Jason Hinkle RIP

Hey Nick, have you seen these? http://www.thecinecity.com/tcc/home.php?cat=270 There's obviously a bit cheap and made for video cameras but I have one and it fits on my ACL with a little bit of fudging. I got it mainly so I could use standard 4x4 filters - especially since my collection of lenses are all different sizes and don't take the same filters.

I'm excited to share that my first official project shot on an ACL just went online. It's a music video - feel free to check it out at http://www.curiousthree.com/cot/ - any constructive criticism would be greatly appreciated (however I already know it looks grainy as hell!) The grain is largely due to shooting it on regular 16 w/ Vision3 500T stock, barely having enough lights and finally cropping to 2.35. But aside from that, the ACL worked out great and despite the grain and numerous technical flaws it's already been on iTunes as well as clips are airing on MTV2 and Adult Swim. It does make me feel very good about buying the camera and all the time and effort spent learning how to shoot film. Thanks a bunch to everybody here in the forums for all your help and advice - it's really fantastic having a place to ask stupid questions and not be ridiculed!

yea, i'm with you guys on that too, i intended it to be mainly informational. i think the software i used is a little confusing & i will probably re-do it when i have a chance. but i did set it up so that anybody interested can manage a section of the site, which will help because there's too much info for one person to manage. I also like that anyone can leave a comment on a page, not for discussion purposes, but rather to add some supplemental information or something. If you do not already have hosting Boris, I would be happy to set you up with your own area on that server or give you permission even to update the content that is already there. I know you mentioned before that history wasn't totally accurate - but I am just parroting the info that I was given! it would be nice to get it right. I would love to see the lens info too - i am always looking for that.

Vision3 is not the best choice for outdoor - especially if it is really sunny. Even with ND filters it can be too much light in the sun. The results will look very grainy. Also Vision3 is Tungsten balanced film so in sunlight you should have orange color balance filters on your lenses. If you can, go to the location with a light meter, get a reading and see what speed film you would need in order to have your f-stop around 11 (or whatever stop you prefer for your lenses). This is kinda decent average setting so that will tell you roughly what speed film will give you the most flexibility. If you set your meter to 500 speed film and take a reading in the bright sun, it will likely be off the charts! You can show this info to your partners who want Vision3 film and explain to them that 500 is not the best speed for bright sun.

I was just wondering if anybody here has had the chance to check out an A-cam? It looks like a really fun camera. I was wondering how easy it is to use for a real shoot - is it reliable, easy to change the film quickly, etc?

I learned a lot by getting a used 35mm still camera on ebay and shooting a ton of film. It's cheap and with 1 hour processing you can do a lot of experiments & get almost instant feedback. It's the same basic skills that you'll need for movie film - using a light meter to get your exposure right, using filters to color balance, etc. You can try different film speeds to see how different ISO affects the grain of your shots. If you can, I'd also try to get some of those school cameras and shoot a few rolls of test footage. Good luck - it sounds like fun!

Another option is to have the lab put it on an external hard drive. I recently had transferred aprox 50 minutes of footage to 10-bit uncompressed standard def ntsc which took up about 100Gb of space. I would like to do an HD transfer but as of yet I haven't had the budget to do that - which is a good example that we all have to make-do with what we can afford at times!

This lab does: http://www.cinelicious.tv/?page_id=39 There's an old discussion somewhere here in this forum about ultra-16 labs if I remember correctly.

nice work! I agree with the guys above, persistence is the key to no-budget shooting, and that's not just for gear but for locations, talent, food, etc. Since your school doesn't have film, I would assume you don't get free processing either - so you might want to start sweet-talking your local lab as well for a discount on processing and transfer :-)

I think if you put 1/2 CTB on the lights then you'll be fine for what you described. As long as you don't have a radical difference in color temperature between the various light sources - the colorist will be able to make it look however you want. If you have time you could always shoot 50' of test footage or even some 35mm stills.

It is a noble request, but you might possibly have better luck asking to borrow a cinematographer's car than you would borrowing their camera! There may be some kinds & brave souls out there, but I would not let it discourage you if you don't get any takers. If you are really wanting film experience (and not just fishing for free gear), learning to work with what you have available is important. It's great to work with top-notch gear, but you shouldn't feel like you need an expensive camera to do something. Definitely don't let that stop you from trying out some film. The K3 is capable of shooting a short, a cool music videos or whatever. Go to ebay and get some used 100' film for cheap. Definitely get some film and start shooting, though. Not sure also if you knew that you can get a cheap S-16 gate for the K3 that you can install yourself. http://www.k3camera.com/k3/krasnogorsk-3-super-16mm.php

If you're going for a cold, blue look, some equally important things to think about are wardrobe, set design, props, etc. For example, if the lead is wearing a bright red shirt & standing in a red room, it's hard to give the director "cool blue" even if you tint the whole thing!

Thanks again Saul - that's actually really interesting. I've always been curious about "TV" lenses but I never knew whether they worked or I what should be looking for. I'm gonna put some of those on my ebay watch list. Thanks Topher for the NPR archive link - i'll try to get that posted and see if I can't get in touch with the author if his email is still working.

Oh, I forgot to ask - have you had good experiences with any particular wide lenses from the site you mentioned above? I checked it out and I recognize Schneider of course, but they are still a good chunk of change. Some of the other brands have lenses more in the $200 range which would be nice for my budget! But I don't know much about those brands. Do you look for anything in particular, like how many mega-pixels the lens is recommended for, etc? oh btw, the shot you posted looked nice - I didn't personally see any problem with the edges.

Thanks so much Saul - I just revised those two pages. The lens page was just copy/pasted from Mark's content & I tried to re-organize his info as best as I could with my limited knowledge. I was hoping to eventually do a whole section on lenses because after getting a camera, in my experience, one's life becomes a quest for obtaining good, affordable lenses! Please lemme know if you or anybody else see any mistakes. Thanks again - j

Hi everyone, you may have noticed when AOL Homestead closed shop that the Eclair ACL "super site" went offline with it. This was a bummer because it was probably the biggest ACL site & had a lot of technical info, S-16 conversion kits, etc. I managed to get in touch with Mark (the webmaster of that site) and he sent me over all of his original content. I'm in the process of putting it all back up on a new site. I have a lot of it already online & continue to add content as I get the chance. The site is at - http://eclair16.com/ (click on the ACL link to get to the original "super site" content) I set up the site so that anyone can post and share their videos, tech tips, etc. I hope that a few people might join up and help showcase the work of Eclair cameras, show that we do have a community, keep value of our gear up, etc. I'm also hoping that somebody who knows a lot about the NPR would be interested in taking over that part of the site. No major web skills are required - it's set up with WordPress which is easy for anybody to use. (Oh, a note to Boris, I know you are working on a site concerned with Eclair history. I've been trying to reach you on email and PM. Please get in touch if you would be interested in hosting your site here or if I can link over to you.) Thanks - any suggestions or comments would be appreciated.

Hey Tom, I'm shooting on an ACL here in Chicago too - we should get together for a drink and talk shop one day..? I feel like after a year I've stumbled onto the most economical way to get a nice variety of primes. I have one of Les's Nikon mounts that I use with a variety 24mm up to 105mm Nikons. Due to crop factor they give me the equivalent of 50mm to 200mm range on the ACL. The problems is that to get wider using Nikons, you have to get fish-eye lenses which are expensive and heavy. Instead you can get wide c-mount switar, angie, etc. lenses on ebay to use as your wide primes. There's always a few switar 10mm lenses for sale. You just have to be careful on those you don't get the bolex "RX" reflex versions because the focal length is wrong for the ACL. Basically not being stuck on using only one type of lens mount will allow you to get the greatest variety for your money. I'm planning to eventually pick up a PL mount and rent some nice lenses, but I have to give the bank account a rest for a while first!

I just shot in the exact same situation. Windows with light coming in and overhead fluorescent. I used filters based on what the dominant light was. In the end the lab corrected everything and despite all my worrying it all came out looking fine! I was shooting on Vision3 500T. That being said, you will definitely have to make some type of compromise if you shoot directly into a window with fluorescent bulbs also in the shot. I had a shot like that and basically it was just corrected so everything looks good but the bulbs have a green tint to them.

On the plus side, if film is going out of style with industry productions, it will give you the opportunity to set yourself apart from the pack when you do shoot on film. HD looks great for some things, film looks great for some things. The only thing I really fear about HD taking over is that film processing labs might go out of business. From what I can tell at my local lab, though, they are still extremely busy.

I don't want to start a whole French-vs-English Mag discussion, but I read recently that the English 400" Mags had a tendency to lose tension and cause a jam - but that there was a simple adjustment to prevent this from happening. I was wondering if any of you have heard that and know whatever the adjustment is?

ah, it probably would help if I had read your post a little closer. I've never tried the Kinoptik but from what I've read there is a version that auto rotates the image so you don't have to deal with turning a dial.

I use 35mm prime lenses on my ACL all the time. I have a few good Nikons and they look really sharp - much sharper than the Angie 12-120 that came with my camera. From my personal experience, the c-mount-to-nikon adapters on ebay for $49 bucks are worthless for normal shooting on the ACL because the focal length seems to be wrong. However, they are interesting if you want to take some extreme macro shots - perhaps useful for taking photos of bugs! It could just be the one I bought, but anyway, that's my experience. The adapters made by les bosher, on the other hand work great. http://lesbosher.co.uk/ Unfortunately they are expensive - with the US dollar doing poorly I think they are almost $400 US.

Hey Nick, I hope I understand what you are asking. First off, are you positive you have the orientable viewfinder? Because they both do rotate up and down. (ie neither are totally fixed in place. ) This is the non-orientable one: http://www.my16mm.com/assets/pics/cameras/eclairacl.jpg This is the orientable one: http://www.erkanumut.com/upload/sayfalar/b...r/EclairACL.jpg For both of these viewfinders the image rotates when you move the viewfinder. So, shooting low you probably are seeing at the image rotated 90 degrees on it's side? The orientable one has a dial near where it attaches to the camera body that lets you rotate the image right-side up. It is kinda funky, but using that dial you can "correct" the image so it's right-side-up no matter where you position the viewfinder. I have one of each of these viewfinders. when I shoot a really low shot with the non-orientable one, I actually hold the camera so the lens is pointed directly to my left and look straight down into the viewfinder sideways (just rotate the eye cup). That way I can see the image right side up. It definitely is not the ideal situation, but that's how i do it, unless your brain can frame a shot sideways - which mine cannot!

Awesome footage man - it looks great! I'm curious to know what your light meter said and what aperture you used if you remember? It looks like it was shot at night time but your exposure is right on the money. Also, who did your processing? If anybody has any more info or rules about flickering at 75fps I would like to hear it. I was planning to shoot some slow motion & fast motion footage. Now I'm kinda panicking that I have yet another potential problem that will require more rolls of elaborate notes & test footage to be shot.

i'm curious how the final result will appear in black and white because i typically think of the black light effect with neon colors like here http://www.vividlight.com/articles/311.htm. i suppose in B&W you will just have certain surfaces that will be overexposed and the rest will be dark..? i would have to agree with John, seems like a no-brainer to shoot a few stills. If nothing else just get some film close to the ISO you're shooting, shoot have it processed at the local 1-hour place. It's not perfect but at least you can gather some information about exposures and metering.