Simon Wyss

I always found rounded corners ridiculous but the vast majority of projectors has them. A bigger image area with cameras and a smaller one in projection was provided by the standards since the early 20th century. It works. Mark, I was aware of the double sense and have chosen one meaning. I hope the focal side of the subject will be understood.

No. You have cameras, printers, and projectors with sharp aperture corners and such with rounded corners. A technician can lime the corners sharp, costs some money. If you produce thousand cameras, you can broach the aperture. Some aperture plates are just stamped, some are machined with end mills. A picture of a camera gate with sharp corners aperture

You cannot sharpen out-of-focus pictures. Watch too many criminal series where the good ones achieve to increase resolving power of blurred images? Such a horseplay

“The Bolex” does not exist. There were two Bolex Auto cameras made in the twenties and a number of Paillard-Bolex H models made from 1935 to 1969. From January 1970 on you have cameras from Bolex International, Inc. named H-16 SB, SBM, EBM, and EL. There’s no best lens. Among the good ones differences are small and actually lost in the emulsion for the best part. You get to see softness with lesser designs but that disappears when you close the iris beyond f/5,6. Some triplets are better than four-elements lenses, for instance the longer focal-length Kern-Paillard Yvar. Some four-glass designs outperform more complicated systems, for example the Super-Comat by TTH. With six and seven elements you’re at the top and pay the according price. Kinoptik apochromats, Steinheil Quinon, Schneider Xenon, Berthiot Cinor, Angénieux S 41, Kern Switar, TTH Ivotal. There are Kodak lens enthusiasts, others swear by Meyer or Leitz. The lightest lenses are triplets, compact, small, cheap. If you shoot black and white, you can cut out blue light with a yellow filter. That relieves the triplets that in general are corrected for the spectrum from green through red, explicit younger ones. On a post-war Paillard-Bolex H-16 you have traditionally the Yvar 15-2.8, the Yvar 25-2.5, and the Yvar 75-2.5 or the 2.8. The Pizar 50-1.8 is nice. The Switar 50-1.4 is strong under an overcast sky. Perhaps you like American lenses. Bausch & Lomb Animar are compact and light. Elgeet wide-angle Navitar, quite fast. Wollensak Cine Raptar, stopped down to f/4, useable. PL mount kills the turret concept.

Not brittle, a little sticky due to condensating water. Wait one full hour before you load cold film. Pound the cartridge once or twice into your palm before inserting it to loosen the convolutions. You don’t need to store TXR in the cold.

I liked the former form better. Fortunately used to this design from other fora I can plough my way through. It looks like Filmvorführerforum.de and camera-forum.fr now. Pity

http://www.cinematography.com/index.php?showtopic=20512&do=findComment&comment=152967 http://www.cinematography.com/index.php?showtopic=72172&do=findComment&comment=461790

Look how quick you join film pieces: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=erZSLrLm2i8 Yes, it takes perforated tape.

Depends on the lab manager, whether s/he likes to make a fool of you by argueing that the neg had to be rewound and that costs an extra. No, serious lab people go through your film in any case, they want to inspect splices now and then and clean it. A reversal camera original goes through the projector emulsion towards lens as you say correctly. If it’s perforated on one edge only, the projector must not have sprocket teeth on both sides nor a double-sided claw in the gate. With 2-rows perforation you want to know if head or tail is out. And NEVER SPLICE DOUBLE-PERF LEADER TO SINGLE-PERF FILM.

Contact copies off B-wind camera originals are A wind. Somehow obscure to me, but I didn’t participate in the formulation of that nomenclature.

Assuming the 16-mm. format you run the film across the bench from left to right, emulsion up, perforation nearer to you.

Read it yesterday, great job, thank you. I’m at one right now, serial number 67XX, if I find something additional worth a mention, I’ll take it here.

The winding crank is attached to the mechanism by a Left Hand M 5 thread. To remove it you fold it up onto the lug, hold it against the internal stop, i. e. take away slack clockwise, and free it with a dry smack on the handle clockwise. Unscrew

Please don’t blame the projectionists. We have ISO 2939 that defines picture image area on prints, position and dimensions. We have ISO 2906 and 2907 to regulate the maximum projectable image area on camera originals and fresh prints. Projectionists can’t compensate all the time for variations that come from cameras. The tolerance on the vertical image centering is 0.008" or 0,2 mm. It is the duty of the lab to produce prints within specs but if the producer doesn’t care about vertical centering with the cameras they use, the lab people would need to smooth out too big differences on precision printers. The projectionists aren’t responsible for the often oblique geometry of theatres complicating matters, either.

Oughtn’t. Cutting tools need to be asymmetrical, black spacer overlaps and hides splices. The end of the black spacer should lie in the middle of the frame line. Duplicator’s aperture should block out frame line additionally so that it will turn out all black on release prints. I wonder why it works with 16mm film but not with 35. Have had flashing prints myself and that’s the reason why this thing annoys me. If I find out that early CinemaScope prints don’t flash, I pour my anger over the industry. Which will laugh at me.