Simon Wyss

Me likes, too. My suggestion would be: tripod. All else secondary

A) No B) Steadiness is better with 35, cameras with register pins provided. Unsteadiness is distributed over a longer piece of film holding the image. Additionally, positioning errors are less magnified from 35, equal screen sizes compared. C) Dangerous ground for answering; some would speak of a typical 35 look but could never define it clearly. What we can do is divide the historical development into distinct optical and presentational periods. The pioneers, mostly trained photographers or vaudeville entrepreneurs tried out everything thinkable. With films from between 1888 and 1928 speed is erratic, aspect ratios wild, lighting chaotic, lenses everything from two- to six-elements systems. A certain standard had come along with the Tessar lens, orthochromatic raw stock, the 3-to-4 image aspect ratio, and carbon arc lamps. Then the talkies cemented frame rate, camera movements, indoor lighting level, normal focal length a little shorter. The next period must be labeled color with the inlay of the série noire, both streams in the light of high-intensity carbon arcs. Modern documentary production established itself during the thirties. The last major change to the 35 look came with wide screen presentation, xenon arc light, and coated lenses throughout. 16 to 35 was done since 1923 but Super-16 was not practised until 1970. You cannot play 16 as big as 35. When a 16 original is enlarged to 35 grain is, too. As a matter of fact today’s colour stocks are more finely grained than the films of the fifties, Kodachrome being the exception that proves the rule. The worst time in terms of colours and pictorial quality were the late seventies. Lighting practice got a little sloppy then.

Still another way was via reverse prints off the original. Unfortunately some corresponding stocks have been discontinued some years ago, Eastman direct music preparatory film 5360/7360 and Eastman reversal black and white print film 7361. X360 didn’t afford the image quality of 7361. Both were on a colourless TAC base. If you have microfilm reverse duplicating film perforated, you can go this route. All microfilms are on polyester base.

You developed simply to negative, didn’t you? Reversal films need to be reverse processed which imcludes bleaching and dissolving the just developed negative image out the film. The remaining silver halides must then be exposed to light and blackened in a second developer bath, finally fixed and washed. True reversal films have an anti-halo undercoat between the base and the photographic layer(s). Agfa Scala has a manganese dioxide AHU, Fomapan R has a pure silver AHU. Svema supposedly has a manganese dioxide subbing, I don’t know their films well. After simple development the undercoat is still in place, opaque. Kodak reversal films have no subbing since 1957 but rather a grey or blueish base plastic, dyed in the mass. They’re not true reversible films as the older ones were, Panatomic-X, Super-X, Super-XX. Like a negative film such as Ilford Pan F you can develop them to negative or invert to positive. Maximum density will not be comparable, though.

Carl, I very much appreciate your explanations. Thank you, I have learnt something. If I may remind of an important aspect of the discussion, let me bring in the projection light. The primary goal of a reversal film is its projection. Colour balance thus depends on the spectral characteristic of incandescent, arc discharge or, Lo and behold, the good old limelight.

If a camera is unaltered from the factory or correctly serviced, the rackover and lens swing system is as precise as a reflex finder system. Spectators would see nicely framed and well focused images before the Bell & Howell Standard camera came into existence. The operators observed the image formed on the film from behind with a loupe. Newman & Guardia had the first camera with a reflex prism behind the film in 1905. The Parvo of Debrie features direct film view through an ocular. In 1921 the Parvo L offered ground glass preparation in addition. There was an accessory to the 2709 available in 1932 that allowed to see the image on the film from behind, magnified. The 1930 French Le Blay and the 1934 Californian Akers camera have behind-the-film reflex prisms, too. Equally precise framing is feasible with a MItchell. To focus you have a fine ground glass, in fact not ground but etched. The lens remains in place, that is one advantage over Bell & Howell. Camerapeople of yesterday developed a feel for depth of (sharp) field. Lenses were commonly closer together in design and simpler to some extent. Very often the normal focal length lens was a Tessar type. Taylor, Taylor & Hobson added the dialytic four-elements type in the late 20s. The six-elements Opic came into use during the 20s. You have that family of Planar-Opic-Xenon-Biotar-Baltar lenses. These were used unchanged through 40 years, just bloomed since after the war. A few products got coated in the war already. The depth-of-field behaviour of those lenses is easier to sense out than that of younger designs. Camerapeople didn’t outsource control over the image, they kept a conscience about what they do. Can I make myself understood? Today many people only stare at a monitor, having split themselves from the image forming device, the CAMERA OBSCURA, in the first place.

The graphs show how image density decreases with increasing exposure. At the left hand end of the curves are represented the darkest (densest) points of an image, we speak of the deepest shadows. At the right end are the highlights, those points that are practically colourless. The film optical density is around log 0.1 in the lightest portions. Of technical interest are how the three curves differ from each other. Everything not strictly parallel means a colour tint, for example somewhat less Blue within the midtones. Since this is subtractive colour mixing, less Blue means slightly more yellowish midtones, the typical younger Ektachrome characteristic.

Only film is film. The rest is lies.

One can get addicted to the film. I had used it in my Eyemo years ago behind a non-bloomed four-elements lens from the early 1930s, the 47 mm Cooke, and am eager to return to making films ever since. Until then I have to repair some more Krasnogorskij and such, it seems.

You are right, that chart is faulty. Something different needed for the abscissa. Also ordinates ought to be noted as log densities.

Fomapan R 100 is factory available perforated both edges. Else, if you wire $ 20,000 over to Rochester, they will furnish you Ektachrome in the desired conversion.

That’s what I had thought myself but M means Monoptique or Monoptic. The M model has a shutter of 144 degrees opening angle which suits filming off TV screens. Also, the shutter edges are inclined, not radial. Paillard sought to enter that bigger market that evolved during the fifties in the U. S., television functioning off 60 Hz mains at 30 fps. A film movie camera running at 24 fps and equipped with the mentioned shutter fits. The only things yet needed are a synchronous electric motor and a phase shifter. How the absence of a black bar was verified with the setup I can’t tell.

Duane, no tests needed. If you please, indicate the serial number here. That will allow us to tell the year of manufacture. You can look up the camera’s age yourself on Michael Tisdale’s website Bolex Collector. In addition you may sting the black mastix seal around the main plate in the film chamber with a needle. If it’s hard, the camera has never been serviced. Presumably that is the case, so you better don’t run the mechanism at all. A cleaning and fresh lubricants are needed there. A camera technician can do an overhaul as well as Bolex International does. They are in Yverdon. If you’d tell something about the lenses with the camera, a value could be found for the equipment. Ever so often good prices are payed by people who appreciate the quality of vintage lenses, depending to some extent on the actual types. The Switar 25 mm are goodies. Maybe you have a Switar 10 mm there, a 100 or a 150 Yvar. Any accessory such as the rackover device or a compendium is sought, too.

If they were a little more at home with their own products in Rochester, they might offer Ektachrome 35mm in long rolls together with some nice offers of internegative and intermediate films. For those who wish to go the traditional route dailies would be struck off an internegative after the camera original.

https://www.ebay.com/itm/Copy-of-the-PATHE-PROFESSIONAL-REFLEX-INSTRUCTIONS-MANUAL-FOR-MODELS-PR16-AT-etc-/391463385118