Simon Wyss

The 1945-46 Mitchell 16 Professional loads with double-perf stock. Marco, it’s important that the film is all the way down in the canal under the pressure plate. It can occur that it slips upwards, i. e. to the left side in the upright camera seen from behind camera towards scene. Make sure it sits on the claw with a perforation hole as in the video by R. H. (known to me). Then close pressure pad. Also the film loops should not touch anything. As per your video, make the loops a step smaller each. The film in the upper loop should rub on that round flat knob under it. Ho sbagliato nel altro forum.

I’d have three items with me on a production, micro-fibre cloth and brush. The cloth leaves fibres on the glass that you best remove with a makeup brush. Rubber bulb blower in addition (never gets out of air). Each item in a Tupper container As Dom says, clean only, if necessary. Lens caps are important.

Your work looks pleasing but the cut pace destroyed it all. If the vegetables may be chopped to short pieces, a movie is something different. Someone must have wanted to take too much into it.

I have one. It has had the shutter slide broken off. I soldered it back to the stub but I’m not content with the result. If you want to try your luck on that, I’d love to trade it for an interesting lens. Please contact me via PM

Everybody can move a zoom lever or turn a knob. To masterfully move the camera is a different task. Travel!

Who said better? I never said better.

If I’m a waxing sniffer, I’ve smelled film for 43 years now and not only camera stocks but also all kinds of lab and print film. Have loaded magazines of processors, printers, cameras, and projectors. It’s not good and bad, it’s about the resistance offered by film and mechanical equipment. Would be a pity, if you didn’t grasp that.

That is called culture. Everything man does with nature. Nature is physical. What doesn’t have a physical base cannot be cultivated. Ones and noughts are immaterial, completely abstract. As you say, you can touch film, smell it. Who wants to get rid of materials, of physical life, I ask myself from time to time. We’re in the greyest of the twelve ages now, uranian sun. It’ll be over in some 2,100 years. Until then—shoit.

Varför har du inte frågad? A pre-owned H-16 EL isn’t worth more than $400. It has way less mechanics than a spring-drive model. Why Super-16, why a PL mount? The camera is not made for postmodernity, it’s a modern product, designed in 1931. I’m a simplicist and a purist. And a mechanic who knows what it implies to do such things. It won’t be a fun project because your ideas will crack the budget fast. Better spend a thousand on a tripod with a good fluid head in a container! Ahem, pre-owned. Förlåt.

https://www.manualslib.com/manual/997428/Arri-Arriflex-16-Sr-Ii.html?page=10#manual

The R 21 is a fixed focus lens. Yes, depth of field is big at f/1.8 already, from infinity to about 0,8 m.

You cannot use this lens on your camera. You’d need a negative-space adapter which doesn’t exist. 🤨 Two options: 1. Sell lens and find RX ones for the camera. 2. Sell camera and stay with the many regular C-mount optics. Non-reflex Paillard-Bolex H cameras offer almost the same number of mechanical features* and possibilities as the reflex models together with a critical focuser that you only have to get used to. It works even better than the reflex system because it makes use of 100 percent of the light compared to about 20 percent with the RX prisms system. I’d recommend a late H-16 with big base and 1-1 drive shaft. It accepts the Electric Synchronous Motor ESM with crystal control. _______________________________ *Difference is the fixed shutter.

ISO 4244, Cinematography – Photographic sound record on 8 mm Type S motion-picture prints – Position and width dimensions, 1979

The Women, 1938, is a good lesson about colour cinematography. Yet it takes an original print.

There clearly is a sensible relation between frame rate and number of repetitions of the single frames. Silent cinema ran at 16 fps with three “presentations” of each photogram which, as has been pointed out many years ago, sinks a film deeper into the spectator than 24 fps shown with two-blade shutters. Showscan has 60 frames per second and no doubling of frames, but it is an optical knockdown. An entirely different approach comes with duplex projection. The Skladanowsky were the first to make use of it, Prestwich and Green employed a duplex technique, too. The screen is uninterruptedly lit, you have no dark pauses. Very smooth cinema, deserves actually to be rediscovered.