Simon Wyss

Oh, no, I stopped after three seconds.

It does mean that. You are welcome. Which direction are you taking in cinematography?

Google, type Kodak 5369, and you have http://motion.kodak.com/motion/uploadedFiles/US_plugins_acrobat_en_motion_products_lab_5369.pdf D-97 is positive process.

Question was if EKC will survive, wasn’t it? More acutely, if motion-picture film will continue to be manufactured I have the impression that Aaton, Arri, Bolex, Ikonoskop, and Panavision people know more than us. To them, obviously, film seems to be an institution.

You should not run the camera at over 32 f. p. s. without film. Then you wind her fully, set the speed dial at 12 f. p. s., hold the camera upside down and listen to her running without film. When there’s rattle don’t use the camera before an overhaul. Probably never serviced the bearings are dry. The clicks can be switched off by the little lever just above the footage counter engagement pin at the inside rear. Have a look through the viewfinder with no lens in front of the taking port towards the sky or a uniformly lit surface. Adjust the eyepiece to maximum sharpness of the groundglass. Then swing back a lens into taking position, open iris diaphragm wide open, set lens at infinity and see whether distant objects such as trees or horizon come sharp. Everything must be clean. Film side guide (spring) must touch film and exert some pressure. One can check this function with a piece of film moved up and down by hand. Make sure the claw is withdrawn! For that you disengage the spring motor from the mechanism by turning the 180-degrees lever on the camera’s right side to 0 (Zero). If it doesn’t want to go, push the release simultaneously. With the rewind crank you can move the mechanism freely and fine set the claw forward and backwards.

I’m copy-pasting from Aaton’s web page: With its "distant-eye viewfinder" A-Minima invites the operator to move the camera from eyebrow to arm's length (and back), without worrying about the light that enters the eyepiece! This distant-eye feature is obtained by means of a cone-shaped shutter attached to the reflex mirror (Aaton patent): it prevents the light that enters the eyepiece from being diffused onto the film by the viewing screen. This feature is especially helpful to camera operators who wear glasses, or who take shots in acrobatic positions (e.g. mountaineering). (Coloured by me)

Let me try again. Violet is a colour outside RGB. If at all, only the blue-sensitive layer(s) of a color film stock will respond to it. No Red involved, no Green Upon processing, a color negative stock produces the complementary colour to any given one. The complementary colour of Violet is . . . ? It doesn’t exist. No subtractive color photographic system until today is made for Violet. Why? It’s not needed. We see Violet only faintly. It’s off the retina’s RGB sensorium, too. A color positive film would have to have an extra layer of Violet dye in order to let Violet appear on the screen. Things are simpler with black-and-white plates or film. These do react to Violet as far as the colour is transferred to them by the lens. Violet exists in nature, proven. Animals see Violet and Ultraviolet. The answer is thus: Yes, film can capture the colour Violet but that’s where it ends also. There has never been Violet on a cinema screen or a photo paper. Violet is not purple, nor lilac, nor pink. Purple is the blend of Red and Blue, exactly half-way. Violet contains no Red.

Here’s precisely where you hit my point. It is my strong believe that there will come new generations, young folks who might be ten years old now plus minus, who’ll rediscover handicraft. I mean, those who are growing up with CGI today actually must turn their heads towards closer-to-oneself doing some day. Editing has much to do with a movie’s content, so as soon as there is a picture to be made come alive producers will want reel creatives. It’s what one finds against the resistance from the material. Upright or flatbed, of course, is a matter of taste. But nothing replaces the joy one can get by doing it by hand. To hasten up the editing of a movie is simply plain stupid, greedy, and overly male. Where’s the female side of us all today?

Richard, have a look: http://www.imagica.com/e/company.html http://www.imagicawest.com/westcom/film/fil_pro.html

Well roared, lion Synching picture and sound is as easy on a flatbed as on an upright editing machine. I have direct access to the magnetic head and can hover a band to and fro by will until I’ve got the impression that I want. A differential gear helps a lot when you have to search for some things that match like a “p” and closed lips or a sharp sound and a fork hitting a plate. Reel sound synch work is with photographic dailies picture and sound! I mean, if you want to delve into it.

I have. Makers of magnetic film are Pyral and FPC-Eastman-Kodak, see under Fullcoat.

As lab technician I like to find white cloth tape around cans containing exposed stock. Film type identification by can label, any additional information written on the white tape. Please don’t write or paste on the label. Let it be the way it is. Short ends in cans sealed with black tape. That’s logic to me. Original film manufacturer tape discarded

Did you ask Bolex for H 8 spools? They might have another one or two in the drawer.

Entirely agree with you, Phil. I call it opportunism.

Which theater projects with flicker?

Perhaps because being married doesn’t have the same importance anymore? Only fooling A married print, the term comes from before WWII, is no more dead synch but only reproducable on a projector or similar device built for the sound-to-picture advance. As long as picture and sound are on separate films one can manipulate and adjust for synchronism in a theatre, in front of the telly, whatever. In spite of that, printers are able to jeopardise the concept, projectionists as well. Worst experience is what I am making today with TV. Sound comes before picture, and you never get more than cop-outs.

Reminds me that I wanted to offer my new perforator also in DS-8. Give me a hint if interested in DS-8 black-and-white stock anyone, for instance Gigabitfilm or Europan.

Nothing can be too professional. The more something is done professional, the less it will be noticed (at all). Weigh content with form. Form alone is not enough, content alone is not enough.

My recommendation is black and white.

So would I. Planning on processing spirals for film widths above 16 mm, I can only recommend that you make contact with Mr. Alfred Kahl in Germany. He holds the molding tools from JOBO. Ask me for his adress in case of interest as PM. By the way, what is your full name, please?

Your camera was made in 1944. It certainly wonʼt mind care, so learn about it by opening, cleaning, and lubricating the mechanism. You first unscrew the lenses from the turret, then screws 1, 2, 3, 4, 5. NOT ONE of the others (6 through 12) ! The four turret screws are seen in its corners when looking at the camera from front. Take care when removing the mechanism from the housing because the shutter protrudes radially into the turret from inside. NEVER try to remove the spring housing from the mechanism NOR to take the spring out of its housing. That can be very dangerous. IF you need to refresh the spring lubricant, graphite powder, DO pass the whole camera to a specialist or to Bolex International; 15, route de Lausanne; 1400 Yverdon-les-Bains; Switzerland. Give the governor top bearing some grease. That bearing is a bit hard to reach. Give the governor bottom bearing a drop of oil. Oil all the axle bushings, one drop each. Grease the gears. If you unscrew that slotted cap under the winding handle you get access to the spring core into which fits a winding key with square tip. I think it is of a quarter inch width but Iʼm not sure. You can wind the spring from the core while the camera is running.

How old?

Ben, let me put it like this: Black-and-white or color film can and will capture violet. Subtractive color positive film, subtractive printing, subtractive LCD, additive fluorescent VCR tubes, additive LED arrays, additive LASER projection, and any other system will not display violet unless this specific light colour is introduced either by a filter (subtractive) or a source/luminophore (additive). Still another point to consider is transmission from a color negative to positive stock. Had we the corresponding value of violet on the neg, an unknown yellow, would the pos stock produce violet from it? But what gives me a real feeling of b. is the confusion about hues and their names.

Violet, not purple, not lilac. Violet does not contain any red, not a trace. I cannot put up violet here for you in the forum, nor on any monitor. It would take an extra dye on the film to project it. It’s sometimes done with art imprints, seldomly, as a fourth colour.

Very good question! A film layer can be sensitive to ultraviolet, violet, and longer wave-length colours but multilayer colour films bear filter layers plus they cannot reproduce violet by their dyes. Nobody has ever seen violet on a cinema screen. That’s the mystery of the simple thing. The secret of everything boring. The holy oafishness.