Frank Wylie

Your links are to private videos that are not viewable. Try changing the permissions to public.

I think this has to do more with the color science employed by Red VS Blackmagic and that you'd have a better experience customizing whatever color transform you use to covert your log footage to working color space rather than using filtration to emulate the look. If I am correct, this is essentially the same advice Stuart is giving. By using filtration to compensate, you have to fight the transform to obtain your desired look and that can be less predictable than "fixing it up front".

Aaron, What filmstock were you shooting? Feed and exit loop length above and below the film gate are critical. If you have an imbalance in the loop, it will tend to shift up or down in the gate once the claw retracts on pull-down. When loading the camera, slowly advance the movement and watch the loops on top and bottom. If the film tends to raise or lower slightly when the claw retracts, adjust the upper or lower loop until they are equidistant and the film remains stationary until the next pull-down sequence. Also, the gate might be oxidized slightly. Clean the gate with 91% alcohol and an orange wood stick (no metal). You can find orange wood sticks at a beauty supply; they are used for fingernail cuticle maintenance. Polish the entire gate area with a lint free cloth. Buff the guide rails until they shine and blow the interior of the camera out well with canned air to remove any possible lint (lens removed). If the gate is really cruddy, try polishing the guide rails with a very small amount of metal polish like Flitz, but be sure to clean any residue thoroughly with alcohol to remove every trace of oil or polish left behind! Examine the claw movement carefully under magnification and carefully clean any foreign matter from the claw. Is the claw "hooked" or worn heavily on the underside? Claws can wear down on the underside, forming a "hook" that interferes with stable transport. A very fine file and light touch can smooth out the underside of the claw, but you have to be extra careful to not over do it! Go slow and test frequently if you do this repair. Also, do this a your own risk; if you feel unprepared to do it, find a repair shop who can do it properly. Frank PS. One other thing occurred to me; if you find no problems with the transport mechanism, it could be vibration from the spring motor being sticky when unwinding during the run. If you wind the camera and run it empty, does it feel like it is vibrating randomly? If so, the spring motor probably needs to be serviced and re lubricated to run smoothly.

All six of our 35mm machines are Triese sprocket drive machines... The very last machines Tom ever made...

I would venture 4444 is compressed just enough to make working with the files much faster, but retains the proper color space without impact on color operations. Uncompressed DPX files are quite taxing on playback; 4444 less so...

Try starting here: http://www.bolexcollector.com/ With a bit of search engine work, you can find all your answers easily...

Blackmagic Training: https://www.blackmagicdesign.com/products/davinciresolve/training Go to the bottom and take the intro and color grading courses. There is downloadable footage and a lesson plan. You can even take a test and be certified by Blackmagic for free. Also, there are good tutorials on Lowepost.com, but I believe they are subscription-based, as are many more online.

The ProRez files will be compressed and have a lut applied, whereas the DPX files, if they are true log files, will have none of that applied and be much more like a RAW file. Admittedly the compression on ProRez files is good, but any sort of LUT imposed on your image PRIOR to grading can be destructive to your target color space by clipping or limiting the response. In any event, it's best to appy LUTs and color transforms at the END of your node tree or pipeline to avoid this clipping and possible distortion of the color range. If you are using DaVinci Resolve, even with a slower computer, you can either use proxies or optimized footage and cut/grade in a lower resolution format. When you are finished, reconfigure the project to output 4K and let it render. That being said, there can be instances of where your graphics card can choke on the very large files IF you use a lot of nodes and noise reduction. I have found times that 2K files worked acceptably in Resolve, only to have the GPU error-out when trying to render @ 4K. It's just something you have to test; like running cameras tests before you do a shoot. You wouldn't shoot a feature without a proven camera, so why attempt post with an untested computer?

I do think it's possible, but am only going from memory. The back focus or flange mount distance can be adapted with shims or machining the turret plate down a bit.

Here's the best place to ask that question, but read the FAQ and have the information needed BEFORE you start asking questions. https://forum.blackmagicdesign.com/viewforum.php?f=21 The guys there are very knowledgeable, but want you to value their time as much as you value your time.

I used to use Diamond Cut Software, which was developed to restore the Edison Collection of early acoustic discs. https://www.diamondcut.com/st3/product-category/software/ Bit of a learning curve to this software; must round trip the files without changing sampling rates and such to maintain sync. It's the closest thing to CEDAR you can get for under $100.

Check with Visual Products; they can probably advise... http://www.visualproducts.com/

The logo on the cap looks like the old Cinema Products logo; the maker of the CP 16 and the Steadycam. More than likely it was designed for a one-tube video camera or a very early single chip digital camera. It should have relay optics inside the unit, but what the back focus would be is anyone's guess.

House reels are only for theaters with changeover systems with two projectors that can run up to 2000 feet of film at a time (35mm). Typically, you don't build-up reels; they are shipped on 2K reels and just wound onto the 2K house reels for projection. The standard printing/production unit for 35mm since the 1900's is 1 reel or roughly 1K feet. However, in the late 50's, 2K printing reels were introduced in an unorganized way, which later became more or less a standard for lab printing, but 1K reels were (are?) still quite common for printing. When platter systems came in, then prints were sliced and diced like crazy, often losing several feet off each join over their production run as each theater built-up and broke down the print between screenings. Archive prints are, for the post part, prohibited from being plattered, so they have to maintain a changeover projection system if they want to exhibit a print.

I would say, "The Lighthouse".

https://store.ascmag.com/product-p/leicamp10.htm "With the M10-P “ASC 100 Edition,” Leica has created a fitting tribute to the world of cinema on the occasion of the 100th anniversary of the founding of the American Society of Cinematographers. The Leica M10-P “ASC 100 Edition” enables cinematographers to get a first impression of a planned scene by reproducing two different cine looks and displaying these frames as still pictures. For the first time, the cinematographer will have a useful preview of their intended image, allowing them to choose a more classical or more contemporary cine look. The “ASC 100 Edition” set comprises a Leica M10-P camera and a Leica Summicron-M 35 f/2 ASPH lens and — with its two specially tailored cine look modes — is an exquisite tool for aiding cinematographers and filmmakers in their search for the truly exceptional visual experience. The two unique looks were developed by Leica imaging quality specialists in collaboration with some of the world’s most influential cinematographers and members of the ASC. While the ASC Cine Classic mode is inspired by the analog 35mm motion-picture film look, the ASC Cine Contemporary mode supports the current digital look of contemporary movies. To make the M10-P “ASC 100 Edition” a tool for professional cinematographers, it will enable users to select from different frame lines used in cinematography. Once activated, the corresponding frame lines are displayed as a bright-line frame. The ”ASC 100 Edition” set also includes a Visoflex electronic accessory and a Leica M-PL-Mount. Together with the Cine Looks, and the selectable frame lines, this enables the use of the combination as a digital director’s viewfinder. The Leica M-PL Mount enables the use of almost all PL mount cine lenses available on the market. The Leica M10-P “ASC 100 Edition” thus provides cinematographers and filmmakers with the ability to view and test scenes with any desired lens before shooting begins. Location scouting can also be made much easier with the aid of the Leica FOTOS App, as the combination of the camera and the App offers the ability to share and discuss results immediately with all parties involved in the filming project. The modern interpretation of Oskar Barnack’s vision is expressed not only in the unique range of functions offered by Leica M10-P “ASC 100 Edition”, but also in the camera’s design. Radically reduced to just the essentials, the engravings on its black chrome surfaces are also completely in black. The technical-functional look is carried forward in the leathering, which is similar to that also found on the Leica SL. The final touch to the look of the Leica M10-P “ASC 100 Edition” is the classic ASC logo on the top plate that seems to disappear in certain lighting conditions. "

Hand cranked film projected in the Silent Era looked.. normal. What modern audiences associate with hand-cranked footage is largely based upon a number of artifacts subsequent to their initial exhibition. It also depends on the Era of which you speak; 40 some-odd years encompasses a LOT of technological change, aesthetics and production methods. Hand cranking wasn't so primitive. Sven Nyquist used a hand-cranked 2709 shooting color negative for Bergman's "Fanny and Alexander" (1982) that was intercut with Arri 35BL footage and no one noticed. (I have been searching for this article from American Cinematographer for reference, but have been unable to locate it yet. Hope my memory hasn't failed...) Image "pulsing", often attributed to irregular hand-cranking, is 99.9% incorrect; it was the rack and tank processing of release prints that introduced this artifact into the prints. No cinematographer worth their salt allowed density pulsing in their camera original! From about 1895 to around 1912 (depending on a lot of factors), the cinematographer not only loaded their own magazines, they perforated the film just prior to shooting! They did clip tests on set to determine exposure, cranked the camera and worked the geared head with the other free hand. After shooting was done, they were responsible for processing their own footage on racks, most with their own modification. This mostly consisted of a sliding top bar that allowed the film to slip on the rack and vary where the highest velocity of developer played upon the film, minimizing any density variations. Unfortunately, very little care was taken with the high volume processing of the release prints and static racks were used and introduced these density pulses. I have timed over 600 features for the Library of Congress and many of them are classic silent era masterpiece camera original negatives and can tell you emphatically that very, very few of them suffer from this defect. Speed issues, flicker, poor registration, deterioration, bad speed conversion duplication and just poor duplication are, in general, artifacts of lazy lab work and poor storage.

http://www.jkcamera.com/index.htm They might fix it for you...

A very tricky way to make a diffusion filter is to lightly mist Acetone on an optical acrylic flat. It's hard to get the mist just right and even; you only get one chance! Very tricky, but with this method, you avoid the potential to get a "starburst" pattern on specular highlights that the weave pattern of hosiery can produce.

Not directly helpful, but you could try contacting JK Camera and see if they can either rebuild it or offer an alternative controller. http://www.jkcamera.com/index.htm Home of the famous JK Optical Printer...

(old man rant - not directed at anyone in particular) I don't understand people who go to film school without some basic understanding of the process and who wait to be taught the fundamentals. Film School should be for making contacts, honing how you interact with others, refining advanced techniques and cementing your choice of career paths, not learning fundamental concepts. In this day and age, I am bewildered by anyone who asks for information that is easily obtained with a few clicks of a mouse or a brief visit to a library. In my books, you have almost already lost the race if you enter with this little initiative and expect an institution to hand you all the knowledge required to be successful. (old man rant off) I need coffee...

"Sticky Shed Syndrome" is a real problem with some audio (and to a lesser extent, video) tape, but it can be partially overcome with the "baking" technique. Just don't wait too long to try to recover those tapes; they might turn into hockey pucks...

No worries; your suggestion to contact the person who made the file is good one and I will follow up on that! Thanks again!

Some audio tape can be "baked" and that will allow you to make one playback pass in an attempt to transfer the content, but it doesn't always work. There is a lot of info on this process online... https://www.google.com/search?client=firefox-b-1-d&q=baking+old+audio+tapes

That's a "House Reel", not a shipping reel. House reels are just that; owned by the "house" or theatre and the print was removed from the crappy, banged-up shipping reels and mounted on house reels to insure smooth projection and then wound back onto the shipping reel and thrown in a Goldberg Case for transport to the next show. If you accidently shipped a house reel, you paid for it out of your pocket or got fired or both...