Frank Wylie

If this gets any interest at all, I can try to query our loans department to see when our 35mm prints are destined to be screened around the World. July 25th, 2018 "The Maltese Falcon" (1941), 35mm B&W at the UW-Madison Cinematheque http://cinema.wisc.edu/series/2018/summer/35mm-forever Unfortunately, most of the Film Noir titles I timed last year have already screened (they never tell me when or where our prints are being shown unless I beat it out of them), so I can't point you toward our brand-spanking new prints of "Raw Deal", or "I Wake Up Screaming" or "The Accused" at the present time. There's IS a new print I timed last month of "The Hitch-Hiker" by Ida Lupino making the rounds, so keep an eye out for this title where 35mm revival showings occur... Right now, I am putting the finishing touches on new prints of "The Ghost Ship" by Val Lewton and "Cabin in the Cotton" by Michael Curtiz, so those should be in repertory and film society theaters soon. I'll ask around tomorrow and see what I can dig up if anyone is interested...

Some of the older telecine/scanner operators that worked in broadcast television liked to crank up the aperture setting (electronic not physical) on on the data/telecine and that introduces a lot of ringing and noise. I suppose it was to offset the loss of sharpness in terrestrial transmission in SD Analog TV systems, but it plays havoc for digital transfers. From what I understand, the National Archives now has a vendor list from which the client can choose to make the transfer rather than force the user to use the in-house lab.

Not having scrutinized the entire 24 pages of postings on this thread, I can't authoritatively confirm that anyone has made the statement you strenuously argue against. Perhaps you are painting those sentiments upon all who responded in favor of film; and if you did, you're wrong to make the assumption we all feel that way. Generally preferring film over digital does not automatically make one inflexible to seeing the merit in digital cinematography or workflows. Expressing an preference for the look of film over digital, does not make one a Luddite or technophobe. As a general rule, I have issues with rabid "purists" who cannot see the virtues beyond any one way of working, but I will respect personal preferences. If we can just agree that all tools are valid, and the skills of the users are what make or break the project, we can put these futile arguments to rest...

I agree that there is also a bunch of ethereal BS that surrounds the endless hyping of supposed stops-of-dynamic range, bit depth and so on in dealing with digital cameras. If you claim to be agnostic to the capture medium of a motion picture on the basis of its intrinsic quality of subject matter and artistic execution, you can't then dismiss film in the same breath and not contradict yourself. Deakins now shoots digital; great! Should he suddenly helm a film shot on film at the director's request, will the end result automatically be inferior in your eyes?

So the choice of digital over film has now become a class struggle? Balderdash. If you are unwilling to acknowledge differing aesthetic preferences, I think interaction with you is futile. Reducing the preference of film over digital as an origination medium to some misguided sense of nostalgia is just snobbery... .

+1 Pretty sure the legs do not come off. The casters will come off, but not the legs...

Yep, Dwight knows his stuff! He has the maintenance contract on our 8 or so flatbeds where I work...

OH BOY! Two rabbit holes have opened-up! :) Think I'll sit this one out...

OH God, don't disassemble it other than taking the viewing head off! Believe me, you'll be sorry! Get a good furniture dolly and turn the thing on end, resting the Steenbeck on the side away from the controller cards. Of course, you'll need a padded dolly of proper height to keep the deck from dragging, but that can be built-up with rigging. I have moved more than a few of these older Steenbecks and disassembly is highly discouraged! EDIT: Of course, remove the plates, clutch pads and core spindles before tilting the unit! Another thing; just give the transformer and drive motor a quick test to be sure they are bolted in properly and that no mounts have deteriorated or are loose prior to moving the flatbed! It's not nice when 40 to 50 LBS of copper and steel falls out onto your feet! Finally; get a strong friend; actually as many strong friends as you can find. I think they raised the Bismark and used the salvaged armor plating when they made these early Steenbecks. I once burned up 4 titanium tipped drill bits trying to drill through the side of one of these to mount a non-DIN fuse socket! Ah memories!

Typically you don't archive prints; you archive intermediates; Don't confuse distribution with archival practices. Film archiving costs are high up-front for the stock and labor, but relatively low downstream for climate control storage. Digital archiving is relatively low up-front, but very high for ongoing storage and migration. In the end, the costs are similar, but the physical, tangible assets are not. In the archival world, when the studios go back to remaster a film (shot on film) for distribution by any means, they DON'T go back to the last scan, they go back to the best existing film element. I have timed prints from the original camera negative of "The Great Train Robbery" (1903, Edison) from the camera original negative. It still runs happily through a printer and is largely intact, but has a bit of wear for it's 115 year tenure in the vaults. See me in 115 years on any current title...

For all it's amazing cinematography (and it is astounding) the sound track is the key to Citizen Kane. Kane is THE first modern sound-era film, period. I have seen Kane more times than I care to count and am always amazed by the track. It's very fashionable to denigrate Kane now; so much the poorer you are if you can't see the value in this pioneering effort.

OK, I just watched the trailer for this film and I can save you a LOT of expense if you want this same look... Back in the 1990's, I worked for Ohio State University's Department of Photography and Cinema as their Motion Picture Lab Supervisor in support of student film production. The University invited the filmmaker Peter Watkins (of "War Games" fame) to teach cinema production for a semester as an Visiting Adjunct. Problem was, they failed to budget ANY money to support his curriculum and I was suddenly put in the position of trying to scrounge-up a way to facilitate the production of a 90 minute documentary that would finish on film. The only solution I could formulate within the scant resources I had was to have the students shoot on Hi8mm video, BUT finish on color neg. The raw footage was video edited into selected takes or complete scenes and I then transferred these sections in one pass to 16mm color negative stock by shooting a Sony Color Monitor with an Auricon Pro 1200 with TVT shutter while recording the audio to magnetic fullcoat and to 1/4 inch magnetic tape on a old Nagra III synchronized to the same mains AC reference. The negative was processed, work printed and the magnetic fullcoat was used to cut the mix tracks (we had a Magnasync 8 track "rock-and-roll" mixing system). The process continued from there "as normal" for a standard 16mm production. The results were very akin to what I saw on the trailer on Youtube. Yes, I've done some strange stuff in my life...

From Glenn Kennel; it's a bit more film->DI->Film https://www.amazon.com/Mastering-Digital-Cinema-Industry-Handbook/dp/0240808746 And from Jack James... https://www.amazon.com/Digital-Intermediates-Film-Video-James/dp/0240807022/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1527175092&sr=1-1&keywords=digital+intermediate+film&dpID=51lpo-ZBUSL&preST=_SX218_BO1,204,203,200_QL40_&dpSrc=srch Had some 1"C format video transferred to 35mm by Southwest Film Lab in Dallas, Texas in the late 1980's... would not recommend that approach! ;)

Sorry, 65mm was never, and will never be, an inexpensive medium in which to originate.

Do yourself a favor and put the magazine camera on a shelf and admire it. Seriously, finding magazines, reloading them...; not to mention modifying the camera to take single perforation film. Nightmare. The magazine cameras are cheap and plentiful on Ebay for a reason... Besides, modify a camera in a couple of weeks? Not likely. The least expensive route to shoot 100 foot loads would be to find a Bell & Howell 240 like this one: https://www.ebay.com/itm/Bell-Howell-240-16mm-MOVIE-CAMERA/263647581559?hash=item3d629ed577:g:HzgAAOSw~y9ZCWnx or this one: https://www.ebay.com/itm/BELL-HOWELL-Model-240-Electric-Exposure-Sixteen-16mm-with-Leather-Case-Key/292540983749?_trkparms=aid%3D222007%26algo%3DSIM.MBE%26ao%3D2%26asc%3D50998%26meid%3D479cb06596634935b17db31a2cd11072%26pid%3D100005%26rk%3D6%26rkt%3D12%26sd%3D263647581559%26itm%3D292540983749&_trksid=p2047675.c100005.m1851 The only caveat is the ones with photocell automatic exposure can be non-functional Stick to the manual version and get a light meter. Great, simple camera with a bullet proof film gate and easy to use. (Egads, watch the shipping costs on that site! Crazy...) Just my 2 cents...

Well, if it had all the aesthetic niceties (and accompanying costs in design and molding) you suggest for roll-out, I'll bet you'd be no more likely to run out an buy one today, eh? Funny how even the slickest cameras wind up covered in tape, scratches and dirt; because they are TOOLS to get the job done. Myself, I congratulate Logmar for having the balls to bring such a camera out at this point in history! It might not be everything to everybody, but it shows a real commitment to film and they DID put their money where their mouth is, so you have to give them credit for doing that! Maybe if a few sell, they can refine the design a bit, or purchasers can mod it up a bit, but I don't understand nitpicking such a huge effort...

Save yourself some heartache; tent the windows and relight the panes with the proper gels if you can. Shooting natural light with gels or paper will be a continuity nightmare as the sun shifts overhead. If you are uncertain, just put some cheap butcher paper over the windows and run a timelapse test of the duration that would be your shoot. I think you'll see the problems that might occur by trying to use natural light over an extended period.

Thanks, Jean-Louis! I purchased sets of of R8, Super 8 and 16mm DP sprockets from LaVezzi in 2011 for a scanner project (It has yet to happen). Glad to hear some stock is still available.

If you go the self design route and are going to run anything less than new elements, do yourself a favor and eliminate as many sharp turns as possible. Make all rollers large radius and have a very simple threading path. Sharp, tight bends tend to crack perfs and pop splices. For God's sake, have as soft-start on your drive and torque hold-back motors...

http://www.lavezzi.com/ Under new owners and no mention of the custom film sprockets they made for over 100 years.... Sad day...

Just peel off the tape off the splice...

The level of support needed to keep a Ditto or Spirit or whatever of that caliber, is often equal or more than the purchase price over a decade of service. It's one thing to buy it, another to run it properly... Anyway, many scanners over a decade old are EOL (end of life) as far as the manufacturers are concerned. Good luck getting parts...

Michael, The BNCR autoslate system I am aware of only worked if the camera was blimped, as in Mark's link to the Mitchell Cameras website. So, if ALL the outtakes show these NISO code slates, then I guess you're probably right about it being an aftermarket system, used in post production to archive outtakes. It sure LOOKS like the same type mechanism that was mounted internal to the blimp for autoslating. I have all the SMPE/SMPTE journals from 1930 to 1980 or so near my desk; maybe there will be an article somewhere in there addressing this issue, but the indexes are very unhelpful...

I am 99% sure that is an in-camera autoslate from a Mitchell BNCR. I believe there was a periscope device that was slid into the optical path to record the autoslate on BNCRs. The tone is a blooping sync tone. Jerry Lewis, who was a real technology nut, used it extensively on his productions.

The timer idea is not so good; the inrush current of when the timer relay kicks and the lamp and motor come online probably will, blow the lamp! No, you should manually pause the projector and turn off the lamp. Inconvenient for sure, but unless you adapt or built a LED lamp replacement for your tungsten bulb, the danger of blowing a lamp is very real. Someone on Ebay was selling LED bulb replacement for certain types of Super8mm/Regular 8mm projectors, but I am unsure if it will fit this model of projector. Here's a DIY version on Youtube... Of course if you do this, there is no reason you couldn't let it run until the film fell apart, as the heat of the LED should be orders of magnitude lower... As Mark states, the CIR splice would be best, but no matter what tape splice you use, be double sure to smooth it out very carefully so that all bubbles are gone under the tape.