Frank Wylie

Go slow with Vitafilm and mag stripe! Try a short section that has a section that has lifted before you commit the entire roll. There were many ways mag stripe could be applied; most often you have what came from Kodak/whomever manufactured the film, BUT there were post processing applicators that used solvents and even mag strip applied via an adhesive strip. Test to be sure. Vitafilm is a good impulse, but test to be sure. Iron oxide is the perfect catalyst for Vinegar Syndrome, unfortunately. You may just have to live with interruptions in the track if the oxide starts falling off the film. Not many real cures for this problem.

Great information! I don't have any pressing need for it now, but I am in the process of moving an ACME printer to my house this very weekend to restore it and have always wondered how to adjust the gate for bi-packing material. Hope you don't mind discussing similar stuff in the future!

Late to the game here, but thanks for posting this information! I assume this is very valuable information when bi-packing elements in the projector head. How did you determine the clamping pressure to be applied by the adjustment and is there a way to measure with a micrometer for repeatability? Thanks again!

I would never use compressed air in a can; it can leave residue AND it can drive dirt down further into the mechanics of the camera. Get a bulb blower, like the Rocket Blower brand; much safer and turn the camera/mag upside down to let the crud fall out. Orange wood sticks are great for removing stubborn build-up of emulsion on gate and other polished surfaces. Never touch the gate or any surface where the film runs with metal or any type of abrasive material.

err, nevermind.

Maybe someone was trying to make "authentic" silent films that flicker and strobe...

8 frames per crank is the standard for most 35mm silent film cameras with very few exceptions. The 1/600th of a second shutter speed surprises me; it must be a modification of the shutter angle for modern film speeds, as I cannot imagine it being that from the factory. The film speeds of the day would simply have not worked with such a short exposure time at 16fps. Be sure to use a stout, sandbagged tripod (or hang a weight from the center column) or you'll get cranking "wobble". From the many films I have seen of silent film camera operators cranking, most tended to place their cranking forearm roughly parallel to the shaft of the crank and revolved their hand in a circular motion with a loose wrist, rather than using the overhand cranking motion of an organ grinder; It's less tiring and easier to maintain a constant speed because you are only moving your hand, not your entire arm.

If I remember correctly; A = the tension brake used when winding FROM the power winder to another winder. This allows you to create a smooth film pack to a reel or another core on a separate winder/rewind you must pair with the unit. B= Not an adjustment; don't worry about it -- it's a locking collar that keeps the shaft from flying off. C = The gap is normal and, yes, it's to vent the heat from the motor. Nothing much to the operation. Bolt it down; usually on the right-hand side of the bench with the flange face TOWARD you and the motor pointing away from you. Make the mounting holes slightly oversize so you can adjust the rotation of the base of the unit slightly for alignment. Tighten the base to just snug at first. Carefully align the power wind to be square to the bench. The film must take up without excess tension on one side or the other across the film core or hub of the reel, or you will stretch or tear your film. Secure it firmly and check this alignment every few months, as it can slip. Most people mount one hand rewind opposite (left) of the power rewind at a distance that is comfortable to allow you to place a hand on the shafts of both the rewind and the power wind. This allows you to work for long periods without straining your arms as you wind a lot of film. You also need to carefully align this with the power rewind; especially if you are using large metal reels. The foot switch should have a variable speed button you press, but this is the point I am fuzzy about. I had one of these years ago but can't remember if you had to regulate the speed of the power rewind ALSO via the yellow knob or if it was via the foot switch. Anyway, you should know instantly when you try it. These units use motors with brushes. Do yourself a favor and check the brushes before you install it. https://www.thomasnet.com/insights/understanding-and-maintaining-carbon-brushes-in-electric-motors/ Other than that, clean it up and check the bearings; they probably need servicing too. This thing should outlast everyone reading this post if properly maintained.

I would say you don't need the diffusion at all if you want the sharply defined shadows. This is pretty typical of television overhead grid lighting with small Fresnel lights of 750 to 2K watts; you have multiple light sources here, not just a few.

Not to be morbid, but the generation that bought and used this stuff new is getting-on in years...

I don't know how long this has been around, but if you go into the FAQ, it states: "Can I get involved? Certainly. Contributing new, verifiable data is the most immediate way to get involved in making this a better resource. Small additions or corrections to the data can be submitted via email. Contributing information on multiple "new" film stocks can be accomplished via spreadsheets, csv files, a database export, or through your own account on the system. Procedures for contributing images or PDFs are still being ironed out but those assets are welcome, too." The only contact information I can find is via the LIbrapay donation link in this page which lists the author's email address. Last updated in 2021 according to the bottom of the main page; I wonder if it is still actively being maintained, as there have been no donations as of yet on the donation link page.

Forgive if this has been posted before, but I find it most interesting... https://filmstocks.info/

I think you are looking for "Superior Bulk Film Company"; they were in Chicago.

It's a camera of it's time and place. it's probably made so complex as a way to employ as many workers as possible at Eclair during the French economic boom of the 1950's through the 1970's. That reminds me of my Zeiss Icon Contaflex Super B, 35mm stills camera. While made in Germany, it was designed and produced roughly in the same era and is wildly over-engineered, complex and almost impossible to repair. I respect it for it's jewel-like appearance, but it's not a very practical camera for sports or action photography. I understand your frustration from a practical standpoint, but remember that it's not from your time or your situation. Maybe that will take a bit of sting out of its design and allow you to appreciate it for what it is.

I wonder if the magazines might be a good 3D printing project to replace all the rollers and perished parts?

IMHO, "nostalgia" has become a generic derogatory term used for any technology that is not stone-cold, technogeek current. Ironically, the technology ball moves so fast that these pundits have undeniably produced "nostalgic" product unless they live-stream their product as it occurs. I think people should think long and hard before they toss out this sloppy meme; it will come back to degrade their own work.

The top reel looks like a typewriter ribbon reel!

As you indicated, it could also be part of the beam splitter that transfers the image to the viewfinder, but the shape doesn't seem right for that function. Let us know what you find out; inquiring minds and such...

If you have a new film cart, look through the lens and push the cart into place; if this disappears you have your answer.

Ask if the footage already has a LUT applied to it before you got it. To me, it looks like you are trying to grade over a film LUT as source footage. The RGB Primaries appear to be strong and saturated with muted Secondaries. The whole balance is leaning toward red/green but not in a unitary fashion; the secondaries are not following in a neutral fashion. If you could grab a screen shot of your Vectorscope with the RGB trace overlaid and the skin tone indicator enabled, it might give more clues. (basically, what David said. Get the raw footage if possible. It's early, I haven't had enough coffee yet, I didn't read all the responses and i'm old... excuse, excuse...)

Full strength household vinegar, followed by a damp cloth with distilled water is a good bet. Be sure to use new microfiber cloths for each step and use a blow dryer to fully dry the surface after rinsing with the distilled water. For extra insurance, take an old sock and place a handful of loose copper bits (here in the USA, I use old copper pennies that are pre-1982) within and toss it in the clothes dryer with an old towel. Get the pennies/copper as hot as possible and toss them in with the camera body in an airtight container for several days. Take the copper out and re-heat it at least once a day and place it back in the container. The copper is a great fungicide/mold killer.

Saw it last weekend. It was beautifully shot, full of humor and pathos, well staged and fun to watch. However, I left the theater puzzled more than anything else. It was kind of like watching a couple of hours of Henny Youngman standups interrupted by flashes of "Who's Afraid of Virginia Wolf?" I left with the distinct impression I failed to grasp the entire thrust of the motion picture despite it being laid-out in bold relief... Weird.

There are not many books on the history of lighting in motion pictures, but one that touches upon trends from the Silent Era to the late 1940's is "One Reel A Week" by Fred J. Balshofer and Arthur C. Miller (ASC), University of California Press, 1967. Balshofer started as a lab rat with "Pops" Lubin in NYC around 1905, making illegal dupes of Melies films, foregoing a career as a stereoscope photographer. Soon enough he broke away from Lubin and formed the New York Motion Picture Company. Miller started with Balshofer as a teenage lab rat and their careers crossed paths back and forth up until the late 1960's. The sections Miller writes touches somewhat on the types of lighting he used from the silent era to the sound era, mentioning early Technicolor productions and the impact that panchromatic stocks had on traditional ortho film lighting. Miller won 3 Oscars for his cinematography; most notably for "How Green Was My Valley" with John Ford. It's mostly a sentimental journey of the two, retracing their careers, but there is enough of a sprinkling of technical information in the chapters to be of value to read. Edit: Of course, there is also "Painting With Light" by John Alton (1949), which you can currently purchase as a reprint with a forward by John Bailey. If you want to learn about Film Noir lighting, this is a great resource.

https://www.loc.gov/collections/silent-film-scores-and-arrangements/about-this-collection/ Silent Film Scores Collection Now Available Online On May 4, the Music Division launched the online collection, “Silent Film Scores and Arrangements,” featuring more than 3,000 items published or created to accompany silent films between 1904–1927. Items published after 1927 were placed in Stacks and will migrate to an online site when they enter the public domain. The collection includes scores written for specific films, cue sheets compiling melodies for use at certain moments in specific films, and stock music composed or arranged for general silent-film use. The Library is one of largest repositories of silent-film music, an area of increasing interest and study worldwide.

It can be the same composition, but it doesn't have to be. Those are just generic descriptors; nothing locks it to the same composition and in return, nothing says it cannot be the same.