Frank Wylie

Determine hyperfocal distance on the lens and fix it with a pin to that fixed focus point. Make some waterhouse stops to vary the aperture.

I would try Robert Shanebrook @ http://www.makingkodakfilm.com/. He might have an idea, as Kodak was intimately involved in many NASA projects...

Amber, That's a lot to cram into a reply, so I am going to suggest you obtain a copy of this book; https://www.amazon.com/Bare-Bones-Camera-Course-Video/dp/0960371818 It's inexpensive and will answer a lot, but probably not all, of your questions. Shooting color for black and white can be done a number of ways. The easiest is to shoot it normally in color and then de-saturate (remove) the color in Premiere. Beyond that, I wouldn't worry too much about technique at the moment; get a shoot under your belt and start looking at the footage. You will see what you like and don't like; take it from there. Don't try to get too complex at first, it only tends to discourage. Finish something and be ready to learn from your mistakes. Remember; if you got it perfect the first time, you should retire. Good luck

Have you checked your viewfinder for a possible light path to "kick back" through to the aperture? I haven't personally shot with an ACL, but have had mysterious flicker issues with other cameras that were traced back to a reflex viewfinder eye cup not sealing against my face correctly. Is your eye cup in good shape? Does it fit your face properly?

So I haven't tried them? Glad you can ascertain that from a great distance. I'll not impede your quest further.

These probably served dual purpose; as both for feature film presentations on 16mm and for Newsfilm segments for daily news presentations. The film usually was shown MOS with the reporter talking over the images, but there was the option for optical or magnetic location sound playback. In fact, if you look at the left-most projector, you will see an impromptu "cue tab" on the film of this projector. This let the operator know which segment was ready to go and allowed them to thread up the 2nd projector with the next news segment footage (if there was one). Most stations shot VNF reversal on a 16mm camera (CP16, Canon Scoopic, B&H DR70, Frezollini, Auricon, etc.) well into the 1990's.

It also tends to very slightly degrade resolution due to the refraction of the liquid. Unless your element is damaged, I would not suggest the added expense. You lose sharpness and gain no real advantage with wet gate printing unless you have base abrasions.

Can no one use Google anymore? Must everyone be spoon-fed information? Add that to your blog post; the incredible entitled attitude of those who refuse to search for information themselves. http://www.graphicsmagick.org/ https://imagemagick.org/index.php https://www.imaging.org/site/PDFS/Papers/2001/PICS-0-251/4635.pdf For one thing, JPEG 2000 does not require side-cart audio in the file of a scanned film, can retain Rec. 2020 color space and frame rates... enough. Do some research.

1 and 7 -- Film chain projectors with changeovers. They are the Bell & Howell models that were originally developed for WWII troop projection, but the design was so good, they continued to produced them well beyond the end of the War. The specification was developed by the US Government and models were made by B&H, DeVry and others. Most you find are either OD Green or Tan colored. They were made in both Telecine and standard projection configuration. 4,5 and 6 are racks full of audio and video monitors and patch panels 2 and 3 are 2" (Quad) video tape recorders/players. 2 looks like an RCA and 3 looks like an Ampex.

Personally, I would just remove as much as possible and use a hand-held meter. The electronics are corroded from a leaking battery; you can see the effects on both the battery socket and the wire traces on the backside of the board. It's a pretty clever device and might have even worked reasonably well, but without the knowledge of the builder as to how it operates and measures light, you'll probably ruin a lot of film trying to get it to work. My 2 cents...

Pin registered 4K scans @ 1fps? Seems perfectly reasonable if you want pin-registered scans. It's a specialized scanner; not a bulk library or transfer machine; it was designed for DI work intended to go back out to film and was prior to really robust electronic stabilization option to be had now. It makes me laugh to hear all the complaining about the speed. Just like our Oxberry Oxscan, they love to derisively point out how slow it is and they refuse to use it. It really upsets them when I point out that, if you don't load it and push the "go" button, it effectively scans at 0 fps and they wasted $100K for nothing. Frick: "The food is really bad here" Frack: " Yes and the portions are so small!"

It "might" be a contact print. The camera was a single glass plate camera, probably no larger than 2 x 3 or in that vicinity. The camera is now in the Smithsonian, as I recall. We restored a film based on the "ankle-camera" incident called, "The Picture Snatcher" with James Cagney about 10 years ago from the original camera negative. https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0024450/ Looked pretty good if I don't say so myself...

People are shooting Kodak 2383 as still film at ISO 3 to 6 and getting an image not too far removed from 2 Color Technicolor when scanned and tweaked. Of course, that's a flatbed scanner for still film, but I can't image you wouldn't be able to do more in a full blown DI suite or Davinci Resolve...

Yes, despite my best efforts, the films had to be thrown out. Even with molecular sieves and frequent cleaning, the base just exuded into fine white crystals and began to curl-up into brittle pencil-shaped ropes. The film was carelessly printed and processed; as cheap as possible by the Scopiotone people, so it was fatally flawed from the beginning. Mendelson's used to also have thousands of those R8 and S8 endless loop projectors; technicolor and a second brand I can't remember. Walls were lined with them and every art student in Ohio would go down and buy a dozen or so and make these projection exhibitions with repeating loops. You're a little too late; Mendelson's closed in 2020 when a group of Chinese investors bought his warehouses full of parts and then they sold out the remainders in the main store. I went by shortly before they closed for old times sake and it was pure trash left over with sky-high prices. End of an era...

Yeah. Mendelson's Surplus in Dayton, Ohio used to have all the spare parts and chassis left over from when the Scopiotone assembly line shut down. I remember going through there and seeing at least a dozen chassis and bins of parts. Of course, that was 30 years ago and it's all long gone. I also had several 1200 foot reels of built-up Scopiotone subjects, but they eventually went vinegar despite my best efforts. They were irritating to project, as they were "flipped" left to right in printing to make the projection path within the jukebox much more compact. Not a particularly robust or long lived format/display media, but a unique novelty.

Or request an inter library load for free. Your local library can help you get the book on loan; totally for free. I paid the $115 and learned a lot, that's why I recommend reading the book.

A "film tent" or large changing bag with several oversized film cans can be used on location to change out film. The changing tent or bag will have to be large enough to hold the camera, the film and the storage cans all at once. It won't be easy and you'll have to practice with dummy loads, but you can do it. It won't be "frame accurate, but you should be able to pull and restart a roll within a foot or two of the extraction point. The hard part will be threading the camera sight-unseen, but if you practice with your eyes closed, it you can make it happen. Organize and think it through; you'll have to find a way to identify (by touch) which daylight spool is the feed and which is the take up in the cans you use in which to store the film that is not in the camera. I would also be a good idea to find a way to immobilize the reels to keep them from unspooling in the cans... Once you start practicing with dummy loads, a host of problems will present themselves, but you should be able to find a solution before you load your valuable raw stock.

Um, no it's around $115 for the 2nd edition, or you can visit a library and put in an Inter library Loan request to read it for free. You're the one who is stating that coating can be done with "modern technology". I have nothing to prove; I just hold up a can of Kodak color negative and it's all there. Show me something.

I thought we were talking about making film. The book... The book... If you are unwilling to look at the actual evidence, I have no more to add to this conversation.

Not being testy; I am simply confident. Your statement that Kodak has "a reputation for going with the status quo and not taking advantage of advances in technology" is totally unsupported. You won't find a more advanced coating facility on the face of the earth. An I don't think you are giving enough respect to the state of the art coating facility Kodak runs. They are not ladling out goop in a room with pigeons flying around in the rafters. Order a copy of this book, have a read and get back to me... http://www.makingkodakfilm.com/ Of course, Shanebrook was not totally able to divulge everything about the process, but there is enough detail to realize just how incredibly difficult it is to make a multilayer color film.

Frankly, I don't think you do; in fact I am sure you do not. Having toured the color coating alleys in Rochester back in 2008, I can assure you the companies that build CPU manufacturing facilities would not have a fun time trying to replicate Kodak's color coating alley. But, please, be my guest and whip up an alternative. I'll even put in the first order for 10K of good color negative stock. 35mm please. Let me know when it's done. I will have my checkbook ready...

There's no puffery; the job is hellishly difficult to coat film to the standards Kodak has established over their History. Think of the coating alley as a Giant steamship you have to have to push into dock with a small ski boat. The inertia of the process is astronomical, the standards extremely exacting, the raw materials and chemicals must be totally pure and clean... in 2012, the main coating drum of Efke Film in Croatia broke down (so I have heard) and they simply walked away from film production because they knew they could never recoup the cost of getting the coating alleys back up and operational. Efke sole a fair amount of film and was well regarded in the still film industry. Nothing is off the shelf, nothing is easy. As Phil Rhodes implies; ask Ferrania how easy it is, even when you have some access to former employees and a small, preexisting coating alley (yes, in bad condition, but in place nonetheless).

1. Lipsner Smith Cleaning machines were not specifically designed for restoration work; they were designed for cleaning printing intermediates during release printing. 2. Perchlorethylene evaporates even faster than Isopropoyl when used in one of these machines with heated supply and air knives, PLUS these machines easily keep pace with alchohol machines. That being said, I won't debate you on the above. These are clearly incorrect statements. I've used these machines for 3 decades. Like Perry, I don't know why I bother; but when you don't dispute bad information on sites like these, the incorrect statements somehow become facts, which they are NOT.

How reflex viewfinder flicker on film cameras bothers you, would seem to depend on when you started shooting. It doesn't particularly bother me, but then, that's what I associate with shooting film and the state of art when I started. I found the trade-off between the assurance of WYSIWYG with flicker and using a manually adjusted/adjustable parallax viewfinder and maybe not getting critical framing on the finished film worthwhile. I could see how others would find it distracting coming to it from video or digital viewfinders, but that's just how they were built.

Frankly, Silver is just one of many of Earth's raw materials that also are required to produce digital and solar infrastructure. Competition for these resources will only get worse as technology advances and the demand grows. Film was artificially cheap when it was the dominant medium. A Kodak rep told me back in the 1980's, they sold Color Negative basically at cost or a loss because the print stock volumes were so enormous and profits so high. Shoot what you can, while you can, is the only really practical philosophy I have come up with to date. Worrying about it is futile.