Colum O Dwyer

The Tamron is a handy lens, used it once, quarter turn gives you macro - inf, cramped focus but nice with a loose, handheld aesthetic.

50mm/85mm are both long lenses on the 60D with the crop factor, so only so useful version a fast zoom

I am surprised I'm even saying this, but Scarlet undoubtedly blows the Canon announcement out of the water. Canon would have only been impressive at DSLR price point.

I think Canon have surprised everyone for the wrong reasons. The C300 would be the DeLorean of the HD camera world.

If it wasnt for the Scarlet coming with an EF mount as standard you could suppose 5D/7D users would migrate, but it seems the only thing that would make that happen now is Scarlet back-orders and RED-hate.

Mind you, it's footage isn't without merit:

My confidence in Canon as a manufacturer is immeasurably higher.

Mine would be too if it wasn't for the snails-pace at which Canon came to the video world. Putting a 5D sensor into an XL body (over simplifying of course) shouldve been a no-brainer 2 years ago.

How soon until Canon 'adjust' their pricing after the Scarlet announcement? Hmmm.

This is a great topic and something I've been wondering for quite a while! Thanks lads

I'm coming to this late in the game, but whatever.

I found getting in contact with the lab on the phone was really very hard, I'd phone be told who I was looking for was busy and that I'd get a call when they had a minute - I never got a call back. This happened quite a few times when I was trying to establish whether my stuff (10 cans S16 only) was ready for collection. Very frustrating.

Having said that when I travelled over to drop the film off (from Ireland, getting a ferry over is the most cost effective way to transport the film I found) the lads in the office and the actual lab techs were great guys, had a few great chats with them. Which makes it such a pity that my problems communicating with the lab soured me so much.

Local rates for a Focus Puller are approx 380 Euro for 8 hrs.

Thanks lads.

(This sort of thing has probably been discussed before, but for the life of me I can't find a topic)

Hey. I'm due to crew a show shortly that is being produced by a New York based company and being shot here in Ireland. It's a TV cookery show. I'm ass cam.

Just wondering what a ballpark figure for A.C's in the New York area would be, or in other words what such a company would be used to paying.

I'm just curious, I've already sent my rate on & it's my 1st time crewing something that isn't homegrown.

Thanks.

I was going to order one of the shirts but they won't be available till 2013 maybe

 

check them out they rock they are lots better than the I'm with Arri Shirts.

 

http://www.cafepress.com/momboughtmeared

Those shirts are great!

While obviously a work of fiction, I'm sure when your college fees are so astronomical, buying a (used?) Red & some Nikon glass is probably not too much of a stretch for many American film students, right?

Colum,

 

I've shot plenty of bleach bypassed footage over the years both S16mm and S35mm and I'd always recommend

going with a chemical bleach over a digital "bleach bypass". They don't look the same and the beauty (and peril) of the chemical approach is that you cant entirely predict what the results will be and thats a very good thing you need to embrace that.

I really do think that I need to explain to the director (whose idea the BB initially was) the unpredictable nature of the process, even as a way of putting the case for money for (proper) testing - as well as seeing what can be done in post.

Karl is right. ...

 

Which is all well and good until you test a "partial bleach". What you get one day may well be different from what you get the next, or on a different emulsion type or gauge. The "test" isn't a reliable predictor of your end result. ...

 

Spend your 4 cents a foot on lighting instead - as you know you really want to.

Dominic, thank you for such a concise explanation.

& thanks to all for your helpful advice.

You really should consider doing this look in post.

Without an ability to do a proper test @ the facility that you'll use, you should really consider, as mentioned, doing the look in post. You can do it at the Telecine stage, or what would be best, would be to wait until everything is edited and do a nice correction of the finished piece (recommended for best matching)

Part of me would certainly prefer to take the extra money from the BB (0.04p per foot) & use it in drip or lighting gear.

Part of me says that because of the strange weather we tend to have here in Ireland the post route might be best to try to match scenes (Sun splitting the stones in the morning & overcast weather in the afternoon are far too common) & would also just give the wiggle room necessary.

Sad thing is that by in terms of budgets for Irish shorts & esp. student films, the budget is huge - But still not big enough to do the necessary tests.

I recommend you do it digitally if you're only doing 50% BB.

 

...

 

In other words, if you dicker with the time and temperature and make it too low, or slow down the processor, it will run to completion at the very edges of the film first, and may still be incomplete near the middle of the film.

 

 

Depending on how your stills were processed (by slowing down the bleach temperature or speeding up the machine) this could also result for what looks like a half-bleached frame.

Wasnt sure about the 50% BB, kinda what the tests were for. If, and it's a big if now we were going to go ahead with the BB, I'd probably end up going with the skip.

That's very interesting about the processing - makes sense looking at the dodgy frame.

Thanks again.

You need to test this out on 16mm film using the lab you're planning on using with the stock you're planing on shooting, else you're really just running in the dark.

At the moment looks like it's the best I can do, don't think the production will pay for any 16 tests, regardless of whether I advice it or not.

For more precise results though, I believe the ASC magazine still has an online artilce from the late '90s that shows the effects of a lot of the various silver retension techniques.

I had a look at it, and I reckon the results make sense.

Karl, any idea what happened in mess-ed up picture, processing-wise?

Thanks guys.

Colin,

 

 

have you or could you pass along a link to your Fuji rep, of this and other related threads. Just so they know about the petitions and such. They might reconsider things.

Can do, couldnt do any harm.

Maybe everyone could bombard their respective reps, agents & resellers with those links?

We're planning on using Bleach Bypass this summer on a S16 shoot so I wanted to do a cheap & easy 35mm still test.

Shot on 35mm Fuji Superia400, got a friend to process it & went for 50% bypass - But something went wrong & as such I'm sure whether to trust the results of the frames that seem unharmed.

So I ask you chaps, do the 2 attached pictures marked as 'Good' seem correct for 50% BB?

I had a look at the oft referred to article from American Cinematographer & I think it's all cool. In any case I'm going do more testing obviously and hopefully test it on 16mm too (8683 or 7229).

Attached also are two of the damaged pics from the end of the roll (any idea what happened?)

Thanks alot.

- Colum.

Thanks for the replies guys!

Lucky it was raw stock and not an exposed roll!

 

It would depend on how much ambient light was around, what the ASA of the stock was, how wide the mag door swung open, and for how long.

80ASA 7231, overhead fluorescent, mostly shielded by the mag door - So maybe not so bad.

I should explain, in the event of reshoots being needed I'm sure the director (who is also the producer & financier) would prefer being able to use that roll as opposed to buying another - even if it is only €55 with a student discount. I already suggested getting a clip test done (as John suggested), but not sure they heard what I was saying.

You didn't flash it, not tell anyone and let them shoot it did you?

No, no - Told everyone that needed to know, marked & set it aside.

Throw it out, or use it as a dummy roll.

 

 

The bummer is when it is a roll you already exposed. . .

Hope that'll never happen, thats surely grounds for a career (or name) change... or at least a few stuff drinks.

Had my first accident last week on a college grad shoot when, in a tired state I accidentally opened & exposed a mag that I had just loaded with a roll of 7231. Very embarrassing but everything worked out OK.

I'm just curious, if we were to get that roll developed - would it be just the edge of the frame that was flashed? Or would the whole frame be fogged?

(I searched for a similar tread but found none, in-spite of the fact I'm sure this has been mentioned & asked before)

One thing to look for on all old Russian cameras: The lubricants they used need to be cleaned out and replaced from time to time, because they harden with age. First thing to check on any Russian camera that won't run, or is hard to inch.

 

-- J.S.

I never did that, which is surely something that should've occurred to me. May be time to big the thing out from the depths of whatever cupboards it's in - Thanks.

Any sort of lubricant in particular?

And Column, is it worthwhile to ask your contact at Fuji how their motion products are doing in general?

In a word, no - I'd be asking our local Fuji guy in Dublin and I doubt they're privy to much info - although very helpful & decent.

I'm sure there's plenty of lads on here who have a decent relationship with Fuji UK who could find out such things.

Hurt Locker should have given them a boost for sure, but I doubt they're gonna eat into Kodaks share - Slumdog didn't seem to give them a great boost.

Let me know what you find out about Fuji, Colum.

Re: special order of Neopan CN/Acros in 16mm.

"Hello 
Yes you are correct, the factory would need an order for a few million feet before they would run the production, also I think the processing would also be a problem.
However you could use Vivid 160 or 500 as its a high contrast stock, then desaturate the colour and you end up with a great B&W image, the NFTS did some tests recently and the results we stunning, I suggest you try this stock.
"

- Colin Ricardo

Business Manager

Motion Picture Products

Fujifilm UK Ltd

That's a disappointment, I was under the impression it would be something like 10K feet.

where is it sold? Asia only? Imagine Acros in 16mm.

As I understand from speaking to our fuji rep and from what I've gathered on here, if you out in an order for enough stock, they'd cut it for you.

(I've just sent an e-mail off to Fuji UK enquiring actually)

Acros or the 400 would just be great.

All this news makes me feel extra bad & wasteful after accidently flashing a roll of 7231 last week :(

Also, the 7231 is the only B+W stock that they produce for the Aaton Minima, Hmm...

Now Fuji ought to market their Neopan Motion Picture film here in the US. Has anyone on this site ever used it?

That's one of my dreams, to shot 16mm on Neopan.

They should be doing it already, it's not like they aren't producing sheets of the stuff.

Update - my repair guy got the camera running ...

That's very interesting - I had pretty much the exact same problem (trigger did nothing etc.) and even after having a look around in the guts of the thing I came up with nothing.

Pity the project it was bought for was a few months ago.

Hey. Certainly no labs over here and be sure to phone ahead to make sure they have the stock for you, I recently waited two months for some stock to arrive from Japan [Admittedly, it was a small order and was looking for daylight spools, but still].

I think the handiest thing is to go through Kodak UK and they'll put you in touch with their reps in Ireland.

Stephan alluded to some post houses, two of them are Egg and Windmilllane

For film cameras: Production Depot

I believe that 8521 was introduced in 1995 and withdrawn in 1998.

Brian

Really? Cool. Thanks.

From my experience with old stock, I'd say you want to add a stop every three to four years out of date.

 

So, if this stock is 125T, from, say, 1997, and you want (somewhat) normal-looking imagery, I'd say you want to rate it in the sub-25 range with tungsten lighting.

 

Of course, if you are after milky, washed-out foggy imagery, that is something different.

Thanks Karl, I may have under-exposed a tad, but it's all good. Thanks.

Cheers. There is a place in London still offering it, although they are really expensive and not too good ior so ve heard from others, but I was thinking of Dwaynes, although I havent made contact with them yet. Im anxious to see if notching the cartridge would work with this camera.

Would you know where that place in London is maybe? I'd love to shoot off Kodachrome if possible w/out having to ship it to the US.

When I've shot Ektachrome I've used a light meter or my film SLR to give a rough estimate - As my Braun Nizo won't read 64 carts.

If you use an SLR set to ISO 64 [& 1/50sec] and take a reading and then take a reading of the same frame using your cameras light meter, you'll have a good idea whether the cartridge is being read as 40 or 160.

So, Colum, your ID says you are from Ireland. Out of idle curiosity, where did you take the shot of the film can? I see palm trees in the background. What aren't you telling us? ;)

If only we had palm trees and sun! Figured it was a nicer backdrop than a dull sitting room, the wonders of this technological age :P