andrew parrish

Cool Cams, Folks.

I was looking at the anamorphic rigs, and notice that one of them was using the Mat box for support. Is it OK to add lens support stuff on to these rails? If so Yippee! I will be able to cut down the amount of crap I haul around, using the equipment I already got.

Thanks,

Andrew

We just ordered 75 Pelican 1500 for our Rex 4's and 5's. Camera with 3 primes and a sekonic fits quite comfortably and a little room left over.

Rich

 

cool- thanks Rich. that is about exactly what I'm planing on. ( 75! wow talk about voulume discount)

 

Cheers,

 

Andrew

Hi every body,

What size peli case do you use for your h, and what equipment do you keep in it? I'm looking at a 1500

thanks,

Andrew

Hey Guys, thanks for a very stimulating discussion: it really got me thinking about how the mechanic of the camera translate into film. Thanks again for all your responses.

Cheers,

Andrew

Interesting Chris. I don't mind playing Lewis to your Martin, so I will ask a potentially dumb question. Does this %17 equate to a 1/6 of a stop? If we factor in the disputed difference in shutter angle - 135 ( about 1/60th of a second ) and 144 ( about 1/64th of a second), and this %17, will this all add up to a 3rd of a stop or more? Did Bolex do this on purpose, just to make the numbers easier to use? I was suprised by how non-tech-ee the manual is, considering how complex the camera can be.

You seem very passionate about the subject. Have you made a replacement chart, based upon these more refined numbers? If you have, I would love to see it, and shoot some test footage.

Thanks,

Andrew

No problems Chris,

I real appreciate the time you have taken t help me.

I have very basic math skills, any ways. When someone talks to me about logs, I think of a saw mill.

I did have a look again at my camera, a h8 rex 4, and the manual I have for it. The camera has four settings on the levers mounting socket. They are listed in f stops, according to the manual. They read as follows, from top to bottom: blank ( wide open), 1/2 ( the manual says that the aperture must be opened 1/2 and f stop to compensate in this position, because the variable shutter has closed down by 1/4 of it's opening) The third position reads 1 ( the manual say to correct 1 f stop, because the shutter is now down to 1/2 of it's full aperture.) The final setting is blank, and is for fully closed.

The manual also talks about " jerkiness" when using the Variable shutter. I'm thinking that what they are talking about is strobing. The manual stays with the lever set to 1/2 ( a f stop), the film speed should be more that 25fps. I think that the formula I found might be right, as a rule of thumb.

In his book, Cinematography;theory and Practice, Blain brown points to two causes for strobing- a shuttler angle of less than 90 degrees, and panning too quickly ( a subject crossing the view finder faster than 5 seconds.

I guess I will just have to shut up and shoot.

Thanks Again,

Andrew

<h1 class="gb-volume-title" dir="ltr"></h1>

Sorry to repost, but I thought my new additions would be in a different colour. That last post was unreadable.

Thanks for the quick response. One of the reasons why I am asking this question, is because I got the formula from a website that has wrong data on it.

I have read some of the other stuff, and I was hoping to to get a "kiss" solution, because of the whole 144-135 argument seemed to get bogged down after awhile....I had a look at this thread previously, and I was hoping to avoid it by going straight to the manual.

Interms of the mechanics of the thing, I thought that -F1/2 and closing down 1/4 were one and the same- to stop the shutter down a half a stop, the shutter had to be closed down a quarter of it's full opening?

My goal is this:

I just got my camera back with a new transport mechanism in it, and I was hoping to test it for the sharpest possible. I get you point about the transfer, so I'll change shooting at 25fps, ( to capture at 24p) at between f5.6 and f 11. I will project at 25fps, +/-, because I have a variable speed projector.

As to the shutter dial, I will set it to the smallest opening possible, that will not have a chance of strobing. I was hoping to use F-1 ( the second position)

Thanks for your answers, and your time,

Andrewpublic/style_emoticons/default/smile.gif

Hi Chris

Thanks for the quick response. One of the reasons why I am asking this question, is because I got the formula from a website that has wrong data on it.

to get angle use:

I have read some of the other stuff, and I was hoping to to get a "kiss" solution, because of the whole 144-135 argument seemed to get bogged down after awhile....

exposure * fps * 360

~first positon on the variable shutter is half a stop

I thought that they were one and the same- to stop the shutter down a half a stop, the shutter had to be closed down a quarter of it's angle

Therefore simply take the open shutter angle and halve it - depending on how you like to think about fully open bolex shutters - it's either 144/2 or 135/2 or 133/2 (see here for more confusion: http://www.cinematog...showtopic=11912)

I had a look at this thread previously, and I was hoping to avoid it by going straight to the manual.

~fps is redundant when it comes to shutter angle - but since you're calculating it via exposure it's a bit of a tangle

Remember strobing is a perceptual effect, not something set in stone - the subjective response to it depends on the shooting frame rate, the shooting exposure relative to the frame rate and the same again in the projector.

To answer your question, need some info: you're shooting at 18fps - to project/persent at 24, 30 ? and your variable shutter is set to what number on the dial?

I just got my camera back with a new transport mechanism in it, and I was hoping to test it for the sharpest possible. I get you point about the transfer, so I'll change shooting at 25fps, ( to capture at 24p) at between f5.6 and f 11. I will project at 25fps, +/-, because I have a variable speed projector.

As to the shutter dial, I will set it to the smallest opening possible, that will not have a chance of strobing. I was hoping to use F-1 ( the second position)

Thanks for your answers, and your time,

Andrew

Hi everybody,

I was trying to figure out when I can expect strobing when using the Variable shutter. One of my books says past 90 degrees. I found this formula on the net: (fps x 360) / exposure time. I plugged in the numbers from my manual for the 1st position, 1/4 closed at 18fps-

( 18X360) / 87, and got the answer 74.48. Is this right? Will I get strobing at 1/4 closed.

( More likely I have messed this up some how)

Thanks for reading,

Andrew

Here is what I'm working on. It's an Elmoscope. I have been told that it is a re-branded Kiowa, but I really don't know. I bought it at an antique shop for $30. The rail and the Support were made, mostly with my table saw ( very carefully), from $25 of aluminum and stainless from the scrap yard. It's my knock off of the Bolex "Light Bench" My father in law machined a 50.5mm to 55mm step up ring. Next is a double threaded polarizer with the glass out to allow focusing. finally, a 55mm to series VI ( or V, I can't remember). I guess my point is that with a little messing around, the thing can be done on the cheap. As it stands right know the thing weighs a ton. after I get the kinks out, I'll start shaving down the metal, change somethings to plastic and Carbon fiber.

Good luck with you Project

Andrew

Here's A good one Jean-Louis just gave me, and I will share, about how much weight the turret can take:

One very general rule-of-thumb for turret cameras like the Bolex is to grasp the rear mount with your fingertips and if you can't hold the lens horizontal, then it probably needs additional support.

Hi everybody,

I was wondering, as a general rule of thumb, how much weight can the lens mount on a H camera support, before you new additional support, like a rail?

Thanks,

Andrew

As an update, if anyone is interested. The filter ring is a 50mm. I was told in a couple of camera shops that I would have to get an adapter machined, but I found a 50 to 52 ring on e-bay for $ 2.50, including shipping. I fit it on to my HV20, as well as my Bolex P1 ( both are 43mm), and the first tests are good. Once I get the results of the film test back, I will see if it's worth Fabing up a mount for my rail

Nope, I've never used one, sounds like an interesting idea though. I've been surprised by how much latitude film has in these situations. Here's what I do. For a light meter, all I use is an old beat up Sekonic incident meter like this one:

sekonic meter

 

I used to use a spot meter also, but this is all I use now. Since sometimes or often the light hitting a surfer or lineup is different than the light falling where I'm standing, I have to do some mental estimations, or walk around a bit and take a few measurements of light. It works though.

 

For shooting in back lit conditions, I'll take a light meter reading with the meter facing the surfer/sun, and a second reading with the meter faced the opposite way 180 degrees(face of the meter in shadow). Go halfway between those two readings for where you set your aperture. Lean toward one reading or the other depending on what is more important in your shot: seeing the surfer and face of the wave/inside the barrel, or the surrounding composition.

 

I usually lean toward getting a better exposure on the face of the wave/surfer, sometimes only using that second meter reading. That's where your eye goes when watching the footage.

Wow! Thanks for the great insight. It sounds like the system that you use is past the line where tools and technique blur into art. If you are shooting in BC, and need a flunkly, PM me. I am sure you will like the price.

Thanks,

Andrew

What kind of work do you see yourself doing? The type of filming you do should have a big effect on the type of equipment you buy.

Hey Jeremy,

when you shoot back lit waves, do you use a hard line ND grad? I was wondering how well it works in the real world.

Cheers,

AP

Thanks for the Input Jeremy. I live in Vancouver, and the rain tips a much apreciated ( I dig through new electronics looking for silica packets like a kid going through a box of frosted flakes looking for the prize). I think that the octmeter is going to go on " the list" ( Along with a good fluid head) I am driving the PCH for a couple of months this spring, and my goal is to get my equiptment sorted by then.

BTW, I loved your blog, and I am stoked to see the movie. I love many genras, but it was surf flicks that first inspired me to start shooting film. I am guessing by the quality of the stills, format, surf and surfers that this project is going to be get a dvd release? ( sorry if this is in the blog some where- I am have the bad habit of skimming first, and reading later)

With the amount of Surfers and Skaters on this site, I thing we should lobby for our own forum.

Thanks Hal

I am definitely going to have to make a check list with all these things on it. Thanks for the new tips Joe. My h8 does have a closer for the viewfinder. Also, my eyecup is one that I scavenged off an old zm2008. I'm know thinking that I should pop the $30 and get the elliptical one.

I shot my first action stuff Whit it, and it was boarderline overwhelming compared to my super 8s. Very cool, though. It just re-enforces that I need to keep a Camera Log, at least at first.

Thanks Guys,

Andrew

More archival info.

ElmoScope II Elmo reported to be a relabled Kowa 16-H 52mm(?) ? both the projector's/camera's lens and the anamorphot need to be set to the same focusing distance approx. 1/3 f-stop Focusing: 5ft to infinity. Similar to Kowa 16H/8Z yes yes yes, but details unkown (vignetting normally starts at 15-20mm, depending on the Super8/Single8-camera) no ? eBay USA: US $66,00 (+ US$ 9,50 shipping) in 09/2007

Here's something I found, in the spirt of info sharing:

ELMOSCOPE 16MM ANAMORPHIC PROJECTOR LENS FOR CINEMASCOPE MOVIES - WILL ALSO FIT THE KODAK CT-1000

ELMOSCOPE Cinemascope Anamorphic Lens - This is a rare ELMOSCOPE cinemascope lens for 16mm projectors showing films shot in scope (cinemascope prints must be viewed using these anamorphic lens). This lens can screw onto any standard ELMO 16MM OR KODAK CT-1000 primary lens, or can be used with an ELMO scope bracket (not included). You can also get adapter rings to use this lens on non-Elmo projectors. I've been told they blow the Kiowa and Sankor lenses out of the water in picture sharpness, brightness, and focus, but not only have I not actually compared them side by side, but have not been able to confirm from a few third party sources, thus we can not confirm the claim. Nevertheless we used these and were very happy with them and cant imagine glass being any clearer than these. ..... One of the lens was used with a mounting bracket as you can see four tiny spots on the barrel where the mount was set,

I spotted an Elmoscope lens for $25 bucks. I have read the posts about other Anamorphic lens, and understand that there are some draw backs. Has any body had some experiance with this piece of Kit?

Thanks,

Andrew

Your welcome!

 

My degree is a Master of Science in the Teaching of Physics. I taught Physics at Sewanee (The University of the South) and the University's Prep School for six years which gave me plenty of practice figuring out how to explain complex subjects to people.

 

It'll look overkill but ancient top quality tripod heads like O'Connor 50D's can be found pretty cheap from time to time. Another good "oldie but goodie" is the little Miller Professional. If you find one you're thinking of buying one, make certain it's not leaking damping fluid, that's a sign of leaking seals and the drags may not work correctly. Either will work just fine on an equally ancient professional grade wood tripod.

I had a look on ebay ( not always the best place to see what a good deal would be) at therse two models. It seems like they run around $600. Is that what I can expect to pay?

Thanks,

Andrew

Thanks for another reply Dom.

As you were writing this one, I was trying to get the answer for myself. ( my Granny always said the Lord helps those whom help themseves) Here is what I Dug up:

Postby calgodot » Fri Mar 12, 2004 6:24 pm

Lenny Lipton sez (on page 163 of his classic Independent Filmmaking):

"The size of the circle of confusion that we can accept is dependent on how we view the projected film. ...the choice of an acceptable maximum diameter for the circle of confusion is based upon the projected film as it is viewed by some hypothetical viewer, a certain distance from a screen of a certain size. The choice that has been made for the circle of confusion for 16mm is 0.001 inch, and for 8mm 0.0005 inch. The circle of confusion for super 8-single 8 would be very nearly that of 8mm, actually 0.00065 inch."

He goes on to say that this is operating on the assumption of "essentially aberrationless lenses" and the assumption that "the size of the grain of the film is smaller than the circle of confusion." "With some 8mm or super 8-single 8 films," Lipton adds. "the grain size may approach the size of the circle of confusion, and therefore may set a limit on the actual depth of field."

In therms of the F stop scale being on the bott om, maybe its best just to continuing to twist it up to read.

Thanks again,

Andrew

Thanks for the Answer Hal,

It has been very helpful, not only in the answer, but to help me smooth out my thoughts on the matter. I thought that the answer might be to adjust the focal length by adding in the length of the adapter. I,m glad you sorted this out for me. With the adapter in place, the f stop marks are face down. Now I know that I can use a spacer of some kind to rotate it up.

Your thoughts about the telephoto lens is one of the big reasons that I went with this camera. The only problem is that I didn't count on it being too much magnification for my poor little tripod.

By the way, and not that I'm not going to cheat and use a calculator, but what is the Circle of confusion for 8mm destined to be telecined?

Thanks Again,

Andrew