Oliver Gläser

the lens mount has to be moved over by 1mm on the same side as the gate is milled out by 2mm (the side opposite to the pulldown claw. The ground glass should also be remarked (this can be done with a very sharp mechanical pencil) and moved over 1mm to center it into the new frame. The magazines can (but don't have to ) have their rollers and sprocket wheels turned to widen the area that doesn't touch the negative and polished. and thats pretty much the basics. A good machinist should be able to move the lens mount if he/she thinks it through. The gate is relatively easy to do as is the ground glass. The mags are a little bit more work, but I suggest switching the camera over first, shooting test footage with all your mags and then checking to see if the mags scratch or pressure the new super area of the negative. I am all for doing the work myself if I think there is a reasonable chance of success! Super 16ing Eclairs is not the toughest thing in the world in my experience so... Good luck. Oliver Glaser

just an aftermarket paint job. I prefer the old crinkle finish black though I must say...

The other type of finders that fit on the NPR are those off of CP-16 cameras. I have a CP orientable viewfinder with extension and I love it. I'd never go back. The benefit of this system is that you can now comfortably operate behind the camera on a dolly or tripod instead of beside it (which for some shots was a real gymnastic problem!). I believe it is the most expensive option to go for, but in my opinion some of the best money that I have spent on upgrading my camera. the set goes for about $2000 at whitehouse av. I got mine on ebay for a fraction of that. Occasionally they come up and if you have a seller that doesn't know what they have you may get a great deal on it like I did.

I am a big fan of the 600 series of Eumigs. Solid construction that just keeps going... and precise film movement that is gentle on the film. I have 4 that I use constantly!

I agree... I would rather shoot super 8mm than any HD/digital format. oliver

Although in fairness it is often where you put your money (production or post). Many people think shooting RED is cheaper, yet in a lot of the post workflow (filmouts) that I have seen, that isn't the case. Going a photochemical route to a 35mm blowup, for a short film may well be cheaper... especially if you know someone with film stock in there freezer (lots of people have 1000's of feet not being used), cameras are cheaper to rent and wont crash due to software issues! All this has to be taken into account i think. I don't know about down there, but in Vancouver, I can shoot, process and transfer to HD for a fraction of the cost of renting a red camera for one day. And I know its going to work! It should be noted that I have a ton of Film in Freezers (no stock costs, and when I do have to buy, Kodak often gives me 2 for 1), I have my own cameras and lenses (Eclair Ultra 16mm NPR and Zeiss superspeeds), if I am shooting Black and White I can process my own film (custom built film processor) otherwise its between 12 and 15 cents (CAN) per foot for colour, and I scan the film myself to HD on my own 4:2:2 1920x1080 Super 16mm film scanner. But even if I had to pay for all of these services, I still think the cost would come out to less (depending on how much stock you shoot of course) than if you had to rent a RED, buy hard drives, and go a Film out route. Yes, I realize that I discuss an HD route with my example film, but a film route is also possible photochemically if you shoot on film. ... I am biased however... as I would sooner shoot super 8mm than RED or any HD format if given the choice (which I am most often not given by producers...). my two cents. Oliver

Theoretically it should be possible to fix the lens, like any lens... however you need to find a lens tech who is familiar, and that is a much tougher proposition. The problem with many super 8mm cameras is that half the lens is buried inside the body, and that all has to be removed... and many cameras were not meant to be easily taken apart. I would suggest you call up local camera rental houses and see if any of their techs have any experience with Super 8mm or if they could suggest someone who does. Pro 8mm sound in CA would probably be a good first place to start. It also depends on if its worth it to fix it or just buy another one. and since you bought it on ebay, and if the buyer didn't mention that obvious flaw with the camera, you can file a claim against the seller... and buyers have more rights on ebay then sellers do (i know this from personally having been screwed by cheating buyers in the past)! just my two cents Oliver

I have used my D80 for a couple of years as a lighting previewer, and apart from the lower latitude, its worked out well. I through F1.4 prime lens on, set the shutter speed to match my Movie camera's (1/50th for my NPR's 1/48th) which is normally close enough and set the ISO in the still camera to match that of the stock I am shooting. Although not perfect, it does often get me very close. The midtones are normally pretty accurate, but because of the lower latitude of the DSLR, it is always contrasty-er, so the shadows are crushed and the highlights blow out... but because before every shoot I test my stock (as I think everyone should... even if you have shot it a 1000 time before), how it reacts is freshly ingrained in my memory. I use the camera especially when shooting Super 8mm negative on Docs. When things are run and gun and you are a one man camera crew, having a DSLR as your lightmeter has been a great asset to me. I know also that with Film I will have more latitude and therefore I don't worry to much about (in these less critical situations) over or underexposing a stop or so. Best thing to do is shoot tests and compare your results when you transfer. Along with my Lightmeter it's another tool in my quiver. Just my two cents. Oliver

Are you sure it was double 8mm and not double super 8mm? double 8mm should be fine, just twice the number of perfs. Double super 8mm has smaller differently shaped perfs so that alone would cause it not to run through the camera smoothly (if at all). You can check by putting a piece of your double 8mm over 16mm and see where the perfs line up. oliver

Its like the difference between regular and super 8mm... 10% can be a lot. There is another facility in canada that Transfers Max 8mm - Mine! Newsreel Productions in Vancouver BC. Check out my website for more information about what we/I offer. Here is the Vimeo link to the Super 8mm reel and here is some stabilization Examples Thanks Oliver

The funny thing is, I am not sure if anyone noticed... that is an ELAINE... a short lived, shrouded in secrecy (LOL) 16mm camera that Panavision built in the 80's I think. they were converted to Super16mm , but they are more of a museum piece and oddity (although I am sure they run just fine). I think only Panavision in hollywood has the remaining bodies now. oliver

all that you would have needed to do is stuff an old mitchell in there and you have a modern Pana! LOL... In effect that is all those cameras are, just glorified BNCR's... smaller and easier to work with, but the same general design. imagine the possibilities... cramming an old mitchell into that little modern shell. heh heh. anyway.

I have a Tobin TCM 14... which is hands down the best motor ever built for the NPR. I wish tobin still made motors! anyway, The Perfectone Compact is great and offers a lot of options. The Alcan is great too, although I had one once and for some reason, no idea to this day why, a day before it was to leave for Ireland as B cam on a feature i shot there the motor died... I luckily had a constant speed motor that I threw into action for B roll stuff, and the other camera had a perfectone compact (which had a circuit problem in the mirror return) but that worked for me. anyway, my two cents. thanks for reading Oliver

also, if you want to build it yourself... here are my drawings.

in order for the 15mm adapter to be of any real use it has to align with Arri S16mm gear. For that you have to drop the single rod that comes out of the NPR down 14mm (center to center). Otherwise any rental gear (matteboxes, follow focus') you get may not fit centered on the mount. Below is a picture of my camera with a custom built drop down. I can build the same for you for $150 plus shipping. It would be a couple of weeks to get it down. I have built a few others for other NPR owners and they work great. simple and effective. oliver

Hey Tom, Check out my website to see some of the example footage. The results are constantly getting better. I will let you know when more footage becomes available. Thanks, Oliver

also, any kind of matte that you put on your mattebox, that close to the lens will have the undesired effect of not being a sharp line. and it will become sharper or softer depending on how you focus. something else to keep in mind... oliver

Max 8mm is not a difficult format to convert most cameras too... involves very little work, and can be done by most people with any technical skill within a couple of hours. that being said it also depends on the camera that you intend to shoot with. A beaulieu for example is a perfect camera to make this modification too, as the C mount allows you too use lenses intended to cover a larger aperture. For my 4008 ZMII I have made the modification, and use my Zeiss super speeds as well as the stock angenieux which all cover the format. I believe this to be advantageous over an anamorphic adapter for a couple of reasons. First you still see a normal aspect ratio picture in your viewfinder. Second, Every piece of glass you put if front of other pieces of glass, will degrade the image and reduce light transmission. Most of those lenses are intended for Projectors and not for in front of cameras, although I am sure that you can use them for such. anyway, my two cents... thanks for reading. Oliver

when I shot in Ireland in 2005, there were no Film labs and all our film was shipped to London. I doubt that would have changed.

Robert Yeoman. He is great. Talented, intelligent, soft spoken. he knows his craft. I had the chance to shadow him on Martian Child for a month or so and it was a great experience.

For super16mm I cannot capture the keycode. the system is not pin registered, but is very stable... when I have a project that requires even more stability, then I use a stabilization script to take the minimal weave or bob that may be there out. for 99% of what I have been transferring this has not been an issue. I can convert the file to RGB data, from the uncompressed 4:2:2 avi, but I understand that that is not exactly the same thing as you are asking about. hope that helps. oliver

Over the last year I have built my own Super/Max/Reg 8mm film scanner as well as a Super/ultra/regular 16mm scanner and been perfecting the process. The system scans, frame-by-beautiful frame to AVI in 1920x1080 4:2:2 colour space Uncompressed. I built it primarily for my own personal use, to enable me to shoot more and continue to shoot film. I have since modified a Nizo 481 and Beaulieu 4008 ZMII to shoot in Max 8mm and have had great results with the format. The Beaulieu especially, combined with my Zeiss Super speed lenses (that I normally use on my Eclair NPR) are stunningly sharp in super 8mm (if a little long). My next project is to build an Aluminum sound blimp housing with 15mm rod mounts and video tap, and to put a 35mm Depth of Field Adapter in front of the camera! I have seen some tests doing this and the results were very very impressive! The video tap will be needed to flip the image to an LCD monitor and make it operable! I will let you all know when the first tests are up. If you are interested to see what my Film scanner can do check out these links: www.newsreel-productions.com and vimeo super 8mm telecine reel thanks for reading! Oliver

Since first testing the format 7 years ago on an old Bolex H16 - M model, I was in love with it. Over the years, most of my posts have been in favour of the format, which I think has always been a winner (although if you read old posts from a few years ago, there were not a lot of people who thought so!). Anyway I am glad to see that there are so many people that have adopted this great little (cheap) format. I think it helps to open the doors to more people shooting film (which we all who love film should agree is a good thing!) by enabling people to shoot on older cameras yet compete in an HD world! I have been shooting Ultra16mm for years. My first feature film that I used it on "Hooligans" or "Gobshite aka Hooligans" (depends on where you are), a god awful movie not really worth watching (not at all dependent on where you are! LOL ), was a great testing bed for me with the format and I was always impressed with the results. The footage from that and subsequent films was intercut with Super16mm and no (significant)difference was ever noted. At the time, to be able to transfer the format was the biggest problem. Last year I built my own Frame-by-Frame film scanner that allows me to Scan each individual frame of film to an individual frame of an AVI file. This has allowed me to be able to continue to shoot film when others are switching to HD. I transfer all my footage to 1920x1080 4:2:2 Uncompressed, colour time it, process it, edit and done! i built the same system for Super8mm. Now finally for me, I am able to shoot in Ultra 16mm and see the format transferred to HD in a way it was always intended to be seen. Example footage of some of my scans to HD are available on my website, under FILM SCANNING or on vimeo (for super8mm for now only) at: http://www.vimeo.com/7520702 thanks for Reading Oliver

i personally don't think that there is ANY better camera for the money! I have an Eclair NPR that I converted (myself) to Ultra16mm, put an AZ spectrum colour video tap on it (I suggest going with the Black and White model), Tobin Crystal sync motor with Multisync crystal controller (allowing me any speed between 1-40FPS in .001 frame increments, Custom 15mm arri rods adapter, 4x4 arri bellows matte box, Arri lightweight follow focus, Wired custom remote focus and zoom (built by a great austrian camera tech and cinematographer Mario Cater). A set of zeiss superspeeds and nikon primes (longer lenses) that I mount on here with the appropriate adapters. I have shot several feature films with this camera, often intercutting with much newer Aatons, or Arri SR3's. I have always felt the best feature of the camera beyond its amazing modular construction is the Variable angle shutter. it is true that with some motor combination's that the camera does sit a little high on a head, but its a small price to pay for an amazing camera! As far as loading go... I disagree with the comment that they are hard to load... the path is easy and and fast and mine have never lost a loop, but to each their own... I guess it is what I am used to most. Sound doesn't love it and I am often wrapped in a furnie blanket, but a small price to pay i guess... besides, I am a cinematographer, what do I care about sound! LOL. I know guys that are picking these cameras up (just the basic package with an old 'coke bottle' angenieux's and a couple mags) for $500 canadian! I would by two at that price just for spare parts! LOL. Obviously I have put a lot of money and work into my camera, and short of an XTR prod or 416, I wouldn't be happy with having to replace it with any other camera! if you want to see the camera, check out my website: www.newsreel-productions.com anyway... my two cents... Thanks for reading Oliver Gläser Director of Photography IATSE 669

I am a professional Cinematographer who built his own Frame by Frame film scanner in order to be able to shoot more film! here are links to the results from those machines. Newsreel Productions Super 8mm scanning reel thanks for looking. Oliver Gläser Newsreel Productions