John Jaquish

It seems like most of the attention here is on drive speed/connection. How much of the ability to handle these files is determined by drive speed, and how much by other factors of the computer like CPU, RAM and GPU? That is, can a more modest machine handle this footage assuming a fast RAID and connection is used? Or, at what point do the other hardware become limiting factors?

Actually, Rob, I do. But it's funny you mention this -- I'm looking at getting one with a PL mount right now. Would this improve the image in the viewfinder? I've actually handled a 35-3 and it's obviously a much improved viewing system and overall camera, but for some reason, I really like the ergonomics of the 2C for handheld work. I like the pistol-grip. Of course, this was on a 35-3 with an extended viewfinder (making handheld viewing almost impossible) and without any handgrips attached, so that of course is affecting my opinion.

Thank you, Tim. Too bad this is a more general IIC issue. I'd been using it previously as purely a hand-held camera with wide lenses (and wide shots), so critical focus hadn't been as much of an issue. I'll have to get it examined.

ORWO (www.orwona.com) makes 35mm black and white that's very similar to 5222 (although at different speeds). Their UN54 is rated at 100 ASA and N74 at 250 ASA. You can get 100' rolls and spool down into cartridges with a Lloyd's bulk film loader (I got one from Freestyle Photography). I've shot a few roles with this. You just have to test your particular camera to see if the perfs match, since cine film has slightly different perf shapes. The film jams regularly in my Canonet rangefinder, but works just fine in the F1 SLR. I then process the film myself at a local facility and scan the film.

After getting a series of film tests back shot on my IIC with the subjects a little out of focus, I'm searching for alternate IIC viewing options. Putting a wide-angle viewfinder attachment from a 35BL helps, but I've heard of the Technovision/"Fellini" door and was interested to see if anyone had experience with these, and how much of an improvement on viewing the image it might provide? Also, how popular were these, and how difficult should it be to find one? I've also seen the Jurgen's rotatable viewfinder with video tap, but I'm not sure if this provides a clearer image as an improvement to the original door or not.

That's true -- I forgot the original question was regarding 4:3, for which 2K would certainly provide better resolution options. And thanks for your thoughts for my project. I'll probably be going the Prores proxy route, then, like you said, going somewhere to conform and grade the DPX.

The 2K scan scans each film frame as an individual DPX file which forms an image sequence. Each frame (for 2K) is around 12 MB, so it adds up... The amount of information captured and stored in a 2K scan vs. an HD telecine is massive. It's not just the resolution that's to be considered, but the bit depth and video compression (or lack thereof in the the 2K scan). I'm actually in a similar boat for a feature film. I just sent tests out to a couple of labs on the east coast and had the film both scanned and telecined. The difference between the 2K scan and the telecine is certainly apparent, even after the 2K image sequence is compressed to the same format as the HD (in this case, ProRes). Although, I haven't uploaded anything and considered online compression. At that point, I'm wondering how obvious it would be... Personally, this is the first time I've worked with 2K DPX files (I've always had film telecined to HD, and have been pretty comfortable sticking with HD ProRes), and I'm already a little overwhelmed. I'd certainly much rather go for the quality of a 2K scan, especially with considerations of projecting the project eventually. Although, I'm taking into account the massive storage that would be required for storing and backing up all the footage for a feature. Plus, the additional cost of the scan itself, of course. On a low budget, I would be a bit more comfortable sticking with HD and then having the finished edit scanned from an EDL, if things are looking promising. Although, I don't know what the additional costs at that point would be... Also as was pointed out, I do like the ability to reframe within the full 4-perf frame that the 2K scan offers.

Jean-Louis, did you end up testing the Mutar? If so, can I ask what camera you were using? Thanks!

Thanks Dom and Jean-Louis both. Dom, those pictures are very much helpful. I was trying to find out all the extenders that were available. It seems like this is very much a "try-and-see" notion, but not to expect much.

This is an old thread, but I'm curious about this -- what I don't understand is that many of the older extenders seem to have a "universal mount" scheme on one end (I'm guessing because they're designed for 35mm zooms). Are there Arri bayonet-mount extenders to attach to the 16mm zooms? Or, do the older 16mm Angenieux zooms in fact have a universal mount? Or, in the cases this is done, are the mounts mechanically removed from the 16mm zooms? I've seen references to people doing this somewhat simply, seemingly without an overhaul of the lens.

Ending soon! http://www.ebay.com/itm/331089522281

Thanks for the replies. Sending it to a lab is a good idea and will keep that in mind for next time. I ended up using a 400' dummy load on which I used a synchronizer to count the number of turns to 100', then used two 35mm split reels to spool out my rolls. I used a third reel to spool back so the keycode was in the correct order (although, I don't know if I'll actually need that). Haven't shot the film yet, but it seemed to work okay.

Schneider relisted because buyer never paid: http://www.ebay.com/itm/331089522281

Hi Bill -- all the daylight exterior scenes were shot on ORWO UN54 (35mm) in this short: https://vimeo.com/69522462 (and processed as a negative, by the way). I've also started to use it for still film with good results.

Almost over! Low price.

Thanks, Will. Unfortunately, no labs in Pittsburgh... I happen to be shooting B+W right now, but will certainly keep that in mind if I have a color project.

Thanks! I'm still wondering how I'll know it's 100 ft (incidentally, I only need three 100-ft rolls out of the 400). I suppose it's more or less a guess?

I'll need to spool down a 400' roll into 100' rolls and was wondering how this might be done, and what I'll need (by the way, I saw some other posts on here regarding this for 16mm daylight spools, but nothing for 35mm). I have access to a darkroom and rewinds, but wasn't sure what else I'd need (split reels?) and how to measure/keep track of the film being put on each roll. Is there some sort of rule of thumb for number of turns? Also, I was wondering if it would be possible to send the film through a camera (sealed off, of course), let a hundred feet run, then use what's on the take-up reel as my 100' roll. Or would this alter the wind somehow? Thanks!

I'm getting prepared to shoot a feature on 35mm black-and-white later next year, and wanted to start sending some tests out to a few labs. I've had excellent results from Alpha Cine in Seattle, but, being in Pittsburgh, the shipping is killing me. I've had some so-so results from Cinelab (albeit on 16mm b+w a couple years ago). I'm looking into Colorlab and Video Film Solutions in Rockville, MD. Does anyone have any recommendations or experience with any of these labs or others? Thanks!

Now up for auction: http://www.ebay.com/itm/331077560537

20mm now up for auction: http://www.ebay.com/itm/331077561279

Zeiss 16mm is sold, but the Schneider is still available with price reduced. I'll consider any reasonable offer on this.

Still available. All reasonable offers considered.

I couldn't be sure, but I would guess that it wouldn't. The mount's about 30mm to the end of the rubber gasket and there's only about 20mm of clearance at the bottom of the mount on the BL3 until it would reach the shutter.

This is a very nice, heavy duty Arriflex Standard to PL Mount Adapter made of high quality stainless steel with a rubber light gasket at the camera end. I purchased this from a DP who had this part designed and only used it a few times. I never used it, because it's too large for my Arriflex BL3 (it extends too far and would hit the mirror shutter -- note: this will not work with film cameras -- it's too large). Although, this was designed specifically for the Red ONE, and I can only imagine it would work with the Epic/Scarlet, Alexa, and other digital cameras, but I've not tested it with them. http://www.ebay.com/itm/Arriflex-Standard-to-PL-Mount-Adapter-Stainless-Steel-Red-Arri-Alexa-/331063578499