Matthew B Clark

Ouch. Man...what about the old, "please sir, how about a free test scan?" plea? I've been lucky a couple of times so far paying a grand total of $19 in just film processing. There are a few very nice folks who'll throw my stuff up on their machines during their down-time, send low res files for me to do very simple and basic viewing over the web. I also get the sense that some people do see it as a bit of a moral issue...not to say running a business and sticking to your guns on pricing is "immoral", but I defintiely think that there is a soft-spot amongst filmmakers where if you actually come off as a reasonably legit person who is actually broke, and actually needs to test his camera with an actual intention of giving them more work, then some of these people will actually pop it on their scanner for you during lunch, knowing they could crush you for $100 in between color-grading a $50,000 job or just "let it fly" for you. In other words, I think there's a big difference between a film school doof calling up looking for "free stuff" and a genuinely interested, independent filmmaker looking for real answers to real problems. I think they can tell that too. Now, the low res is ultimately useless, but it's totally fair play. I don't want to cheat them either, and I express that on the phone with them. What they send more than meets my needs for very broad testing of lens action and film stock purchases, or camera fundtions, whatever. And costs $19.

Also, as someone who just recently spent about two years worth of Catholic grade school tuition on releasing a record...uh...I don't find the concept of "risk" to apply to this situation....like....at all. Hahaha!

Any luck yet? I can't tell you for sure, but I can tell you my experiences and their "general rules" of operation. It really only depends on the stock and the length of the footage, because they do processing in batches weekly, and with minimums of 300' per order for 16mm. So if you shot 400' of a common negative stock, you'd be absolutely in the clear for that week...if you got it in there on say, a Monday....Friday = next week etc. They aren't open weekends, so I gues you could miss it by a day and wait a whole other week if unlucky. But usually a week for processing negative. On the flipside of that, if you did the "rank-a-roll" with 100' of reversal, they are definitely waiting to "piggy-back" your order onto other "random" 100' orders....and/or reversal order frankly. They've told me this can take up to three weeks (I believe). They always seem to take around 7-10 days for me, regardless of order size, but I always get it scanned elswhere, so the "rank-a-roll" involves that extra process of telecine too...and I have a hunch they may be waiting to scan things in a similar fashion as I've just outlined above...like some "rank-a-roll" grouping of projects done in one shot, aside from "normal" projects, since it's a sorta "quick deal" process...this is just my guess though on the telecine part and based on what they do with the processing....

But more than the Ti West style...I am really looking to work in an authentically "old" way. In the styles of say Walerian Borowczyk's "Docteur Jekyll et les femmes" http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q1QqW5K5BR8 Or Jean Rollin's "La rose de fer" But the gold standard....the GOLD gold is ARREBATO! I love this guy for making this. These are the types of films I like. Their concepts, and their technical artistry. I mostly also love the processes. Something that is undervalued today, but was once an accomplice...

Agreed! But the shame is all on my side of the water, since everything I have an affinity with is either in Europe or your island! The Ti West approach seems fairly similar to what I'm after (in a way), so that's good to hear. I know you get what I'm after...that mixture of technically professional, proficient results, but with a definite "ratty" quality too. The visual equivalent of say, recording on 1/2" analog tape. You can still use incredible amps, microphones, and mixing console, but you purposely limit your "recording medium" to make sure you get your mix into a saturated, organic, ooey-gooey media. Interesting about Black Swan and Moonrise Kingdom too. Though those definitely feel to me like they are a bit more crisp and clean. My set design might just be the key to remedy that though. Like we were saying about Valerie...

Gregg, Gareth, Pav, all excellent pieces of information, and I'm sure my thanks is indicative of many other happy eyes here. The detail and breadth of styles you've all outlined for handling this process is really useful. Hey, by the way, I was thinking about Gareth's "humid" conditions in the changing bag. You described doing it quickly but never having any static electricity issues on the film...I'm wondering if the humidity is helping that. I always thought that really dry air was a major ally of static electricity. So that would actually make sense that you aren't having as many static (and even dust) issues inside a nice, warm, moist changing bag. Food for thought, and likely wrong, but maybe right!

I will! I feel you there. I need to quit usurping everyone's knowledge and give some back, you're right! I'm glad to hear all the responses. This is good info. And I definitely don't want to pay $800 for the Aviphot and then $300 to do a spool down. After a while, that eliminates all the savings. William Mishkin style penny-pinching, baby. Taking the wife's wheelchair for the day for dolly shots etc., because she can sleep in bed JUST FINE, thank you very much! Ingenuity can be so ugly sometimes!

Oh I know. Since I'm looking at doing this for those Aviphot cans though...that's two 1,200 cores. So I'd rather load up 10 or 11 to the brim like normal, then have one ratty short end spool.

That's what I figured too....you'll obviously feel with your thumb when the spool is loaded up, since you have to carefully guide the whole process anyway...I mean it's actually tough to even conceptualize NOT being able to sense that!

Thanks Will! I am so interested in the Lomos...and the Konvas...but also I would love an Arri III for the extreme stability and the 120 fps. I might just save up my pennies in the meantime and strike when a great deal pops up...one of those deals where you can look at it and just tell what's up. In the meantime, I did have a related question....I picked up some new glass for the K3....an SMC Takumar 50mm / 1.4 and a Carl Zeiss Jena Sonnar 135mm / 3.5. I am thinking to myself....ok....sharper primes on the K3 now...loaded with 50D (VERY fine grain, even for 16mm)....am I already in the same ballpark "grain-wise" and "sharpness-wise" as say, if I got an old Knovas loaded with Lomos and shot on Wittnerchrome 200D reversal?? Which supposedly has massive grain?? I mean, I guess what I'm saying is, I'm trying to play with the threshold of "how tight 16 can get" before it starts to get into the lower regions of 35mm resolution...and vice versa, how "low" 35mm can get before it starts looking like great 16....these are my sorts of barometers for purchasing....because they tell me things about what is and isn't necessary to get a certain look going.

How'd it turn out? Did you do that method described above with two split reels on a rewind? And did you notice any substantial (or minor) scratching or fogging?

Yeah, but then isn't the film going to be on the daylight spool all backwards? Because the Arri load would just be a regular "forward-facing" load, right?

Thank you Zac and Matthew.

Thank you Perry. I'm thinking this would be worth it when dealing with a bulk buy...like one of those Aviphot cans of 2 x 1,200' cores. I appreciate that thorough breakdown. I might just try it with a 400' load of some expired stock I have just laying around here. Just to maybe get the feel of it. It's damaged/expired film, so it's not going to tell me much about light leaks and handling, but it will get me the idea of working with my hands in the dark doing this...

I've been paying Spectra to spool down 400' loads for me into 100' daylight spools, but it's becoming a frequent econmic drain at $10 a roll (so $40 per 400'). I figure if I can just learn how to do it correctly myself at home, I can save a lot of money, and shoot a lot more film with that extra money. Does anyone know what this process entails exactly? Thanks.

You know what's cheesy? Not Lucio Fulci's work, but talking about making a lavish giallo with baroque style on an iPhone.

And yes, you can use any film you like if your camera has manual mode. The 40/160 text turns into dust and falls off the camera the second you switch to manual.

Yes, I do this all the time and I just have a really basic camera (Nizo 136XL). When I first started using it I was equally freaked out about the whole 40/160 ASA limitation thing. Cartridge pins never match it exactly with these modern film carts, so I used to only rely on auto-exposure and just use stocks like 200T (because that would meter at 160 ASA and give me a 1/3 stop over-exposure which this films likes, so it would come out awesome every time by just plugging it in there and setting to auto - This might be good for you Aymie to test out your camera - but yeah you'll need to pay to telecine that stuff then because you can't project negative of course. If you want to try it out straight up, use Tri-X, which is also 200T and reversal). Cynthia, yeah, I started to just set this same camera to MANUAL mode yes, and basically just point the camera very still at whatever the area of focus was in order to get a good reading on the dial inside the viewfinder of what f-stop (it will literally just say the f stop on this cheap little dial in there, and you can see it floating around as you move the camera across the scene, so hold it still on what you want to shoot - this is just my camera though so yours will have a different way of showing you the reading probably - but same idea basically - an f-stop is shown depending on what you point the lens at). Then, you just go "ok, that is the reading" (a very important step. You have to say this out loud or else it won't work). Then adjust the markings on the lens to that f-stop. This will avoid you a lot of really bad super 8 footage that looks like the camera is constantly "jumping" exposures trying to catch up as it moves past bright windows or dark spots etc as the camera moves. If you shoot negative stock (like 200T) then you can just find a medium lit area and meter for that and your camera will not have all these schizophrenic fluctuations when panning around a scene.

Well THAT just shot a hole through the last 40-odd years of camera technology advancements. Just kidding, but it's nice to see such masterful work done on what is today regarded as a primitive camera (and lenses). I guess that's the case with all classic films though...being that they obviously have that in common (that camera systems of today did not exist then! Sounds obvious, but it's really a funny trump card the old systems can play on their modern counterparts if validation should be needed...). Though to be totally honest, Valerie..., Pomegranates and even Daisies too get their looks primarily from the lavish set design and costume, so there is that aspect of it all too. These are really films where I'd imagine almost any semi-professional camera system would render a beautiful result. Especially as compared to some of the carelessly monotone gray dreck out there full of arbitrary and uninspired locations...but that's another story and purely a taste thing (I just prefer the fantastique and the magical....a synaesthetic approach). Anyway, sorry to ramble on and on...I am happy to hear that these old cameras can be artfully coerced into beautiful situations.

Thank you for the battery breakdown as well (you steered me clear of some pitfalls there). I'm so illiterate to the mechanics and electronics of it all that I would likely wait until a clearly operational and serviced "package" came about. That ought to give me some time to save also. The Lomos sound really wonderful, and I'd love to test some out. My problem is a lot of the gear I like, or am even interested in learning is not exactly the kind of stuff that I can see many rental houses carrying. Maybe...who knows until I ask, right?

First Jubilee, now Color of Pomegranates. Freya Black has the best taste! I'll take your advice. Right now I'm off buying a few M42 Zeiss primes + SMC Takumars to fix up the imaging on my K3 to best possible results. I do like the added grain of 16mm for some things, and I think that will suit. But yes, I can alreasy see the need to get myself into a 35mm system at some point. Question...are you familiar with the Czech new wave films like Valerie and Her Week of Wonders being shot on Lomos or not? Whatever they chose to deliver that films' visual sensibility is just out of this world. Delicious.

That's great to hear. But keep in mind I'm only experienced with a K3 16mm hand-wound camera, so as far as betteries go at all, it's Greek to me. Do I just get the camera body and then grab a DeWalt battery and then find someone who mods them to that 4-PIN XLR set-up and plug it straight into the camera? And know of anyone who does good mods or sells these you know of? Anyone?

Interesting... What about the whole Konvas battery situation? Anywhere I can get those pieces? And what pieces?! Forgive my ignorance please, but again, I just want to get what I need nailed down, and that's my main missing link in deciding. Battery issues and availability. Resulting image etc. as compared between a hand-cranked camera and a normal battery Konvas or Eyemo etc.

I'm cool with risking the Lomo's that come with it. My main concern is the battery situation. Which is why I am definitely open to suggestions for hand-cranked cameras. I'm just trying to take what I can get and be smart about it.

Pardon my filmmaking literacy...or lack of it really. But if hand-cranking means it will keep me away from batteries while still producing comparable images with comparable stability to say, a "battery powered Konvas equivalent", then sign me up for a hand-cranked camera. I have zero qualms about my arm hurting from my K3 winding, and I actually like not having to think about batteries. It feels more freeing actually.