Phillip Mosness

1 hour ago, Phil Connolly said:

I have everything crossed for "Big Shark"

 

...Oh hi shark

I've noticed a bit of this too, but do we know they're actually selling for those prices? People can ask anything. We've all seen things in eBay that are perpetually offered at some price month after month.  

It does seem like there's an upswing in 16mm lately, even more than 35mm, so if demand is up, then so goes the price. 

Would these work on LTR magazines?

Really enjoyed the movie, but I was convinced it was shot on film because there was a bit of weave in the image.

Turns out it was shot on various Alexas.

Are they putting weave in post now? Was I seeing things?

I've had mixed results with L.A. places, but I liked what I got from Gama Ray Digital Near Boston.

I'd also check the outstanding work of Ochio Y Pico in Madrid.

I contacted the seller on eBay to let them know the situation. I did't get a reply, but they were all gone the next day.

They probably got more than a few people sending them the bad news.

Hello,

I'm guessing your Bolex is a standard 16mm. A 2x squeeze will give you a 2.66 aspect ratio. Wider than standard, but gives you a little wiggle room with framing if you want to crop to 2.35  later. 

Most PL mount anamorphics aren't going to be very wide on such a small format. It's rare to find one wider than 35mm, which won't be too wide a field of view in 16mm. 

Were you planning to rent?

You may be better off using Switars and a Scope projector lens in front with a single focus solution such as the Rectilux.

You might be able to go as wide as 25mm that way. 

Hello,

It's amazing what you can do in 60 seconds, huh?

The only critiques I could offer is that it might be more natural for the camera/phone to fall at a more awkward angle  at :21, and there's not much motivating your lead male to pick up the camera at :35. Perhaps it could get kicked into the next position during the struggle. 

And I can't think of why a guy would drop his gun to punch a guy on the ground.  

Still, nice job!

I was expecting worse with the title of the post. 

Had you shot with this cam/lens before? 

Who did the transfer?

How did you rate the film? 

Did you use any filter, like an 85?

How about the Russian Zenit Quarz wind-up camera?

They're relatively simple and not  intimidating, durable, and cheap.

You can still find new old stock ones 

http://zenitquarzcameras.blogspot.com/

If I could throw one more option into the mix if the Aaton is too pricey.

The Eclair ACL is quite versatile.

It can do 100' and 400' , and there's a 200' magazine that makes it compact for a sync sound cam.

It has a c mount and adapters for Arri Standard/bayo , camflex, etc.

Many ACL II's are Super 16, and it's also a good candidate for Ultra 16 conversions. 

A cheaper option to the Aaton LTR , but similar in approach and with a c mount prime and 200' mag it's pretty darn small. 

Hamad,

Momento has a lot of sequences in a small motel room.

Old Boy

Vacancy

Room 1408 (more of a suite)

Giray,

Can you explain what "printed in the low 40's " means?

Having trouble with your password. 

Can you double check?

3 hours ago, Philip Reinhold said:

Kodak Plus-X is a 125 iso Negative Film. So rating it at 25 Iso is exposed around +2 1/4 Stops.

Cheers!

Not sure, but I think that may have been the 135 still photography version.

According to a list I found, 7231 Negative seems to have always been 80D/64T , but Plus X reversal has had a 50/40 (my favorite) and later a 100/80 version before they pulled the plug. 

10 hours ago, Robert Houllahan said:

B&W definitely holds up longer than color.

 

I shot some Plus-X from 1966 recently and I shot it as 25iso outdoors and it looked great.

Robert,

Negative or reversal?

What was it originally rated? 

A quick foll of reversal projected might help. I had a similar mild flicker with a 16mm that was solved with a CLA. Your motor might be fighting friction. 

Checking by eye would be pretty hard. 

Would there be a way of using a table top scanner to bring a few frames into a photo program?

I'm aware that the prevailing belief is to overexpose older color negative(one stop per decade I've heard), but I'm wondering if the same holds true for Black and White as well.

And on a side note, without any filtering, B&W is rated slightly differently between tungsten and daylight. Is this because it's more sensitive to the blue color temperature of daylight?

Hello, Mathew

If I understand your question you're asking why the sun appears larger when it's closer to the horizon. 

It's purely an optical illusion. At arm's length the sun is about the size of a pea between the thumb and finger at anytime throughout the day. The same is true for the moon.

The only reason these objects seem larger is because topography such as a mountain range or buildings give a visual context, or something to compare them to. 

James, I'm pretty sure the camera to which you're referring hasn't made it to market as of yet.  I'd say the odds may actually be against it at this point. (unless anyone has heard anything)

Kodak was trying to set up some infrastructure to be able to have places around the country/globe scan footage but found it wasn't very easy to get that part of it going at a certain price point. 

Plus there's still decent running cameras out there for a lot less than the 2 grand or so that camera would cost.

In the mean time I'm miffed that the price of a roll of S8 is annoyingly expensive. (I've ranted about this in other parts of the forum)

Double 8 is an interesting option, as Simon suggested. It's hard to beat those Bolex H8 cameras.

something like this?

https://www.studiodepot.com/flexiblemirror.html

Off to a good start with film. Nice colors, natural light,  etc. Handheld can be tricky with cameras that aren't shoulder supported, like the Bolex. Especially on the long end of the zoom range. 

Look forward to the next one

I think the gimmicks existing in the 50s were those like William Castle's really cheesy ones, such as "Percepto!", where there would be a small electrical jolt under the seats that would give you a little buzz.

He also swung skeletons over the audience in some horror films.

There was another called "Illusion-O" where you'd put on glasses to "see" ghosts in the 13 Ghosts movie.

Later in the 70's there was Sensurround used for Earthquake which was heavy use of  subwoofers for when the quake was in full effect.

Fun stuff. 

Yes, the Logmar might the the zenith of the format, but very expensive and probably hard to find now.

The NPR is Pin registered. 

The Eclair ACL is not pin registered, however the pull down claw is designed to be very steady because of the hang time at the bottom of the claw's movement, I believe.

I own an ACL and it's always been quite steady. 

If you look around, you'll probably find either in your price range. 

I had my ACL on ebay a few years ago but it didn't meet the reserve price, so I still have it. 

Hello, Andrius.

Both of these cameras are excellent examples of cameras for this format, however we're talking about cameras that are 40 + years old so at this point I'd just make sure you're getting one in good running shape.

I own a Leicina special and a Beaulieu 6008, (never owned a 4008), and like them both about the same. 

The Beaulieu 4008 will give you lots of C-mount lens options. The Leicina will give you more expensive M-mount options.

The Leicina has the Schneider 6-66, and the Beaulieu comes with the same zoom about 80% of the time. (some say the Leicina version has an extra element in their version of the lens, but I doubt anyone could tell the difference), so lens -wise, they're pretty even.

The Beaulieu has a fast guillotine shutter that sometimes gives the impression of sharper , but strobe like footage, but with a reflex mirror, all the light will reach the film. Leicina has a beam splitter and a more "normal" looking shutter angle. 

As far as jitter goes, it's going to be an inherent part of the format and its design. The only camera I've seen that has made an impact on stability is the Logmar, but that camera may not be what you're looking for.

A crystal sync motor isn't what affects image stability and I don't see a difference in either one of these cameras as far as breathing goes.

I will say that some post production stabilization can help a lot with locked down shots. (I'm doing a bit of that right now.)

It looks like the first clip (fashion) was transfered by Ocho Y Pico in Spain. They've got some of the best super 8 transfers I've ever seen, so which transfer house you use will make a difference too.  I mean those shots at around :45 are about as good as the format can produce, but at the end of the day, super 8 is super 8. Its going to have idiosyncratic elements that make it what it is.

So my next question is if you'd consider shooting 16mm. At this point, the difference in cost is negligible and the frame stability is increased immensely.