Heikki Repo

Correction: my experiment turned out to be a fiasco. The battery shut down even with 25 fps with film loaded. It just couldn't give enough current. Better idea to just stick to NIMH batteries.

The rarer ds-8 cameras cost much more, but those include a Canon Scoopic lookalike and Bolex reflex cameras modified to ds-8.

Well, most of the cameras that are available are quite cheap. You just have to find one that works. This is the most common ds-8 camera: http://m.ebay.de/itm/Quarz-Zoom-DS8-3-russische-Filmkamera-/252453330868?nav=SEARCH Processing can be done as 16mm. Thus it is something like 1.20 + vat per meter @ Andec. For a spool of 10 meters ds-8 you get 20 meters of super-8 after splitting the processed film but pay only about 12.00 + vat.

Well, there are differences in both sharpness and grain -- of which especially the latter is quite a good reason for four stocks. If I need the speed, I can use 500T. If I have lots of light but want to have near grainless image, 50D is my choice. All the other stocks have their place as well. These differences become very evident in smaller formats. Compare 50D to 500T in super-8 and you can't mistake one for another. Also, adding lots of NDs isn't that convenient either. :)

Yes, DS-8 is compatible with your existing projector :)

It's a rental house owned FF and I didn't even operate it, only my AC did so I really don't know the details. Sorry. But yes, you are correct that how the things turned out was very close to some ideas presented earlier in this thread.

The exposed (latent) image is going to start to deteriorate immediately after exposure. With color film the best thing is to try to have it processed the same week, after three months the deterioration already affects how grainy it looks. On the other hand, something like that can be done. For example, here is some 16mm footage that sat for 3½ years (!) before being processed (I think my friend did keep it in the fridge though): Please do note that with super-8 the effects of deterioration are going to be easier to spot.

I worried a bit whether or not a follow focus would reach the focus ring on PL-mount primes. Fortunately it was unnecessary. Even with a narrow gear the Chrosziel follow focus reached the focus ring on the Optar Illumina primes. We had to use a clip-on mattebox, as the Chrosziel 4x5.65" would hit the other end of the rods and thus not get close enough to the lens. To sum it up: Les Bosher 15mm rod base for Eclair ACL works fine with PL-lenses and follow focus equipment.

With film both mags had a very healthy sound. According to Bernie it's normal for things get a bit too loose in these mags without film balancing out feed and take-up sides. I guess this case is closed :)

I think one definitely has to choose the right tools for the task at hand. To be honest, if I were to shoot almost weekly 4 minute short films (I guess for Youtube distribution?) I myself would stick to a BMC Pocket camera. Sure, it'd be cool to shoot it all on film, but really -- 40 shorts a year? I have a feeling one has to cut corners in production even with digital acquisition when shooting with that kind of a schedule, without a budget... I'm now in the process of preparing for an intro video/ advert for a website. Most of it'll be shot on S16, the length of the clip is going to be max 2-3 minutes, it'll be published on Youtube and I have been now preparing for it for a few months, getting permits for the locations, finding crew, having my camera serviced... For my project S16 is an excellent choice. Not as cheap as a BMPCC, but definitely the best option considering this project. What you could do is to sometimes use film. Accumulate resources for those short films you really want to stand out. Rent camera and lenses. Buy only cheap cameras that'll serve you long enough to earn back what you had to pay for them.

Unfortunately, here in Europe, super-8 is quite much more expensive than in the US. Somewhat surprisingly, one can almost shoot on 16mm film for the same price, film + processing + HD scan included: http://www.frame24ltd.co.uk/epages/es768558.sf/en_GB/?ObjectPath=/Shops/es768558/Categories/Process_Paid_Stock/100ft_lengths If you want to shoot 8mm film, the most cost effective option is to acquire a Double Super-8 camera and some Fomapan 100 for it: https://www.fotoimpex.de/shopen/films/foma-fomapan-iso-21100-r-ds-2x8-mm-10-meter-double-super-8-not-super-8.html

Thanks Gregg, I'll consider doing the tests with my louder mag. I have shot a short film with these mags without any problems in 2014. During that time I mostly used the mag #2 which is now the one that I'm wondering about.

I'm having an upcoming shoot so I need to shoot some tests to confirm other areas as working. Might as well test both mags at the same time :)

Bernie noticed immediately that I wasn't testing them with film. ;) I'm shooting some tests today, I'll let you know as well how they sound. :)

Just had my Eclair ACL serviced by Bernie. Since I originally sent my camera in for a ground glass work I didn't ship my mags. Now that I have my CLA'd camera with me and tested my mags with it I can't help but to wonder about one of my mags and how it sounds. It doesn't really sound bad, only ... louder. What do you make of the difference between my mag #2 and #1:

Rewarding life ain't always easy 8)

You don't want that more expensive Angenieux unless you are going to use it with a reflex Bolex. That lens is -- at least according to the seller -- RX, so it is designed to be used with a Bolex that has a prism in front of the film.

I'm pretty sure Simon means this forum: http://www.filmvorfuehrer.de/forum/13-schmalfilm/

Exactly! Your work and expertise are truly invaluable to film based workflow. Thank you! :)

As my Eclair ACL has gone in for some maintenance, I kind of woke up to wonder the question above. There are excellent specialists who can make our film motion picture cameras purr and improve them in many ways. Unfortunately, at some point they will retire. Do some of the masters of this art of mechanics have apprentices? Or do we have a bleak future without techs to service our cameras?

Sure you can process color neg at home! You just have to ... ehh .. build a processing machine. With lots of tanks. And computer controlled heating. And remjet removal. ;) 0.23 --> Unfortunately that lab is at the moment closed. Anyway, it can be done. Results were also quite good, even though there was no Lipsner-Smith to clean the footage and the scanners (super-8 and 16mm) were DIY as well. Some examples below, Super-8 (not my footage) and super16 (my test footage). There were many hobbyists but also professional clients who used that lab.

In addition to financial perspective, there is the historical as well: European Union was founded to build European stability through commerce and to keep history from repeating itself -- you know, Napoleon, WW1, WW2. In the heart of those conflicts usually were France and Germany on the opposing sides. Hoping for the collapse of EU is pretty much the same as hoping for the Texas and some other states of US to seek independence. Sure, there are people who think it'd be great -- but in reality only chaos and lack of stability would follow. At the moment Europe needs neither.

So do I.

I guess I have to find a new place to buy my Kodak film, I don't want pay import taxes twice! ;) Ah well, maybe someone from Scotland starts a similar business after they exit GB and join EU? :)

Hi Shawn, I have shot most of my home movies with a Bauer A512. It only supports two film speeds, 40 and 160 but I have adjusted its lighting meter to meter for a bit over exposed 50D/200T. I have received very beautiful results. It's relatively easy to find 85B filters. The best solution would be however to get a camera that supports all film speeds. Higher end Canons do and they also have auto exposure, which certainly helps if one has small children... :) Since you live in the States, you could try Pro8mm's Provia 100F, processing included. Despite the cost, that's probably the best option, since the only lab that can do super-8 prints from color negative is in Germany and those cost money as well (I estimate I pay for one cartridge of super-8 neg incl. processing and printing closer to 80 € which is some $90 USD. I try to buy film stock first and shoot it later. That way by the time I send my films in for processing and wait for the next invoice I have already forgotten how much I paid for the film stock!) My experience is that super-8 is the best option for home movies, even if the price is rather close to 16mm. That's because the cameras are smaller, faster to load and have nice features such as the auto exposure. Not to mention that everything else is smaller as well: projectors, processed film to be stored, etc..