Heikki Repo

AFAIK, servicing 16mm Aatons can get rather expensive (see http://www.cinematography.com/index.php?showtopic=7988&p=61048). Other than that, the first serious short film I directed we shot with an Aaton XTR. Our DP did like it, it was a good professional camera. On the other hand, if you are looking for a Super16 camera that is relatively modern, good to hold and allows one to use wide range of lenses in different mounts, there is really only one camera capable of it all: Eclair ACL. I have one and I like it. Steady image, reliable camera though without all the latest bells and whistles (monitoring support, variable shutter etc). You'd want to buy a complete package with PL adapter, rods, modded S16 groundglass... As I haven't had funds to buy PL lenses I shot my latest short film with Contax Zeiss lenses (Contax/Yashica mount to C-mount adapter) and for wider lenses I used Kern Switar 10mm & 16mm.

If someone is wondering about the certification process they need to go through... FILM Ferrania writes on APUG: http://www.apug.org/forums/forum390/144666-hello-apug-film-ferrania-part-2-a-3.html

Progress! https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/filmferrania/100-more-years-of-analog-film/posts/1276465

I suggest you shoot one cartridge of test material, process it and scan it. That's how testing is usually done. If that's not possible, you could try taking a photo of the film frame with a good DLSR and macro lens against diffused light.

Please post crops from both scans zoomed to 1:1. Epson flatbeds are usually rather blurry in small details (even V700 which I have) so I'm tempted to say that your film is okay but your scanner isn't. IMHO Epson flatbed isn't sharp enough even for scanning 35mm stills. For 4x5" and 120 it's good enough @ 3200 DPI.

Thanks guys!

Just a quick question: today I noticed that one Super-8 cartridge I had shot creaks a little when I push the sticker in the back, about in the middle vertically. The plastic bends a little when pushed on that spot. Now I wonder: how light tight are these cartridges? Anyone else noticed their cartridge not being 100% solid? Am I in for a nasty surprise of light leaks?

Thanks David! I hope you enjoyed your trips to Finland :) As for your wife studying Finnish -- that's certainly not something I hear too often :)

I just realized that I have been a member on this board for over ten years. I was in highschool when I registered, I had received a super-8 film camera as a birthday present one year earlier and was a complete newbie. While I wasn't that active member here until a few years ago, I remember spending a lot of time on these forums already during my highschool time. I'm really grateful to everyone writing here, to those still active and those who have since then disappeared. My day-to-day work is something completely different from the world of film making, but the small things I have achieved as part-time director/producer/dop are in part thanks to you all and the knowledge you have shared. So -- thanks! :) My latest work I produced/directed/edited, published yesterday:

Hi Nathan! Being myself someone who hasn't gone to a film school and have learned to shoot on film on my own, here are some ideas: 1) Buy yourself a (spot) lighting meter and a film SLR 2) Learn how to expose film with that combination; learn zone system; what is EV and how those values correlate to ISO, aperture and shutter speed. 3) After you have learned to do exposures this way (it'll help you with digital cinema cameras as well) you can move to the next "learn by doing" -- get yourself a 16mm camera or go to some rental house and ask if you can test one of their cameras. Buy some film, learn how to load the film, expose your roll, learn how to unload the film and send it to a lab for processing and scanning. 4) Repeat #3. Practice, practice, practice. And reading these forums and watching youtube "how to load film" -videos. Film is surprisingly cheap to buy and process these days (except super-8). :)

Yes, sounds like one. Cock the shutter and then set the timer. On most cameras pushing the shutter release then starts the timer and the shutter is released after the timer ticks back to start position.

I don't mean to hijack this thread, but since it is on moving colorful lights and how it was done, I think I have to share one music video I found and watched last night. Very inspiring: And here's the making of:

I don't know -- I felt very nostalgious and happy feelings when I watched the trailer. I'm sure it'll be at least as good as Star Wars IV and certainly better than I-III. Some years ago I wanted to share with my wife the glorious experience of watching the original trilogy. As we watched the first movie I constantly felt like I had to defend it -- "oh, this is the later director's cut, not the original one, (I'm sure) it was way better than this!" It just wasn't as special as it was when I saw it first time and my wife wasn't impressed at all. I think JJ is better suited to direct Star Wars. I have had a feeling that this is the movie he has been wanting to shoot every time he has directed one of the Star Treks. To me those felt way too starwarsy. Maybe this time he has the right pieces for the right movie?

Have you seen this yet? :) http://alphagrip.co.uk/index.php/blog/item/364-alpha-lab-ready-to-roll http://www.alphagrip.co.uk/index.php/blog/item/363-alpha-lab-and-mb60

Some years ago I asked courier companies about x-ray. Most of them replied to me that they x-ray everything. Since then I have sent film many times through couriers and in mail to processing or received fresh film sent by someone to me in mail. I haven't had any problems. As long as you had the film with you on the plane and didn't put it in with the luggage I think you should be okay. Just make sure to overexpose by one stop per decade of expiration + possibly 2/3 stops as you might with fresh film.

I don't think one should not go watch movies shot on digital just because of the medium. It's not just the medium. Having said that, I do however have to note that thus far film is the only medium that really let's me just focus on the story. With digital I seem to get disconnected from the story every once in a while. Somehow blown out whites and the really sharp clean picture remind me that I'm watching something shot on video and then I imagine actors standing in front of the camera, director watching the monitor and scenes being played. While it doesn't make much sense I can't help it. But to be fair, not all digitally shot movies make me feel that way.

My rule of thumb with expired color negative is 2/3 stops overexposure by default, add one stop for every decade of expiration. Some Fuji 250D from the early 90s or late 80s:

Hi RC Hoffman, I'm selling an Angenieux 9.5-57mm f1.6-2.2 zoom lens. Included with the lens Chrosziel zoom fluid dampener and lens hood. Everything is in good working condition, there are no scratches, fungus or separation on the lens elements. However, Cameflex mount -- but there are suitable adapters available for cameflex to m43. This lens is intended for R16 and thus doesn't fully cover S16. However, when cropped to 1:2.35 no vignetting should show up. Would work nice with a BMPCC, if you search on Youtube there is a test in which an Angenieux 9.5-57mm was used with a BMPCC. Asking 280 € + Finnish VAT + shipping (EMS package). No VAT for buyers outside European Union. Photos here: https://www.dropbox....2DCpKIzQpXeDx6a

Well, I'd say that Kodak might want to but their coating facility is way too big to be efficient enough these days. Kodak dismantled smaller coating lines years ago and now they only have too large ones. There is still quite big demand for film globally, but what we are learning from the news is that if there wasn't this deal between the studios and Kodak, Kodak would have plugged the plug. Due to digital projection and projection prints not being made anymore we have been on the edge of film making not being profitable enough for Kodak anymore. And that would have been pretty much the end of color motion picture film. While the new deal does secure Kodak film for some time we really can't be sure for how long it'll last. Not to mention that while 35mm is available, we don't know for how long super-8 or even 16mm will be. Is there enough demand vs. just slitting and perforating 35mm for studios? There will be more Kodak motion picture film products discontinued by the end of this year, no doubt. Ferrania is a new hope. It is more like "film enthusiast to film enthusiast" type of business than "biggest profits to the stock owners". They are here to make film and they hope to be doing it "for the next 100 years". They won't be, however, bringing some Vision3 killing negative film stocks to market anytime soon. Instead the film they will be coating first is color reversal for which there are no motion picture film made anymore. That way it'll be catering first to super-8 and 16mm motion picture users and to still photographers, who understand the risk of losing all color reversal film all too well. Even though Fuji is still selling those film stocks for still photography use, nobody knows how long that'll last -- or whether they are really making new film or just selling film coated years ago and stored under some mountain...

Apparently RMS granularity of this film is 13, while AGFA 200 is 12 and Fujichrome Provia 400-X is 11, so do not expect it to be Vision3 50D. However, one thing to note: someone asked Ferrania on Twitter if they are going to do something about the grain. Their answer? Yes, it'll be the first improvement.

New smaller cine film rewards (1x super-8, 1x 16mm and 1x super-8 + 1x 16mm) now available: https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/filmferrania/100-more-years-of-analog-film/posts/1006200

Yeah, just backed and hoping to get a Collector box. Good chance to test the film in all different formats! :)

Ferrania has launched a kickstarter campaign! First batch of film for backers :) https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/filmferrania/100-more-years-of-analog-film

Not to mention you better live in a big house! :)

Yet still there are people, who want to have a picture painted of them instead of just taking a photo and printing it. Somehow they even see some value in the tedious process that is necessary to achieve the picture... :) It's always a question about values: what is good. Sure, those 4K videos look great on large television sets. It was almost as if I was looking through a window. But I'm not sure if that's the aesthetic I like in fictional movies. Sometimes less is more and more is ... well, something else. Some say 24 frames per second is too slow and makes the movement jittering. For them higher frame rates is the thing and even 120 fps isn't too much. For me going higher than 24/25 and it begins to look like bad television drama shot on cheap cameras -- even if it isn't.