Joerg Polzfusz

Hi! I have found several good articles in filmmaking magazines on this topic, e.g. in the CineMagic issue 5 that is also available on archive.org. But so far, I have only found a single book: „Breitwand-Film im Heim“ (aka „Schmalfilm-Truhe 15/16“). It doesn’t only focus on the technical aspect of mounting the anamorphic lens onto the camera/projector. Instead, it explains all related aspects. For example, it also explains the special problems of the correct framing. I have attached an example from a chapter where the books discusses the aspect of planning a scene, comparing the panning, that you would normally do when shooting this scene in 4:3, with a static camera shooting the same scene in widescreen. Is there another book or article in English or German that you could recommend that is suited for amateurs and that focuses on the „aesthetic aspects“ like „proper, non boring framing“? Jörg

Hi! Istvan Vasarhelyi (or most likely more correct Istvàn Vàsàrhelyi) was/is at least an Hungarian author of film-related books dealing with topics like „how to create a cartoon/silhouette animation/…“. One aspect of his career made me curious: His books have not only been published in Hungary (late 1960s, early 1970s), but he also appears as co-author/contributor/illustrator in various German books released in Eastern Germany, Western Germany and Switzerland. And on top, his style of drawing cartoon characters looks "familiar" to me. (Even though I would have said that his characters are from cartoons made in the former ČSSR.) So, why/how did he became "famous" enough to also contribute to books in the German language? Was he a famous Hungarian cartoonist back in 60s/70s? Did he do this professionally (without being mentioned on e.g. IMDB)? Or was he "only" a very skilled amateur (who maybe even represented Hungary in the UNICA competitions)? (I've already asked this question in other places, but I never received an answer.) Jörg

Hi! it really looks like an older model (SD/PAL from approximately 2000). If I remember correctly, then the first „HD“ model was called „flashscan HD“. Maybe you can ask the manufacturer? https://mwa-nova.com/website-2252/products-2094 Jörg

It might have also been an ordinary filter like this one: https://www.ebay.de/itm/234761606827

When the film is unmasked, could you simply soup it in E6 and use it as color reversal?

Children! It's Advent! Can't you stop verbally fighting now?

Do you have a „cherry pit pillow“ or another waterless alternative to a „hot-water bottle“? You can put your batteries into an isolated bag together with such a warm pillow and then only put them into the camera when needed. I would not recommend putting such a heat source into your camera’s bag. That’s because this will most likely cause condensation on your camera‘ lens and body as soon as it gets into contact with cold air.

http://www.dagiebrundert.de/EEntwickelservice.html

A smaller shutter angle means that the exposure duration is shorter. So, you’ll need more light. Hence, you’ll have to open the iris more wide (with the usual impact on the depth of field). But on the other hand, you’ll also have less motion blur. The relatively small maximum shutter angle is most likely a result of the camera’s 54fps.

Why do you want to know this at all? The look is more than just some lenses.

When you are only shooting video, then you should be fine. (Maybe two exceptions: What about a circular polarizer to prevent reflections? And what about gradient filters (ND and/or colored)?) When also shooting film, you are missing all the „usual suspects“ (Wratten 80a and Wratten 85 for color; yellow, orange, red, green and blue for b&w).

As they mention „ORWO“, it’s most likely that „new“ Chinese color negative filmstock that is going to be sold by some British businessman that now owns the right to use the brand „ORWO“.

I’ve added some scribble in red to demonstrate the difference between wide angle and telephoto. (The original image is from https://www.thijsschouten.com/diverse-artikelen/spiegelreflexcamera-voor-beginners/ and shows a still camera. But the logic is the same for a movie camera.)

Hi! wide angle = no way! ? Try to mount an older smartphone with just a single camera to the viewfinder, e.g. an iPhone 4S or iPhone 7. These smartphones only have a wide angle lens (equivalent to approximately 25mm in 35mm still photography) that is small enough to match the dimensions of a Super8-camera’s viewfinder. The result is an image that at least 2/3 black. Even with the 5x digital zoom of the iPhone 7, nearly half of the image is still black. That’s because the wide angle (even with digital zoom) makes the phone’s camera record the inside of the viewfinder and of the „light path“ (no clue how this is called properly in English - it’s the „channel“ that „leads“ the image from the mirror/prism to the viewfinder and „protects“ it from additional light from the outside) instead of recording the image that’s visible in the viewfinder (and the surrounding additional information like the exposure/film running indicators). So a tele-centric lens seems to be a must. Unfortunately some lens manufacturers tend to list the „real mm“ while other list the „equivalent mm in 35mm still photography“. This makes it hard to compare the lenses. Not to mention that the „required mm“ depends on the diameter of the viewfinder, on the diameter of the sensor and on the distance between sensor and viewfinder (= the dimensions of the videocamera’s lens).

Hi! Welcome to fabulous world of real film shooting! a) Shoot a test-film! Even if the camera was working fine when leaving the factory approximately 50 years ago, it might have developed some problems by now. b) As a newby, avoid manual exposure for shooting a serious project without doing some tests before. There are several pitfalls. E.g. you’ll have to understand the lightloss caused internally by the camera (beam splitter, filter, …). c) When comparing the values from the camera’s internal lightmeter with the readings from an external lightmeter, then keep in mind that the S8-cameras‘ manuals never tell you how you what area of the image is used and how many sensors the camera has. And you will have to compensate for the lightloss (see b). d) I have exposed the E100D correctly with automatic exposure in several different cameras without any problems. Nevertheless, this might depend on your camera (age, defects, design, features, …). And of course, you’ll have to know its limitations (e.g. the usually „strange“ reactions to flickering light sources like e.g. a fire). e) You’ll have to understand the concept of the different types of color film and the required filtering: Daylight balanced films (like the E100D) don’t require any filters when used in daylight. They only need a filter when used in artificial light (a blue one like e.g. a Wratten 80A). Tungsten balanced films are balanced for artificial light (halogen, …) and hence don’t require any filters when used in artificial light. When used in daylight (alias sunlight), they need an orange filter (normally a Wratten 85 or equivalent). Most Super8-cameras have a Wratten85 (or equivalent) with a complex mechanism to detect situations where it has to be automatically removed. (Sometimes this mechanism does not work properly anymore due to the age of the camera. And some cheaper cameras are completely lacking the mechanism.) There are only two reasons not to use this internal filter: 1) Mechanism broken 2) filter dirty, deteriorating or damaged BTW: be careful when using LEDs: some of them are emitting light with the same „color temperature“ as the sun. So they are producing „daylight“ despite being an artificial light source.

Hi! I guess that your posting might be better suited for the „please critique my work“-section. But anyway: Nicely edited to match the music, nice shots etc.. So, there’s nothing wrong about it. But on the other hand, there’s also nothing special about it. And IMHO the choice of the CS-format probably wasn’t the best idea as it just added wasted space to left and right in many of the shots. What I also didn’t get: what’s your contribution to that video? Did you direct the shots or operated the camera/lights/…? Did you only/also do the „final cut“? Or have you only/also been the creator of the animations? Or have you been one of the actors/musicians? „Cinematographer“ could be anything or nothing these days. Just my two cents Jörg

At the moment, Hollywood has got three major problems: a) The unstable worldwide situation: In the past, you would have been able to calculate with a worldwide release. Now, you cannot predict anything anymore (inflation, war in Europe, some governments still trying to fight Covid-19 with putting whole towns under quarantine,…) b) Cinema isn’t on the top of the food chain in the entertainment industry anymore. So, in order not to make losses, the studios focus on boring mainstream stuff, sequels, prequels, spin-offs, … . This is killing a lot of creativity. c) „Wokeness“ and other useless „political correctness“ stuff: For example, instead of doing another Western, the studios decided to replace the I-words with Smurfs and North-America of the past with a sci-fi-setting on a different planet. … and even more creativity got killed. The result of this are movies like the latest avatar - low budget and designed to also work fine on small screens & another sequel/spin-off & politically correct. But that’s only the present situation in Hollywood and will not help you predicting the future. A future that one is yearning for is something like the French „Nouvelle Vague“ - creative, independent movies shot outside of studios by small crews - with a budget that is so small that they would even make profit when only being released „regionally“. Of course, this will only work without stars getting bazillions of dollars for each movie and without studios that also have to finance their „overhead“ (CEOs, marketing department, …). So maybe you should watch „A Bout de Suffle“ and some documentaries about Godard‘s way of working? Then take a look at the last ten minutes of the latest Hollywood productions (aka credits) and think about how many people really have to work on a great movie. You might also watch „The Baldlands“ and the way the film got financed:

Those cameras are 50 years old. So everyone that was working on these cameras is not working anymore. Plus, Leitz got restructured several times - with the „Leitz Cameras“ part becoming a company of its own, … . Hence, it could be that all Super8-related information stayed with Leitz rather than their spin-off Leica. Nevertheless, as the camera is 50 years old, the chances are high that something is broken in the camera. E.g. the mechanism that shows the red indicator in the viewfinder at the end of the film might need some oil or might be stuck/broken.

What type of film was it? There are some cameras that require a correctly marked end of the film (with cuttings on both sides of the film) to show the „end of film“-sign in the viewfinder. And some Non-Kodak-films had only some part of the perforation cut out and not the other side.

Congrats! I really enjoyed watching „Space Jam“. It’s a great film. I even still remember the cinema (Thalia in Berlin-Lankwitz) and the friends that accompanied me to the screening. ? And about two or three months ago I forced my kids (15 and 12) to also watch it (unfortunately only on Amazon). At first, they didn’t want to („oh no, not again another film from the last millennium… I hope that it’s at least in color!“). But in the end, they really enjoyed the movie. The only thing that didn’t age well have been the „ntsc to film and then to streaming video“ shots from actual games with Air Jordan and the other NBA stars.

Hi! what type of music would you recommend as “background soundtrack” for Basketball? HipHop? Rap? My kids are part of Basketball-Teams, and I shot some of their games. Now, I am going to compile this to a 10min “documentary”. But I‘m too old to be hip. And my latest music in my collection tagged with “sport“ is „Baby Elephant Walk“ from Hatari. ? And the newest “Basketball movie“ that I watched is “Space Jam“. ?

ZC1000: I don’t have the camera’s original electrical remote release. But all the ones that I own (including the CineAssist) only work in „normal operation“ and not in „single frame mode“. This is strange as Fujica‘s „time lapse control“ is connecting to the electrical remote socket, too. I wonder whether there’s a problem with my camera or whether there’s a special „trick“ needed (like a 5V impulse or something).

Hi! When browsing through eBay, Amazon, Wish, …, you’ll easily stumble across very, very cheap, new Chinese anamorphics that are supposed to be mounted onto smartphones. I bought two of them for 30-40€ each (including shipping) - one with a factor of 1.33x and another one with a factor of 1.55x. They are working fine on my iPhone 7, especially in combination with FilmicPro. But when I tried to mount them onto other cameras, e.g. Fujica P2, I noticed that they cannot be used as they are causing vignetting. Anyone succeeded in using any of these cheap optics on something else than a smartphone, e.g. by removing the plastic on their rear? I noticed that there are also cheap anamorphics for some drones or some „GoPro“-cameras. Would they be larger and hence large enough for another camera?

Hi! Are there any CineAssist-users here? I just want to share some test results: Nizo 4056: CineAssist works perfectly out of the box, but the „film out“ is very slow as it requires a „frame rate“ of 1 frame every 2 seconds. Fujica 2 (modified by Mateo Bauza): CineAssist works fine, but is limited as the camera doesn’t have a single frame exposure/advance. Fujica ZC1000: CineAssist is only working when using an additional cable in between that changes the polarity. (Side note: The Nizo 4056 is working with and without this cable. So it’s a „design problem“ of the camera.) Major drawback: The ZC1000 doesn’t allow single frame exposure/advance via the „electrical remote cable“. So you cannot use the „film out“ and other options. (Whether this can be bypassed by somehow plugging the CineAssist into the connector that is used by the camera‘s pistol grip, hasn’t been tested yet.) Fujica Z800 (and most likely all other Z-models): The CineAssist needs the same „change polarity cable“ as the ZC1000. And the single frame mode is also only available via the mechanical remote (cable release) and not via the electrical remote that the CineAssist is using.

Is there a future for cinematography? E.g. all recent Hollywood-productions seem to be based on Marvel-comics or do have other excuses to replace story-telling with brainless action (most likely to compete with TikTok). ? At the moment, I would say that you should rather concentrate on streamography and producing series with at least six episodes. ? On the technical side, there’s currently the trend to produce everything (even series) in cinemascope. And you can see that more and more shots are done with drones - not only the traditional „shots done with a camera mounted onto a helicopter“, but also shots that would have been traditionally done with a dolly (or a dolly on rails). I guess that even tripods will be replaced by drones in some productions pretty soon.