Bon Sawyer

Just got back from seeing it (Superman Returns) tonight, on a large screen with good projection (and a good clean print). I'm still not overly keen on the look, but am prepared to concede that it's more likely the stylistic choices that I dislike than the use of HD video. Even close-ups often looked too 'smooth' for my liking, which makes me wonder if make-up and/or lighting were (at least partly) to blame. Still, I was not overly distracted by it, and enjoyed the film for the most part. Bon

Glad to hear that I'm not the only one who thinks so. I'm amazed that the film-makers would opt for this look as a stylistic choice- especially given the budget. I can honestly say I would have noticed (and disliked) it even if I did not have prior knowledge that the film was being shot in HD. I'm not "anti-digital, pro-film" by any stretch, but this trailer is certainly a reminder that HD is not yet in the same league as 35mm (in terms of overall quality). However, it's quite possible that the actual movie will look better than the trailer, so I'm planning to see it on the big screen, and am prepared to be open-minded about it. Bon

You could try contacting Bruce McNaughton @ Aranda (who is also a member of these forums). I'm not sure if he does what you are after, but if not, he might be able to point you towards someone who does. Bon

Hi Mike, Is any of this stuff still available? Bon

Interesting... I went to a screening of ECU 3rd-year projects at Luna Leederville a few months ago. I remember a black-and-white film set in Chicago- was that yours? Yeah, there seems to be minimal emphasis on the use of actual film within the WA schools. I think that's largely due to Perth's (apparently deliberate) focus on documentary and television. I recently finished an Advanced Diploma course at FTI, which was also video-only. I gather that Central TAFE, Curtin and Murdoch do involve 16mm in some of their courses, however. (Apparently Murdoch invested in an Arri SR2 quite recently.) Bon P.S. I might be able to give you some tips on putting your reel up, as well as provide some webspace for it if you need it. PM me if you're interested.

Hey Dajan, Cool to see another Perth guy around here. :) I think there's another one or two floating about, but I don't recall seeing any posts from them recently. Which Uni did you go to? Bon

Kodak's 200T and 500T cartridges disable the in-built 85 filter of most cameras. You'll need to use an external 85 (or 85B, etc.), or cut a 'filter notch' into each cartridge to allow you to use the camera's internal filter. The method for doing this can be found by searching the forums at www.filmshooting.com (and maybe here as well, but I can't remember offhand). Bon

No, because all that will do is change the F-stop- it will not change the amount of light entering the lens. Bon

Considered the Peleng 8mm/3.5 fisheye? They're easily, cheaply available (new) on Ebay with an M42 mount. The quality is not wonderful, and your options for mounting filters are limited, but you do get a much wider angle of view than the K3 zoom. (The "fisheye" effect is also not very pronounced when using it on a 16mm camera.) Bon

Thanks for all the responses! It sounds like a good option for me all-round. Rik- cheers for the suggestion. $2.5k is probably more than I will spend, but may not out be of the question. The wider angle would certainly be appreciated. I'll keep an eye out for this model. Speaking of Canon zooms, I missed out on this bargain due to forgetting to bid on it: http://cgi.ebay.com.au/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?Vi...ADME:B:AAQ:AU:1 Granted, it's a C-mount (not my preference), and not really wide enough for my liking, so I'm not particularly upset. But I'm curious- is anyone familiar with this model (12.5-75mm)? I couldn't find any info on the web. Thanks, Bon

Since you are finishing on tape, perhaps you could achieve this effect digitally? Bon

Hi all, I've seen the Angenieux 9.5-57mm zoom recommended as a decent, low-cost zoom for regular 16mm. I have a few questions about it, and am also interested in hearing people's general opinions of it. (1) How close can it focus? (2) What mounts is it available in? (3) How many versions are out there, and what are the differences? (4) What sort of price range should one pay for it? Info on any other good low-cost lenses- particularly wide-angle zooms like this one- is also appreciated. Cheers, Bon

I guess there are some C-mount lenses out there that have a longer-than-normal flange focal distance. This would not include most of the ones you would likely want to use with the K3. Bon

Just in case you were not aware, you will need to use an external 85/85B filter, as Kodak's notching of the Vision 200T cartridges disables the internal filter of most Super8 cameras. In addition, most internal lightmeters will meter the film as 100 ASA, so unless you are using an external meter, you will need to either compensate for this, or simply be aware of the 1-stop over-exposure (which many people consider to be very good for this stock/format anyway). Bon P.S. Although, as David has pointed out, there really is no difference between ASA 120 and 125, I'm curious to know how you came up with the number 120? By my calculations, 2/3 of a stop less than 200 is ~126... 200 * 2^(-2/3) = 125.9921

Yeah, the ones I have seen that allow the reverse are either macro-only or teleconverters with extra glass (due to the difference in registration distance between the two mounts). Thanks for the suggestion, though. Bon