Matt Wells

I've got away with loading in really quite bright light. However un-loading you want to be more careful. This is because when the film is wound onto the spool at the factory it is wound in such a way from side to side so as to make it as safe as possible. Your camera will not spool it as well as Kodak or Fuji though! hence be more careful when un loading. Matt

Definitely super16. I am however a film obsessive to the extent that I even shoot all my home movies on super8 (16mm on one occasion), and my holiday snapps with a Hasselblad, so basically I'm biased. However, you sound like you're into pretty serious still film photography. There is a series running here on the BBC at the moment called Himalya - a travel documentary series in serveral parts presented by Michael Palin. This is shot super16 and looks superb. Try and get a look at it - although I don't know whether you (I assume you are in the US) can pick up our terrestial BBC channels. Matt

Hi there, I second LastQuark with regard to Bjorn - he is a total Beaulieu guru and has been servicing and repairing them for 30 years. You might be suprised how quickly he can turn around the service, if you are prepared to pay for fast shipping. contact him at bjorn.andersson@brevet.nu He speaks good English, is a really friendly guy, and has an excellent dry scandinavian wit. I was lucky enough to meet up with him for lunch a few weeks ago when he was in the UK. Matt

I would expect that Andec in Berlin would offer the service. Matt

I have always found the Swiss lab to be spot on. Matt

Thanks for the reply John. I have one of the frames saved in my PC but am not sure how to make it appear in my post. Anyway, in an attempt to descripe it better, both the 16mm and super8 were transfered on the same machine (it is a Rank, but unsure what model - probably about 10 years old) The best way of describing it is when you view the footage it is rather like there is a pane of glass between you and the film and this pane is rather dirty with one or two grubby streak and a couple of random small oval shaped marks. They are not enourmously noticable, but noticable enough to be very annoying and make you feel that something is obscuring the full quality of the film. I am not 100% sure how the Rank works, but is there the possibility that there is some sort of lens or something in the gate that either needs replacing or cleaning? I say this because the place where I go is not a main stream lab and, whilst the guy who owns it is very experienced and knowledgable, I suppose it is convievable that the Rank could be in need of a little more maintenance than it might otherwise get. The marks stay in exactly the same place, and are present on all 6 rolls of 16mm and also the similar marks remain the same on the rolls of super8. They are obviously not on the film itself as a result of a lap process or something. Thanks, Matt

This is rather unfair. It is not a "terrible camera" and the electronics do not "suck". You obviously have had a bad experience with these cameras, but the faults you list generally occour with beat up student part exchanges, or cameras that have been fiddled with by inexperienced technicians. - All nicad batteries have a lifespan and gradually deterioate towards the end of it and cease to hold charge, regardless what they are powering. Getting the battery re-celled with modern cells is straight forward anyway. - I have newver found the motor to be 'weak' - considering it does not have a crystal motor I have found the speeds to be very constant, and the cameras own tachometer display works in setting the speed. The faults that you cite all sound power related and could occour if the battery was towards the end of its life, except for the prism, but stock of these are held by Bjorn Andersson of Beaulieu Sweden. I'm not saying that the Beaulieu is better then the other cameras listed in this thread - I'm just saying that it is not a bad camera. Matt

The thread is about the ownership costs of film cameras. Everyone is agreed they cost less to own than video and digital cameras. It is arguable what economies are really generated by shooting video over film. What it so hard to understand? Matt

You're off topic here. The thread is concerned about the cost of ownership with regard to different camera gear. Video gear is a lot more expensive to own. We are not talking about production costs. Often rare exotic motor cars hold their value better than throw away mass produced vehicles. The fact that they are usually extremely expensive to run is irrelevant to the observation. And some people would argue that video and digital gear often has higher production costs than first meets the eye. Matt

Why is this, and not the other way round? I have to say I've never heard this before. Why should projecting at 25 allow more adverts to be screened? I know that they are probably all shot at 25, but, again, why is slowing the frame rate by 1 fps going to be any more damaging than speeding it up by 1 fps? I know that the feature films shot by Jones and Jolieffe (writers of "The gurellia Filmakers handbook") were all shot at 25 and they recomend never shooting at 24 because of the additional hassles. Matt

Hi there, I have recently had both 16 and Super8 footage telecined (via Rank) and there are one or two marks on the screen. They are very difficult to explain, but stay in exactly the same place and looks like a piece of clear film laid over the footage with a couple of oval shaped holes in it. They are quite hard to see, but definitely present. Is this some worn out part of the Rank? Matt

In the UK Tiffen are not nearly so well known as Hoya, or Lee for that matter. I think that this might be a geographical thing. Having said that I have a Tiffen ND filter for use on the Angenieux on my Beaulieu 4008. This was purchased, however, from Pro8mm. Matt

As a low budget production in Europe, I have heard people suggest that you should never shoot at 24fps because 1) it is easier to shoot at 25; and 2) if you are struggling to break the 90 minute barrier with your film, knowing it will be presented at 24fps gives a little extra running time! Matt

Excellent. Thanks. Matt

Has anyone from the UK here seen any of the new Michael Palin travel series Himalaya? Does anyone know what format this is, including the slow motion sequences? Matt

I think that, in the context, it means distribution to cinemas. However I would still suggest that 35mm is still the only truly worldwide distribution format - it is the same everywhere. Matt

First, you could expose 200ASA neg at 160 without too much bother if you really wanted to expose with the camera's own metering system. However in the manual it will give you the shutter speeds for the different frames per second. Use these in conjunction with your light meter, and don't worry about the lens coating. Matt

I love K40 (and all other Kodachrome variants for that matter) however the negative stocks are very capable indeed, especially the 200 Vision and Vision 2 and I have been very satisfied with the results. The EXR 50D from Pro8 is also excellent, for obvious reasons, and is far more suitable than K40 for stuff like snow scapes and any other high contrast scenes. Matt

Hi there, I assume you are referring to the Vision 2 200T and Vision 2 500T. If you are using one of the high end Nizo's (2056 - 6080) they will operate on automatic exposure with the notches on the cartridge, as will the Beaulieu's with settings to 400ASA. However, I gave up using automatic exposure a long time ago and now find it much easier to set the exposure manually. It is also much more accurate and cuts out a lot of the classic exposure errors caused by automatic systems. By setting manually you can specifically set the exposure for which ever part of the scene is the most critical, or the mood you want or whatever. I am talking here about shooting "off the hip" - It is worth saying that if you are shooting a short film or something where there is time to set everything up, don't even consider automatic exposure. I can highly recommend the Sekonic range of lightmeters with the digital read out as they are so quick to use, and easier than the old dial in meters. Matt

Try asking this same question here: www.filmshooting.com and click on the forum. I know that this question has been asked and answered before there on a number of occasions. Matt

OK, I get the picture. Does anyone have any suggestions as to a good alternative, with C mount? Cheers Matt

Natural Born Killers looked pretty good. The thing about Super8 is that it can look apalling and it can also look amazingly good. However, just as with any form of photography, if your camera is decent with decent glass, and you know what you're doing the results can be really really good. I personally have shot many very dissappointing shots but I also shot many that make it hard to believe it is super8. I had a wind up Kinoflex Russian camera that cost £100. I show people fotage from this camera sometimes (K40) - when I show them the dodgy looking camera that is clockwork too, they can't believe it. Matt

Only if its a home movie, and then only if the transfer is decent.

What do people make of the Angenieux 12-120? Any opinions? Matt

I think that you have to view Super8 as a format that produces a very different and distict look, rather than as a purely economic choice. It can look superb intercut with other film and video formats. Matt