Charlie Peich

Hi Rob, A little FYI on the 35-3...... In the last 4 or 5 years Arri made the 35-3 - 3rd Generation, the model that would go to 130fps forward and reverse, 15 to 180 degree shutter and "washboard" gate, Arri eliminated the interchangeable lens mount plate, the nice solid steel one, with the 4 screws. Arri instead machined the softer housing to accept the the mounts directly, making it not so easy to change them. Be careful using heavy lenses on this version, make sure you have good support before you take your hands off the lens after mounting it to the camera. Damage the mounting that is screwed directly to the housing, you might distort the housing and then you'll have to replace the "skeleton" or housing. More $$$$. One would have to question if extreme heat/cold would be more apt to change the tolerances of the flange distance do to the softer material used in the housing. ??? Then the 435 came out........ I couldn't find a picture of the modification / change. Charlie

Hey Nicholas... BPS is still operating? I thought they went out of business years ago. They are located just west of Chicago. He used to do a lot of student film processing for Columbia college in Chicago. How was the turn around time? Charlie

Greetings Simon! I want to know, when did Bert Howell acquired the knowledge to make briefcases, table lamps and razors? The "official text" you refer to, from the site you link, of the the current holder of the Bell & Howell name, is from "the 1982 book by Jack Robinson "Bell & Howell Company... A 75-Year History". The Bell & Howell site you link to is old, the business is gone and no longer in operation. The Tele # (847) 470-7100 is now owned by a bakery named Duncan Donuts. The owners of the B&H name at the site had none of the B&H records from the film period. A fellow B&H Filmo collector looking into B&H's 16mm history talked to them years ago, they told him all they had regarding B&H history was the Robinson book. They did copy the book for him page by page. Also, the Robinson book has errors in it and is not 100% factual. The book was written for the stockholders for the 75th year anniversary. The 75th Anniversary diner and party was 100% perfect however. None of the new "historians" looking into B&H's history today know where the paper records of the early years reside, or if they still exist. However, the Bell & Howell equipment "museum" was absorbed into DeVry Technical Institute that is now known as DeVry University . Refer to the 1982 book by Jack Robinson "Bell & Howell Company... A 75-Year History" . B&H acquired DeVry Technical Institute in 1966. The equipment museum was located at the B&H headquarters in Lincolnwood, Il (just north of Chicago). When that plant was closed and turned into a strip mall, it was moved to the DeVry Chicago campus. I did see a portion of the collection when it was at the Larchmont Ave plant in Lincolnwood, and later when it was housed at the Chicago campus . It is my understanding that it was subsequently moved to the Oakbrook Terrace location. It is most likely still packed in moving boxes and in a storage room. I tried a couple of years ago to track it down, but I couldn't get the interest of anyone at DeVry to look into it. When I asked about Bell & Howell motion picture equipment, film equipment, there were long pauses of silence from the other end. I got the impression they had no knowledge of what I was requesting and were not interested in digging it up. You could try to contact the AV Dept at the Oakbrook Terrace location in regards to the collection. Contact Sam Dodge , he restores old 2709s and I believe he has some paperwork on the cameras. "Where did that Standard come from?" Lack of standardization? Termites and mildew? From the Robinson book: (type large enough ? sorry.) I complained about the wooden cameras also. He's a pic of me with my new "all-metal" 2709s. I hated the electric motor at that time. In this photo I was filming a PA being trampled to death by an elephant in front of my tent. The batteries were dead on the other camera. Regards, Charlie

Hi Don! Jamming how? Not taking up on the core? Do you have the ancient type core, the type with the "key" molded into it so it fits in the mag take-up hub slot as shown in the picture above? Here is a thread on how to modify the hub to take todays cores: http://www.cinematography.com/index.php?sh...42&hl=eyemo Charlie

What Kodak needs to discontinue is Chairman of the Board Antonio M. Perez. http://www.kodak.com/eknec/PageQuerier.jht...900688a80234316

Ben, Naaaaa, it's off. I have the same lens, but older, sn-313547 vs your sn-371803. On my lens the aperture ring is silver. My lens is uncoated. Perhaps the black aperture ring on your lens means the new "coated" version of the lens ??. I just checked my lens, and it comes up on infinity and at 3 ft. If the lens is set at the 4 ft mark on the focus scale, then everything that is 4 ft from the film should be sharp. You shouldn't have to do any math to figure it out! If the image on the film is soft, then the flange depth is off, or the collimation of the lens is off, or both! How I was able to check my lens? I have a Eyemo 71QM (Army/Air Force designation A-7). It has the "Direct through-the-lens prismatic focusing magnifier on the right hand side of the camera." The ground glass is the same flange depth as the lens mount. I do have the 2 Cooke lenses as shown in the picture, the 2" that's in front of the finder, and the 1" that's at the top of the spider turret. Both uncoated. You're looking for the Militar version of the 50mm. The 1st version (older) of the Militars were "black" barrels and were coated. The last version or newest, had gray barrels, supposedly the best of the Militar line. I did find a gray set of Militars 25mm, 50mm, 75mm, 100mm, & 152mm, they came with a KF-2(1) camera set. The "Bomb Spotter" camera was just that, the camera that was in a bomber to record the bomb hits. They usually were FIXED focus lenses, (who had time to focus when the bombs were going off?) with the Eymax 6"/152mm f4.5 or the Eymax 10"/254mm f4.5 lens being the most popular. Any Eyemo lens you get will need some work, all lens surfaces need cleaning and all mechanics need lubing. It all depends what you plan on doing with the camera. I set out to get a Eyemo and lenses from that period for the look. I wanted a set of uncoated lenses and a set of coated lenses.... early lens designs with all the flaws and flares. I had no desire to put a PL mount on the cameras, I just wanted the look of the camera and lenses from the period. Wind it up and shoot like they did back then. I ended up with 5 Eyemos and a bunch of lenses, some of them worth cleaning and lubing, some were junk, or would cost a lot to restore. Art vs cost. BTW, you put a frame grab on one of your posts, how was the image registration your camera? Did you use FilmWorkers for the transfer? Do you want to try out a 50mm uncoated lens? Charlie

Ben, Here's a thread on Eyemo lenses http://www.cinematography.com/index.php?showtopic=11379

Hello Gregory! The "zoom" ring problem, as I recall, was the most prevalent problem with the series II. I have a friend who has a small rental house, he had a MkII that developed that problem. $7,000 to fix with Zei$$. As for putting the front "focusing" group from the Mk II on the MkI, I don't know if that can work. You need to talk to Zeiss or a lens tech like Paul Duclos. Paul works on the Mk I and Mk II lenses. If it was my Mk I, and it was working without any problems, I wouldn't mess with it because of the additional weight on the front of the lens. For instance, with my Mk I, I don't put any clamp-on filter rings with multiple filters, or clamp-on matte boxes on it... no additional weight added to the lens. This is the philosophy I've had with all zoom lenses. A lens tech told me once years ago, "a 'variable focal length' lens is a barrel of compromises!" Charlie

I made my post without seeing your photos. Unless you want to restore that lens for the period look of that lens with it's flaws and all, I would look for another lens and try that 1st. They show up on e-bay.... http://cgi.ebay.com/EYEMO-MOUNT-EYMAX-V-50...4#ht_713wt_1133 search eyemo, there are several lenses listed right now.

Ben, I have the Army version, similar manual, but no lens adjusting, that was handled back at the main depot. Which lens do you have? Have you tried other lenses? It may be cheaper to buy other lenses. It will be hard to find a tech with a collimator or projector with the Eyemo mount. Alan Gordon ended up with the Eyemo / Filmo tools and parts when Bell & Howell closed their film manufacturing business. They sold off the Filmo line several years ago. Paul Duclos might be able to help.

What model camera is it, single lens, "spider" turret, or the compact turret? The Eyemo M model required a "Eyemo type C" mount. I can't recall if that was because of flange depth differences or not. The repair book I have doesn't list the M model. There was a color code on the lenses in the form of 3 dots. I think that helped differentiate the mounts. Mostly used/found in military cameras.

Hey Brian, I had the T3 also. Didn't you just love the rotation direction of the focal ring, it rotated in the opposite direction from all the other zooms in the world. What the heck was Zeiss thinking? Killed many assistants that weren't used to working with the lens. The T3 also needed rebuilding often as the nylon guides on the focal group wore out quickly. Did you add a larger gear ring to your Mk I's focal ring? I put one on mine, it gave it a better ratio for the slower zooms. Also, at the time I had a J-4 control and motor, and I don't think the motor's gear would mesh properly. I think CP sold the over size ring.

Gregory, Both lenses were optimized for Standard 16. Neither lens will cover Super 16 satisfactorily at the wide end. On the Mk I, the front element of the front lens group (the focusing group) is 80mm. This caused the lens to vignette in the corners from 15mm down when focused at 5 feet and closer (you can focus slightly closer than 5 ft, but there are no marks). This would disappear as you focused to a further distance. The Mark II corrected this problem with a larger front element. The Mark II's front element is 87mm. That was the only change, just a larger front element and slightly different focusing ring. The rest of the Mk II is identical to the Mk I. You would have to compare them on a projector to see any difference optically. "Great value has been given to the neutral colour reproduction so that if the lens is changed the film retains, as far as possible, a uniform colour character." That's quoted verbatim from the Arri Tech. Information sheet. However.... While not wanting to change the physical size of the lens and, of course, raising the cost of the modified lens; Arri/Zeiss perhaps, cough, cough, didn't address the new weight of the re-deisgned front focusing group, cough, and it was rumored, cough, cough, that the Mk IIs may have needed more servicing than the Mk I. Cough. I have a Mk I, bought it just before the Mk IIs came out, no problems. I found the Tech sheets for the 2 lenses: Hope this helps. Mk I Mk II

I say Amen to that. The Stylist is a true artist with food! Usually the day before the shoot, the Stylist is is sorting through the food the client provided, or what she has shopped for. Always looking for the perfect specimen. That's the difference in how good the product looks. You have to have a prepro/prelight day to pull the best photography off when dealing with food. One needs to see how the product looks under the lights and through the lens. But, I'm always lucky to be able to work that way. David, did you ever hear of the great grand-daddy of food shooters Elbert Budin? When I was a pup, he was my inspiration. I worked on a couple of national spots for Micky-Ds. At that time, McDonalds insisted that no "trickery' was done while shooting food. Also, they required 3 different shots of all food set-ups. That meant, after you shot one hero burger, you replaced it with a 2nd hero burger, then you shot it again with a 3rd hero burger... then on to next set up. They wanted 3 different variations to pick from while sitting in the "how come" room. Well, that added time to your day...$$$$$$$$$$. As far as trickery, as an example, ALL steam in a shot had to be real, no A/B smoke. That meant, on the stage we would build a smaller room large enough to contain our set up with lights. The room was constructed of a cheap simple wood frame and then covered with visqueen to seal it off. Then we would put 2 portable air conditioners running full blast to cool the room down so the steam would show....... again..... $$$$$$$$. It worked great for for showing the steam while frying a burger or coming off just poured coffee etc. Charlie

You need dry ice! Put dry ice chips in a metal screen strainer and hold it over the ice cream until ready to shoot. The melting "ice" will steam downward over the ice cream to keep it cold. A Food Stylist experienced with ice cream will have a strainer and dry ice over the ice cream after they sculpt it and while carrying to the set. Some will request a small freezer to have on set to keep the multiple "heros" in until ready to shoot. Still, ice cream doesn't last as long, but this helps prolong it. I've never photographed "fake" mashed potato ice cream. If I need greater depth of field on the shot, I don't increase the light and stop down, I prefer controlling the depth of field with shift/tilt lenses (Arri and shooting 35mm) and work at lower levels with tungsten light. I have used HMI's before to keep heat from rising with higher light levels. Different look however. If using tungsten lights, set your shot and levels, then after putting your lights on a dimmers, dim them down until ready to roll/shoot. Remember the old "lights, camera, action"! All this is subject to changes depending on your shot and any moves involved. PrePro! Charlie

Happy New Year Kirk! Here's a youtube with a description of the . The camera ran at 24fps. The maximum load of film was 50ft (split after processing = 100ft reg 8). You could load "silent" 25ft loads in also. The Cinephonic film was Ansco stock available in AnscoChrome color (iso 32 tungsten) or B&W. Kodak did not support the camera with mag striped film. The sound was recorded 56 frames ahead of the picture. Hard to edit! Info on the mag track from a Kodak ad for their 8mm sound projector. The battery is built in, and you would plug the charger in the base. I can't tell you how accurate the speed control was. I don't recall hearing anything about "crystal" sync control. I bought a turret model new when I was a kid. The zoom model wan't available at the time. But I did get a 8mm-48mm Schneider zoom with reflex finder for it. Nice lens. I still have the projector (non working amp) and a few hours of film. Problem is, the mag stripe flakes off easily as the film ages, there goes the sync "words". Charlie

Jason, There is a Bell & Howell 173 "Time and Motion Study Projector". They pop up on eBay occasionally. Features: 400 ft roll, forward/reverse operation, still frame and hand crank for forward/reverse advance of film, frame counter, calibrated motor speed, 1000w lamp. It takes single or double perf film. The knob to put the drive into the "still" mode is marked with the blue arrow. This clutch disengages the film drive from the motor, leaving the motor to run to cool the lamp. Then turn the crank, red arrow, to advance the film one frame at a time. This model has a "heat absorbing" optical block to prevent the film from burning, yellow arrow, but it absorbs a small amount of light from the 1000w bulb. However, there is no light loss on the screen when you go from motion to still frame mode! Nice, simple to operate projector for analyzing the action in technical films or those high school football game films. I have one of these projectors (not the one shown here) I use to show old family films on-- "home movies".

I found this Vimeo Group titled Expired Films "A group created to share the interesting and unpredictable nature of films that were shot past their expiration or "process by" date." Lots of examples.

That would be "Funeral March for a Marionette" by Charles (François) Gounod (b Paris, 17 June 1818; d St Cloud, 18 Oct 1893) Here's the The Hitchcock show version This small piano piece is a light-hearted piece of musical grotesquerie, a mock funeral procession with a jaunty beat and a carefree tune over a humorously not-slow-enough funeral march rhythm. Gounod himself, recognizing its popularity, set it for orchestra in 1879. Other composers have arranged it for various combinations, and the piece gained international fame beginning in the 1950s when it was selected as the sardonic theme music introducing appearances by film director Alfred Hitchcock at the beginnings and ends of his television anthology series on suspense and the grotesque, Alfred Hitchcock Presents. Gounod's dead marionette is now as unseverably linked in most people's minds with the portly British filmmaker as Rossini's William Tell Overture has been with the Lone Ranger. The piece has a little program: the marionette has died in a duel, and the funeral procession enters. A contrasting central section depicts the "mourners" stopping off for refreshments at an inn on the funeral route. At the end, though, Gounod lets a little more solemnity show. ~ All Music Guide

Patrick, Here's what I did with some 200ft mags and 1 400ft mag. I haven't use the 400 footer much (you definitely need a motor to drive it), but the 200 footers are handy with short ends under 200ft. The spring motor on one of my cameras will drive the 200 footer with about 120 - 180 ft of film. Nice for hand holding. The original mag spindles and cores look like this (200 ft mag shown for example): That's a cast aluminum core that came from DuPont. It's heavy! Cheaper than plastic? Take the core off and the spindle looks like this: What I used was a "Woodruff Key". The slot is 1/8" in the brass spindle. Remember, this is Bell & Howell, everything is in inches, not metric. I found at my local Ace Hardware store, in the parts drawers, was a 1/8 X 5/8" steel Woodruff Key (40 cents-ish): These keys fit snuggly in to the slot on the spindle! You may need a pliers to firmly seat them. Of the 7 mags I have ( 2 metal 400 footers, 2 wooden 400 footers, 3 near mint brown 200 footers), in only one 400 footer the slot was "sloppy" and the 1/8" key wouldn't stay in. You could always get the next size thicker and file it down. When you go to the hardware store, take the mag and a core with you to make sure it fits. Spindle with key and 2009 core: A cheap, simple fix! Charlie

Go to this site, all about Auricon Optical Sound cameras!

It looks to me like the door was used for aligning the camera for locked down shots. You have to put a prism into the gate to see what the lens is seeing. After aligning the shot, take the prism out, put the film in and use the normal camera door. Very similar to the Bolex prism. "Prismatic Focus The prismatic focuser was inserted into the film gate, and allowed focusing at the film plane through the taking lens. Although useful for cinemicrophotography, animation and title work, its use is rather limited for normal filming as the film door and pressure pad are removed while focusing." You didn't remove the gate in the Filmo, the gate opened far enough to insert the prism and show the width of 16mm's 10.26mm aperture. The ebay pic shows the opening in the door to view the gate prism. There used to be a focusing prism made to work with Filmos and Auricons called the AuriBell (similar to the Bolex unit), right angle view, image upside down, focusing magnifying eyepiece. As for this opening, I'm guessing the light blocking end cap, like the one on the opposite end, is missing. This finder door was made to make life easier when precisely aligning and focusing locked off shots. It most likely lets you view the shot with the correct left to right orientation and image correct top to bottom, unlike the Bolex or AuriBell units. Very handy when having to align many cameras. I am not aware of any gate prisms used in Eyemos. The prism would have to be big enough to cover the width of the aperture (35mm Full Aperture at 24.92mm), but the problem is, the gate with pressure pad doesn't open far enough to accommodate the necessary size of the prism that is needed to show the width of the aperture, it opens a measly 12mm, just enough to slip the film in. The finder door offered on eBay is incomplete and useless without a properly ground "gate" prism assembly. Many 16mm Filmos with electric motors and 400ft mags were used to film atomic blasts remotely.

Check out this site 16mm Film Talk. Die-hard 16mm film and projector collectors. Most will answer your questions as to which ones are the best now. Super 16 will be difficult. The Bolex was a great machine, however there are maintenance issues now, no one to work on them in the States, and no parts. If you subscribe to the site, look up Ken Layton in the members list. He rebuilds several projector models and also rebuilds tube amps for the old projectors.

Bill, Did you see this Topic I contributed to about 16mm camera gate I.D? I just thought of it.