Jon O'Brien

Yes that could be it. Maybe it's simply the edge of the internal filter that hasn't fully swung out of the way. Especially if the internal filter is mounted in a metal frame that surrounds it, as the left hand side is completely dark and doesn't look like an orange or ND filter gel. So ... I'd try engaging and disengaging the tungsten control switch (if there's a switch on the side of the camera with sunlight and electric bulb symbols) or engaging the filter key if there is one. You can look down into the lens, with a good light, as you engage and disengage the orange filter behind the lens, and see it move across. If the camera has manual exposure contol you can also look into the lens as you rotate the small wheel and see the aperture blades open and close. Sometimes you have to get the angle of light just right. Good luck! The other day I pulled apart a broken, completely-unusable Super 8 camera that I bought for almost nothing on ebay to see how these things work and how they can be repaired if needed. This one had a broken drive shaft that turned the film take up wheel in the film compartment, so it was beyond repair. I'm going to sell some cameras so have to learn how to pick good ones. You can learn a lot about camera repair this way. If there's a problem with the internal filter not being completely retracted it's risky but possible to open up the camera and physically try to push the filter out of the way or at least see what the problem might be. I'd be cautious about removing the filter though as it may upset the internals of the camera. Sometimes small ND filters are attached to the mechanism that controls the orange filter. The orange filter was put in the camera in the first place because Kodachrome reversal film required an orange filter for daylight filming. With negative film, as is commonly used now, you don't need that filter to be engaged. So it normally should rest in a position completely swung out of the way of the light path as it enters the film gate.

Hmm, I've not seen this before. I assume it's in all the images? Possibly one of the blades of a two-bladed aperture (common on Super 8 cameras) stuck in the closed position, throwing the optical centre off. Or the lens has been bumped in its mounting attachment. Doesn't seem to look like a shutter problem as far as I can see. It would be best to see some actual footage.

Or even better, both a PL and a C mount version. That would greatly expand the usefulness of such lenses.

Sirui has released a 1.6 x squeeze anamorphic lens that would be great if it could be used on a C mount vintage 16mm camera. Imagine that. But every single mount it comes in, L, X, Z, RF, and DL is unusable on a C mount with an adapter. If they could design a similar lens for Nikon F mount that would be truly amazing as such a lens could then be used on old standard 16mm cameras with a low-cost and easily obtainable Nikon F to C adapter. https://store.sirui.com/en-au/products/sirui-saturn-35mm-full-frame-carbon-fiber-anamorphic-lens?utm_source=youtube&utm_medium=jojo-kol-vuhlandes&utm_campaign=saturn35&ppl_length=1&ppl_time=1697937506542

In the creative arts much of what's called minimalism is actually a form of laziness. You see it in music performance too. Violinists who use the latest high tech pickups, blue tooth, and light, easy to set up speakers and their sound goes through a digital system that imparts an automatic reverb and whatever else into the sound - sometimes almost a sampling effect. You still have to play in tune and smoothly for good results but it means you literally don't have to work so hard (physically) for a good sound and projection. But it comes out looking and sounding lazy and low-tone -- and it is. I feel that in video, too, going with digital stabilizer and gimbal all the time, and too much slow-mo, with light, easy gear ... it just comes across as a lazy way to film. Something's missing in it. It lacks conviction and soul somehow. Ultimately, it affects just how much 'art' there is in it.

At the time, I actually didn't mind the look of Attack of the Clones in the cinema. It was no doubt shown on a film print. It's funny but the very beginning of the digital revolution started very quietly and without much fanfare at all. It just slipped into place and there it was. Didn't really cause a ripple. Then next thing big changes started happening in the film industry in Australia. Then cinemas lost their film projectors ... As recounted here a few years back, I was literally nearly given the two enormous and virtually brand-new cinema film projectors (capable of both 35mm and 70mm projection) from the local cinema I frequented, by a local projectionist who got too old to look after his prized possessions. But it wasn't to be. They were both just too big, and what was I going to do with them anyway.

There does seem to be a view that sticks are old school. Hand-held all the time, big monitor on top, sometimes a gimbal, is the new fashion. It's called minimalism I think. Shoot in natural light most of the time and use minimal gear. It's a style that works but I think a tripod can help get even better results. They're heavy to lug around and could potentially do your back in on a busy and long day especially the older you get but I feel it generally gives a more professional look than shot after shot of hand-held and subtly 'floaty' or tracking shots for no particular reason other than to impart a certain look that's supposed to be more impressive. The other fashion is for a lot of slow motion. It's so easy to do but gives a wedding video an overly sentimental feel. To all those who say a tripod is too old school I say give the tripod a try, work a bit harder on the shoot, and you might end up with something that has a chance of not looking like kitsch. If people laugh at you for turning up with so much gear (the average person out there seems to think all video can now be shot just on hand-held phone cameras) don't worry about it. Just get the shots you need.

All figured out now. That little ring with the tab on it, it does have a bit of free play from side to side, about 1 or 2 cm of travel, while in non-macro setting. It's just that I had to sort of gently 'force' it further to the right (with lens pointing away from me) and then it suddenly yielded and entered the 'macro' zone. And it's focusing very close indeed now. Yay.

Hi, can anyone tell me how you engage the macro function on the Schneider 6-66mm lens that came with some of the Beaulieu 4008 models? I can get mine to focus normally from about 5 feet to infinity but can't get it to focus closer than 5 feet or at macro distances. There is a small metal tab on a ring, at the base of the lens, between the aperture ring and the C mount, that can rotate a short distance. But turning this ring isn't engaging macro focusing on the lens I have. The two 'barrel'-like devices (I suppose for motorized zoom etc) that were originally mounted next to the lens have been removed. I hope the lens I have isn't faulty.

Thank you Jeff. I will make good use of it somehow, and let you know what becomes of it.

Another advantage of Super 8 is that the cameras are generally somewhat quieter than equivalently-priced MOS 16mm cameras.

Good job, well done Jeff. I found it interesting to read. There's many things in it I like. What do others think about it?

It's early Monday morning where I am. Very busy week for me but I will look at properly the first opportunity I get. I'm looking forward to it. I started reading early this morning and it looks great Jeff. It drew me in as I read. Intriguing and interesting! More later. Best wishes.

Wow Jeff, thank you for offering to do this. As we say in Australia, don't bust a gut on this. I will be keen to read what you come up with. Take all the time you need. I'm mainly in this for the fun, I've got my dreams but at the moment they're just dreams. Take care. Best wishes, Jon

Hi Neal, I'd check out Dom Jaeger's cinetinker blog, he has a step by step service guide to the Arri 16St https://cinetinker.blogspot.com/2019/02/arri-16st-service.html Also, see:

How about a script for a western, or a 'frontier' Aussie story during the years of the early European settlers 'out bush', with a theme of redemption woven into an adventure tale or a feud of some kind. A classic western story. Perhaps a story of sheer survival under incredible odds (a variation on Deliverance, maybe). I'm hoping it's not out of fashion (or if it is, that it can be good enough to spur a new fashion in films), but at the moment I'm looking for a story that gives you a gleam in your eye and maybe a bit of a tear, too, at the end of the film. Other than that, how about a rip-roaring adventure tale, set in outback Australia. A minimal number of characters to keep the budget down. How about a small team of geological surveyors or jackaroos/ringers that have some kind of an encounter with something 'unknown', 'unseen'. How about a supernatural presence that could be either a demon or an angelic being. A bit spooky. With a moral in the story woven in -- a morality tale. Just some quick ideas.

That's a good word for it. To describe watching Super 8, and how great it is, here is a short list of words I've compiled, adding Scott's word too: "Artistic, tranquil, timeless, hypnotic, dreamy" Go Super 8!!! You're a winner. To me, 16mm is just that little bit more 'businesslike' and serious, and still arty like Super 8. But Super 8 is in a league of its own.

I actually like westerns. I still think there's a definite market for them. I'm sorry but I can't abide a western shot on digital, even with film emulation in post. To me it just doesn't work. The right feel isn't there for that genre. Same with most period dramas. For television productions (for instance, the Miss Fisher's Murder Mysteries series shot in Melbourne, Australia, about 10 years ago, set in the 1920s/30s) digital can work very well for period drama series. But for feature movies in my opinion it's such a better effect if the movie is shot on film. You need a slight graininess or texture in the picture, and also in my opinion the colour saturation has to be just right to get the proper effect. Miss Fisher was a great series. It would be great if we could bring that back ... ten years on.

Hi Gabrielle, I guess it depends where you live, and what your resources are so to speak, but I found where I was that usually I had to figure everything out by myself, and before long knew as much and often much more than the locals around me. Keep going that route and who knows you might end up some kind of expert, and people will start coming to you. That's not very helpful, but for the sake of at least other readers I guess it's worth saying. Nothing is better than a truly great teacher and mentor ... but, wow, they can be thin on the ground. If you stick at something long enough, through the good and the tough times, you might just eventually end up being that great teacher and mentor that you yourself always wanted to find and searched hard and long for. That said, best of luck in finding a great teacher, mentor, school, or workshop, or all or some of these things, to help you along your way. There's nothing better and faster for getting to be where you want to be. In the meantime, shoot film.

I was once interested in the horror film genre. It has a lot going for it as an effective feature can be made on a low budget with this genre. I find a lot of B grade old B&W films fascinating to watch in the endless variety since the production was forced to shoot in existing locations on low budgets and the whole mix of the production realities results in sometimes very interesting movies bordering on quirky in some cases that ends up being so original. These days though I probably wouldn't get into horror flicks. I'm more interested in human drama stories with people facing challenges and somehow overcoming their difficulties, etc etc, you know, character-driven stories that are inspirational and uplifting. Beautifully photographed and compelling to look at and listen to (great soundtracks etc). I'm also very drawn to period drama pictures which Australians have traditionally always been gifted at making.

I need to find a good script from a writer. At the moment I'm thinking more along the lines of 16mm for a feature though. Super 8 might be a success for a cinema release feature, but everything would need to be done to maximize sharpness. Super 8 looks great on a phone or tablet screen but on the big screen .... tests would need to be done. I'm busy at the moment as I'm also a musician and teacher, and do some videography on the side, but will soon get back to my own filmmaking projects. Funding from organizations and/or from government grants, for a feature movie, is necessary. You have to motivate people and convince them. Takes time but often good things happen. Well, that's how I see it.

I love those two videos from FFP. Very much worth watching. I find Super 8 very easy to watch. I don't know why that is. Where as a lot of high def video footage just looks unappealing to me. It looks so boring

I haven't done dissolves recently on this camera, however I do know that it is a great and strong camera and I once did a lot of filming with a 1014XL-S, hours of footage. I used the lap dissolve several times and every time it worked perfectly. These days however I'd probably be inclined not to push my luck using in-camera functions such as this, and just do the dissolve digitally in post. A couple of years ago when I last filmed with my old 1014XL-S the cartridge jammed on me while just filming normally at 24fps. I soon fixed the jam though by taking out the cartridge and whacking it on my leg twice. Another thing to try if the cartridge jams is to turn the uptake wheel on the back of the cartridge clockwise until snug. All the best with it.

No way. Didn't read the details.

Looks great! We need the same thing here in Australia.