Jon O'Brien

Thanks Doug for your valuable advice. One thing I wasn't clear on, though, in your last two sentences. Are you saying that for normal shooting eg. of live action footage, that you do tape up the door, just in case? I've never bought camera tape. What is the type to get? Excuse my ignorance - I was mainly into Super 8 and such details of film production weren't necessary back then.

There's something magical to me, I must admit, about the film compartment of a movie camera - the bit where the film gate and sprocket wheels are. Partly what motivated me back to a decision to get into film again (I was already moving in that direction but this helped to speed me up) was the brief shot in The Force Awakens 'making of' segment on location where they open up the Panaflex camera and run the mechanism. I was completely hooked when I saw that. It brought the magic back to me after many years of being bored by the idea of cinema. I'd still kept going to see movies but the flickerless video projection had reduced my interest in "film" by 'a lot.' So to the people who made the decision to show that little tidbit of filming on that documentary: thanks! And to the ones who think my thoughts above are pathetic and cinephile-esque, you don't have a leg to stand on! You are just as much in love with those ENG "cinema" cameras with Arri and Red written on the side, and little fans blowing to cool off all that technological hot air.

Thanks Gregg, if I buy from him I will take the bigger aluminium one as per your advice. Just going through last moments of indecision. Can anyone comment on what these Manfrotto video tripods are like, for an H16, such as the discontinued 055XPROB, which unlike the bigger Miller/O'Connor 100mm bowl type tripods seem to be able to get a lot lower to the ground and in some ways might be very versatile.

Guys, now cool it, everyone get back to work. Aren't we supposed to be working? Just kidding. I think this has been an interesting thread.

Sorry! My mistake. I typed "my friend" into a French translator and that is what came out. Merely a faux pas on my part. I'm not French and indeed of Irish stock mostly. You coming from Europe, and far away from Australia, I had a mental image of Hercule Poirot for some reason, and typed that welcoming phrase without giving it much thought. It was not meant to be offensive or to be humour at your expense, or indeed anyone else's. You see, like anyone else, Australians can put their foot in it, so to speak, when writing!

Ah-ha yes, the penny has dropped, now I understand. Thank you Simon. It is for threading the LOOP straight through, as if loading a Panaflex or something like that. I get it. Thank you, mon amie.

I will definitely keep that firm in mind, Samuel. Found these two Millers not too far away, and the shipping shouldn't cost too much. Contacted owner and he said they were a relative's of his and have been in storage since 1991. They mightn't have been used for some years before that. The prices are good! Anyone know if a Miller fluid head likely to still work okay after maybe up to 30 years or more of storage? The fact that the ball bearings have been sitting soaked in oil/grease all that time means they might be fine. I'm more interested in the smaller one with wooden leg tops: https://www.gumtree.com.au/s-ad/marks-point/video-camera-accessories/miller-tripods/1161323354 How do they look? A bit old and not very snazzy, sure. The other alternative, more expensive, is a used Manfrotto 502HD head, flat base mounted on an 055XPROB tripod. This is for a Bolex H16, weight about 4.5kg maximum. Any opinions on these? Thank you.

Ah-ha! Eureka. I see now Dom and Simon what you are saying. Thanks! Simon, I didn't read carefully enough what you wrote, until just now. So this sprocket guide lock (the bifurcated sliding lever) is only used when using the 400 ft magazine? I can't figure out how on earth why, but will leave that query for another day. So in a nutshell, to quote Austin Powers, I don't need to touch this lever lock at all if using 100 ft daylight spools - I just leave the two sprung sprocket guides unlocked and in the far right hand position and thread the film the standard way?

I'm not saying that all good or great script writers and directors are inspired by real film. But if you put your ear to the ground and actually listen to what some of the most creative people are saying today, it's definitely a factor worth taking note of. You can have all your top, uber cool technology if that's what floats your boat as a cinematographer, but remember that you are but one link in a chain.

A lot of commercials on tv here have a milky look that I despise. It literally looks like milk has been doodled into the image with a whisk. I don't know what it is, where it comes from, but it's pretty obvious someone high up likes the look because they keep churning the muck out.

Those bent dogs sound scary, I will avoid those! :o :) Thanks Simon and Dom. Could you describe in some more detail what you mean by springing open the sprocket guides? When I push this to the left and to the right, about 2 or 3mm of travel, absolutely nothing seems to happen to the mechanism. Nothing locks or springs open or closed. In case there is any confusion, I'm not talking about the lever that swings down to close down the loop formers. If we are talking about the same thing, should the "lever" (I wouldn't call it a lever, I'd call it a sliding metal piece that is held down by a black anodised screw) be pushed to the left or to the right before threading the film into the top sprocket wheel? Thank you! Sorry, I'm not too mechanically savvy in some ways.

Also, yes, this is a forum on cinematography, but a lot of factors come into cinematography, as David has shown above. A big part of the whole shebang is the script, which everyone is talking about. Do you understand what a writer is? That they must be a sensitive artist? A writer is by definition a type of dreamer and wannabe. These people must be inspired to create a great script. If that inspiration happens to come from real film, stand back and let that writer indulge their passion because otherwise your whole industry is not going to have any creative product at all. Stand back and let the artists do their thing ... and support them, or all the engineers can give up, drive cabs, drink beer if they can afford it, and dream of the days when they worked in film.

That's an interesting observation about professional filmmaking, that cinephiles generally don't work in the industry. I think they certainly do, but possibly not in the departments you've worked in. Quite a few directors have said they're huge movie fans. But by cinephile are we talking movie lovers or specifically movies shot on celluloid? There is a big difference between a fan of actors, roles and stories, which is the fictional side, and being a fan of movies themselves, which is a deep appreciation for the medium. But as for poseurs, this same thing happens in other industries as I've seen it several times and it is tiresome. It's a well-known thing in science, with hot shot know it alls turning up who are in love with the topic but don't actually do any research or anything else. I have great respect for what people who actually work in the industry do, and have done. I can also see the hilarity of this topic being around for so long. But people do have to say and write what they do in defense of real film because if they didn't, and don't still today, film will disappear. In music, a creative field I do know something about, the best, most influential creative people are most definitely huge music fans. They just couldn't do what they do if they weren't. A creative industry like music production and the film industry basically needs two types: hard bitten engineering type people of many types who actually do things, and the others who maybe some pass off as being dreamers and wannabes of which there are an almost endless supply, but if you look at history, who actually gets big new projects off the ground? Is it the hard bitten engineering types? They assist, but they don't generate. The dreamers do it with the absolutely necessary help of the, maybe at times cynical, down to earth types. I just felt that self-evident truth had to be stated in reply!

Is that because there's a lot of light on set, and the camera is sitting in that light for ages, Brian? I used to do stop-motion on Super 8. I got pretty good at it too, usually with clay models.

It's neither of those things, but thank you for mentioning - I was trying to figure out how to turn off the audible click and just figured it out.

Harry Lime in his dark alcove wouldn't be quite the same.

One more question, Bolex users! This one may seem infuriatingly obvious, but bear with me - I'm trying not to ruin my first roll. I can load a roll of 50D in subdued light, as in, enough light to see what I'm doing? Correct? Thanks for any advice.

Also, is it necessary with a Bolex to put tape around the film door? I'm assuming not, since no one ever mentions it. The door on my Bolex seems to close well. I'm forever reading about pro filmmakers putting tape around Arri magazines, that's all.

On a Bolex Rex 5 and SBM, and apparently only on these models, there is a simple mechanical apparatus in the region of the loop-former lever, the purpose of which I don't understand. For instance, the Rex 4 has a different design at this point. I'm pretty sure Rex 5/SBM Bolex users will know what I'm talking about. There is a sliding metal plate 2cm to the right of the loop-forming lever central button - the button you push to release the loop-formers after threading film. It has a slight lip that pokes up about 2mm, and you can push this plate left and right about 2mm. You can see it in this video, though the film loader never touches it or mentions it: At 0:19, see the little black screw head to the right of the loop-former release button? To the right of that black screw head is the tiny lip that you can push left or right. It makes a slight click sound as you push it, and is clearly designed to be pushed. But what for? I've looked at various loading videos and no one mentions it. Can anyone tell me what this sliding plate thing does, and whether I should push it to the left or to the right when loading the camera. I regret, but Bolex camera loading is, so far, not my forte. As mentioned above, the sliding plate is tightened by a black anodised screw approx. 4mm in width. The little plate bifurcates into two little prongs that seem to engage in some fashion with the loop forming mechanism. Any wisdom that anyone can impart on this mystery? As always, thank you.

And I'd be going to see a nice projected film at the movies next weekend, and not projected television that looks oddly glassy and weird, and is somewhat boring to look at.

To be fair, perhaps it mostly comes back to directors and producers: this whole business of 'look' of a picture and whether to shoot on film or digital. When you think about it, cinematographers have to know about lighting, framing, colour composition and so on of the scene, camera moves, blocking, exposure, lens type and focal length, dof, perspective, colour balance in post (if they get a say in that), and so on. Directors have to know this too but perhaps at the end of the day it is directors who seem, publicly, to be coming out and commenting on this issue of 'look' on the cinema screen the most. I've also noticed that cinematographers sometimes admit that they don't go to the cinema much anymore, where as most of my comment is from the perspective of a chair in the cinema. Yes, cinematographers clearly do have an opinion on the film and digital 'look' but I get the feeling it's not of paramount importance to many. Or that, truly, they deep down prefer the look of digital these days. Which I find interesting, but there you go.

You just keep the filter slide in the slot at all times, to avoid this light leak? Or is it best to tape over the slot openings as well even though the filter holder is in place?

Thanks Samuel for your helpful advice on the Manfrotto gear for the Bolex. My quest is still continuing; at times I tire of the search and must rest from it :P But soon enlightenment shall come.

If you want a powerful insight into humanity's frailties, go along to a common, garden-variety painted media art show one day - the type that is open to anyone who wishes to enter their work of art. Walk around; have a good look at all the paintings hanging on the walls. You will see there before you the same dilemma we are discussing here: 'Look.' Most or all of the works will be superficially very impressive technical and artistic creations. But ..... It's a matter of taste. A professional collector of art works will walk around and, if scouting for potential pieces to purchase for his or her commercial gallery, will probably not pick out any at all. It's because most people don't have a good eye for what's artistic. In a painting of a landscape, a lot of average, everyday painters and buyers will favour a 'look' that is not good art. The colour will usually be 'off' - in multiple ways. Landscapes will be rendered in a strange metallic way rather than warmly. Or there will be some other visual, conceptual flaw. This is after all the art of image ... and image alone. There will be an obvious tackiness or kitsch-ness to the work. This is a fact of the art world, but some people say it's snobbery (I'm not saying anyone is saying that here). It's not snobbery - it's just a fact that a lot of people don't have good taste in artistic imagery. Cinematographers must have this good taste however. Now, to my taste, there's something very wrong with the imagery of a total digital production, though not in some (in my experience, very rare) cases. As time goes on, perhaps digital will improve in its 'warmth and magic' (to try and find a suitable term). Even if it does, I believe filmmakers will continue to buy and use film and that will of course keep it alive. I think the industry really needs to take note of this point. There's something about the look of a total digital production that is just unappealing to a certain percentage of film fans. At what point does that affect sales? Do the top film execs even care? It goes without saying that if the top film execs don't care, then it is a bad sign, ultimately. If it's just about sales, and nothing else, you will end up with a lot of money but that's about all.

Fade in. INT. Day. Medium wide shot. Swish looking office. Film exec at desk boils over and flings poster across room, hard, like Ninja throwing a star. Picks up phone. Cut to Close up. "Get me Kodak print stock division on the line!" There is determination in his voice. He looks a man with a mission. Audience sees he has clearly reached a decision. There is a subtle bead of sweat on his brow.