Jon O'Brien

I did get a battery from Du-all but it wasn't really suitable for the IIC. It was 12V so it is better for the 35-3 I will also be using. I contacted them for extra advice on what to do next but they didn't reply. The battery cost a lot. Those who criticize film shooters for not being very productive should look into the difficulties involved. You've got to have a real commitment to shooting on film. It's not for wusses. Gotta be determined.

Thanks guys. Very helpful. Looks like I will be filming a short film on 35mm in a few months' time. I have the film stock, Dom has the IIC for a check-over and a battery build, and I'm in the process of finding a location and coming up with a nifty little script. I'm more the camera dude than the guy who comes up with story however, so might have to ask my wife to come up with a screenplay. Anyone in my area reading this who wants to act in my film/camera/lens test? By all means get in touch.

Btw, I still think that film will survive. What we are seeing now is a major drop in interest in the film industry generally. Hollywood films are currently flops in many cases. Things happen in cycles. This has all happened before. There will likely be a resurgence in the film industry and the film and the film camera equipment is there when it happens. Film will survive not because of nostalgia but because of its inherent quality. Film gives a better vibe when you sit down and watch it. If you can't see this or feel this yourself perhaps it might be wise to put the digital camera on the shelf, or on Ebay, and do something else with your future. Study engineering or law like everyone else, maybe.

The old stand by if you wanted to be a filmmaker upon leaving school was to get a job at a TV station, and work your way up to DoP in the film industry somehow. That was pretty much the only way back in the 80s and around that time. Perhaps that's what I should have done. Anyway, like the poem says, I took the other road in the woods.

Not all that much has really changed regarding the difficulties of shooting moving pictures on film. It was always expensive, in every era. Super 8 was always expensive to shoot, even back in the 80s. You could only afford to buy a roll of film if you saved up. I had good work in the school holidays so was able to save up for film. Then I did Film & TV at a public school and the school paid for the film I used. Then I left school and had to make my own way in the world .... and the filming soon stopped because I couldn't afford to be a filmmaker any more. Back then home video was garbage and I wouldn't have anything to do with it. It was also very expensive. I wanted to get into 16mm but couldn't afford the film. I had an old Bolex I got when I swapped an SLR for it at school but I couldn't even afford a projector. So I had to quit. I got back into filmmaking many years later but it's still expensive. I had the idea to film projects for people at not much more than cost. But so far no takers. No one so far can afford the luxury of even a Super 8 movie of their wedding. I even have difficulty offering to film things for people for free! It's not true that those who are into real film just like to admire the cameras but not do anything with them. I've made many a sacrifice because I know that film is a better look than digital. Life Geffen, I don't like the sterile and plastic look of modern video. People call it 'filmmaking' but it's not anymore. It's usually now just video. Our "film" industry is a video industry. We now go out to see feature length videos. My only interest in real film is for the truly better look and emotion that comes from shooting on motion picture film. I think that scanned and digitally projected film looks great. I've compared it to film projection and the two look almost identical and I have a good eye for visual art. There are now so many filmmakers around because of the rise of affordable digital video cameras. Back in the 70's and 80's just a few Mums or Dads had a Super 8 camera that they took on holidays with them but that was the reality for most people. Now there are filmmakers everywhere.

... which is one of the ways that emotion is conveyed in art. In my humble opinion the beauty of the image itself is very important. The image you see has got to be worth paying money for and sitting down and watching. Even with a great story it's still got to look captivating somehow, with a bit of magic.

... from back in the days when the medium itself was a huge contribution to the feeling a movie created in the audience. Many don't realise that digital filming gives you the literal facts (definition etc) of the scene but very little added beauty. What do I mean by added beauty? It's something hard to define, but impressionist painters had the knack ... Somehow making the bland look kind of magical, and a bit more special, in a way .....

Lighting and general 'look' reminds me of the Ascot race scenes from My Fair Lady (1964). Beautiful. Agreed. Also from a little bit earlier, Alien (1979) has a fantastic look.

Is it the same or similar to standard gaffer tape as available at any hardware store? Or does it tend to be a certain brand? Which brand? I'm thinking the typical blue tape (seems to be common) you often see taped around the edges of film mags for 16mm and 35mm. Thanks. I find standard gaffer tape leaves sticky bits of adhesive behind sometimes.

I like how you use the word artist, Gabriel. A cinematographer has to be an artist, because you must care about light and shadow, and composition, and so on. Only an artist cares about such things. Aspire to be an artist. There's no better calling. God is an artist, if you believe in such a thing.

For the sake of those coming after me, who will one day possibly tread the same path ("there but for the grace of God go I" ...), I've been advised by three film camera experts not to power up the 35-3 with 14.4 volts (unless only as a quick test). The current plan is to send the camera on an adventure, down to see Dom in Melbourne (some 3000 km away I think), to see what he thinks of it. It might need a simple lube. Can you imagine how great this camera will be if it can be completely fixed up? A 2 perf Arri 35-3, with Nikon F lens mount. Easy to do your own focus pulls (especially if you're an old Nikon lens user from way back). I want this camera to one day shoot the main scenes for a great feature movie. It can do it. I have faith in this camera. It's a joy to look at and hold, too.

The 2C motor:

I'm getting the impression that the 35III isn't getting enough power. It still won't start when I turn the run button on and needs to be kick started by turning the inching knob every time. I'm also getting a red LED light glowing in the viewfinder. I found a 1988 operating manual online today. Also, advice from a Melbourne rental house backs up what Uli and Phillip say. I see that up to 14.4V is fine for the 35-3, so I may try a 14.4V battery. Here's the advice a senior technician from the rental house said in an email today: "The ARRI 35III runs on 12-14.4 Volts batteries and the IIC normal motors on 16 Volts, I would not us 16 volt on the 35III, if you have the High Speed unit, you need 2 x 12 V batteries to get to 120fps. The red light usually means not getting to the crystal speed".

Both cameras are now working, at least the camera bodies only, without mag or film. With the 35III I didn't have a proper inching knob as it seems to have been removed at some point in the past. There was however a kind of square metal stub of the inching knob left behind deep in the socket where the inching knob used to be. I turned the camera run button on and then with the tips of my fingers managed to turn the mechanism over manually while just getting enough purchase on the stub of the inching knob mechanism. Suddenly the electric motor jumped into life, happily churning away at 24 fps. I let the motor run for a bit this time, then turned it off. Hope all is fine. Wish me luck. There was a red and a green light in the viewfinder. When I turned off the motor there was still a red LED glowing in the viewfinder. Oh the joys of revamping an ancient technology and art form.

The 35-III has a Cinematography Electronics Accessory Block on the right side of the camera. I'm wondering if this might mean that the camera needs more power. I've no instruction manual/s. https://cinemaelec.com/products/35-3accessory_block

I'm pretty sure the power requirements to the camera are identical for both 4 perf and the 2 perf conversion. Both cameras were modified by Bruce McNaughton in Melbourne. I will email him too though I think he's retired now.

It's a bit concerning. Looks like the main fuse to the camera is still fine, since the LED numbers still light up. Could be a secondary fuse or something worse. I've emailed Cameraquip in Melbourne to ask some questions as they rent these models. Hopefully Dom might be able to help me out too with some advice. Might have to send the camera off to someone to see what could be wrong. In the meantime I'm thinking of first trying a 16V battery -- unless that's not advisable.

For the very first time I got a 2perf 2C powered up and running today. I've got film in the fridge and am gearing up to film a short narrative film/camera and lens test. I recently bought a 12v battery from Du-all. Tonight I connected the 2C to the battery and the camera ran fine. No mag or film -- just the empty camera body. So far, so good. I also connected the same 12v battery to a 2perf 35-3 which ran for just a bit (with, I thought, maybe a slightly anaemic running sound). When I stopped the camera and then later attempted to run it again it didn't run at all. The red LED lights that show the fps etc were lit up, but no movement from the motor at all. I think I remember that the 35-3 requires more power than the 2C. Would another battery be in order? For example, a 16v?

Thanks Todd. Excellent advice. I'm a stubborn fellow and will keep trying to make a buck from filming on film. Not much of a buck. I also got into digital cinematography, having started out with the idea of specialising in real film cinematography for weddings and so on. Filming is already something I do on the side, so the money I make elsewhere is already funding my art. But, what you say about making money from vintage clip restoration does also interest me because, along the way of getting into film production, I've developed good skills in grading, editing etc. So it would be possible for me to get into vintage film clips as another side income, as you have described.

Thanks so much for your detailed and very helpful response! Yes, the life of the 'artist'/content creator: the eternal tension between what the creative person wants to make and what his or her audience wants to buy. My mother was a painter and won many awards but almost never sold a painting. I'd be glad to film vintage auto events. Or vintage anything events. Then sell the footage but looks like authentic vintage footage only is the one customers currently want. I'd like to do the filming myself of course 🙂

Thanks Todd for this excellent information. Could I ask, who would mainly be buying these vintage footage clips that you've restored? Would the clips be used in music videos for instance, or documentaries, videos on YouTube about cars? I'm genuinely curious.

... and another thing. I'm sick of videographers putting their hands up to do work for free. Videographers and filmmakers, and anyone who's shelled out hard cash to make movies of any sort: refuse, and i mean point blank refuse, to shoot any more gigs for anyone for free. Take your clips off the cheapskate clip sites, if you can. Cut the cheap bastards off from their footage. Every time you shoot something for free you're killing cinematography as a profession.

Yeah. To hell with that, as they say. The clip companies can take a flying F.

https://www.stocksy.com/ideas/film-stock-footage-why-super-8-16mm-still-rule/

All those stock video clip sites have reams of very similar shots, all in glorious 4K. Gimbal tracking shots of inner city buildings. Drone city scapes and interesting geological features. Shots of people sipping chardonnay at street bars or whatever. Drone shots and uber slow motion shots of people in the surf. Slow mo of wedding couples hand in hand. It's all the same stuff. Much of the most interesting stuff is shot with a drone. I don't know why they keep accepting clips because they already have more than enough. Almost no one is going to need Super 8 or 16mm B roll.