Richard Tuohy

2R print film would be used in older projectors that have two sets of perforations. It could also be used for bipack or old-fashioned in-camera printing where you need to flip the emulsion to get the right orientation. Contact prints, that kind of thing. You can also shoot with it in older 16 cameras, like pre-1950.

 

Using a J-K for S8 to 16 neg-pos blowups is pretty straightforward, but keep in mind the emulsion/base wind orientation. Experimentation is key to saving your sanity. That's why you might want to buy 2R. It's more adaptable and there's no wind confusion.

 

The J-K is not a contact printer, so the wind problem is harder to figure out. I remember it was especially insanity-inducing with 1R camera-reversal film. So I'd stick with 2R-- it's easier. You can always flip it. And since it'll probably be a one-off print it won't matter to the projector which side of the perfs it's using.

2R doesn't overcome problems with wind. A contact print always has a different wind from the origional. An optical print is always B wind (if the camera was moving in the forward direction).

There is no reason to use 2R in your JK optical printer if making a blow up from super 8 negative (unless you have a very old silent projector that needs both perforations). The resulting film will be in B-wind (for what its worth) and project like a reversal film with the emulsion out - not that it matters unless you are cutting this print in with an A-wind print for some reason, but it doesn't sound like you are.

Trust me, if there was a KS-perf version I'd already be projecting it :P

I saw a beautiful film finished on 5285 projected at the Rotterdam film festival just now. Don't let technical correctness stop you!

Hi Glen,

chosing a filter pack and a light is going to be a tedious process.

I would start with nothing (except UV) given the 3383 is expecting colour neg as seen through tungsten coloured light.

But then, you can expect that you will need some filter combination balance the light (for the particular light voltage setting) from the JK.

A lot of testing of short pieces. Would be best if you could do your own processing. Unless you can find a sympathetic laboratory to process your little tests cheaply.

good luck and let us know what filter pack you end up with.

Yes, 2R colour print does sound funny. Silent, colour films.

I note that the Kodak catalogue also lists 3383 in standard 8. I wonder if there is any lab anywhere making colour prints in standard 8mm?

odd

Not that the original poster needs 2R for their JK purpose. 1R is more appropriate, and easier to get.

Of course, the Ektachrome is of no relevance to the question of enlarging colour neg super 8 to 16mm print.

Hi Giorgio,

you can certainly process 35mm film yourself in a large size lomo. however the largest lomo (which is hard to find I can tell you) is 100'. There is no lomo or lomo like way of developing a full 400' lenght. You could, however, invent your own way of processing 400'!

Get a konvas, by all means. I love mine. then just shoot 100' lengths. It isn't so hard.

cheers,

richard

HI all,

my first post here.

I'm living in Italy, I'm a pianist and I love photo and cinematography.

I have a project for a short film with Kodak 7222 or Orwo UN 54 negative in my near future.

I'm looking for a Arriflex 16BL or another 16mm camera as stupidily I have sold a near mint Beaulieu R16 el. some time ago...

I have a couple of question about my project:

I'm intrigued by 35mm film shooting and the Konvas camera is very interesting for me, cheap and good quality.

Only, I don't know how much would be difficoult to find 35mm B&W (5222) short or long ends here in Europe, any help about that?

Also, I'm a Large format shooter and I have a good experience in developing B&W films but if 16mm would not be a problem with a Lomo tank what about the 35mm in 400 ft reels?

How can I develop these in my darkroom?

There is a Pro tank or similar for such a long film?

Last question is where I can find the Konvas 35m camera full manual in English.

Thanks in advance for your help.

Giorgio

Yes, jock is right, the Kodak 3374 makes beautiful images. It is high contrast and extremely fine grained. It is a panchromatic stock (ie sensitive to the entire colour spectrum of light) like normal camera negative film (so you can't use a safe light when processing it). Rate it as 40 asa (quite fast for a sound neg).

Kodak also make another sound neg - 3378. This is a slower speed stock (I've never shot it so I don't have an asa for you, but quite a bit slower). Unlike the 3374, its not panchromatic - just blue sensitive.

Agfa also still make a very nice sound negative called ST8. You can shoot it at 25 asa I believe and it is a blue sensitive stock.

ORWO (the german film company) also make a panchro and a blue sound neg if I remember correctly.

These all work fine as camera stocks in 16mm. I know many people for whom sound neg is their favourite camera stock. Note that it is usually pollyester base, rather than acetate.

In 35mm, however, I am not sure whether there isn't frame number information printed in the picture area. I say this because I saw a 35mm film in the Rotterdam film festival a couple of weeks ago that had a sound neg look and there were frame numbers etc printed in the middle of the picture area. In point of fact, I haven't shot any sound neg in 35mm. Others on this forum will definitely be able to inform us whether 35mm sound neg normally has this 'edge number' information printed in the picture area in this way.

Well done with the drill!

You could avoid the risk of damaging the camera when the film runs out (if there is a risk there) by using self-loaded film. If you tape the film to the plastic core of the film canister with only a small piece of tape on one side of the film only, then that will be enough grip to easily let you load the canister in a bulk loader, but it will mean the the camera with drill-motor will pull the tape off and the film run all the way through into the take up side of the camera. You would then simply need to remove the film in a change bag. With self loaded film, you could use polyester based stock and fit more than the normal 36 exp. However, then you would need a processing spiral that is longer than the normal little 36exp size. Like a lomo spiral ...

Yes, you can pull process 100d, no problem. I have pulled up to 3 stops for a customer who had a broken light meter and had massively over exposed their film. The grain doesn't become radically reduced by any means. But there is less grain and less contrast, yes.

Hi Richard

is it possible to do the contrary ? To overexpose and pull-process to lower the grain ?

Regards.

Roberto

I have pushed 100d by 2 stops and had what I consider to be acceptable results. Yes, it gets a bit grainy.

rt

Yes, you can do this. It gives a very golden and very low contrast positive image. Its quite nice.

From memory, I found I had to under rate the film 1 or even 2 stops (ie shoot 200 asa as 50 asa) and also push process in the E6 by two stops in order to get an image. Yes, you can take the rem-jet off at the end. If you can use the kodak encII prebath at the start of the process, that helps. If not, there are other recepies for rem-jet removal bath out there (based on borax).

No, I don't have a telecine of the stuff I did.

go for it.

rt

Right you are Todd, looks like they do handle 16mm colour reversal. I am interested in Fuji's MP film (ie colour neg). Thanks for the suggestion though.

Thanks Simon for finding the Imagicawest site. I had been to the Imagica site, in which I couldn't find a mention of film processing. But imagica west seems to be the go for processing.

richard

Hi Todd,

thanks for suggesting Retro. Yes, I know them. I have emailed Tak of Retro and hope to meet him while I am there. Retro don't handle 16mm film, but I have asked him for suggestions. Last email I sent Tak I didn't get a reply however.

I just received an email from a Japanese experimental filmmaker collegue who is currently in North America. He suggests its hard to get 16mm film in Japan, and that I should bring it from Australia. Hmmm. I still haven't found a lab that actually lists film processing. Kodak's laboratory page (which is often terribly wrong - check out their information about Australian labs for instance, where it lists several that are no longer in business or never processed movie film - mentions 3 labs in Tokyo. Looking at their sites, I don't see mention of film processing. Yes, I would have thought in a city of 12.5 Million it would be easy to get these services.

Well, I am still hunting on the net. I will keep asking: does anyone know where I can buy Fuji 16mm in Tokyo and where I can have it processed? Any helpful suggestions would be ... helpful!

regards,

richard

Hello all,

I will be visiting Tokyo briefly in about a week. I will have 5 days there. I want to purchase some Fuji 16mm stock while there, shoot it and have it processed. Does anyone here know where I might buy the stock and have it processed in Tokyo?

Many thanks,

richard

Hello Christian and Martin,

I am afraid I can't resit coming back to this thread.

My Canon 514xl was returned and i was able to do the required test. It is indeed the case that this model was designed to be able to shoot 100 asa daylight type stocks notched in the correct way.

Here is how we can easily know this:

Get a cartridge of old Ektachrome 160. This has the same asa notch as the current Ektachrome 100, but the 160 has the addition of a filter notch.

With the filter switch on 'sun', insert the E160 and point the camera at a neutral, evenly lit subject. Take a light meter reading.

As we know, the reading will take the internal 85 filter into account. As such, the reading will be for 160 asa film, minus 2/3rds of a stop light loss for the filter. Switch the filter switch to 'bulb' of course, and now the reading will be based on 160 asa without the 85 filter, so 160 asa minus nothing. But we are interested in the reading with the switch on 'sun'.

Now, compare this to a cartridge of normal Ektachrome 100d with the filter switch on 'sun'. You will get exactly the same reading as you did with the Ektachrome 160 with the filter switch in the 'sun' position - that is, a reading based on 100 asa - , but because of the lack of filter notch, there will be no 85 filter in the light path. Thus, this camera (and any other that passes this test) is able to read E100d and Plus-x 7265 just fine.

Of course, you don't need to do this test with actual cartridges; you can simply put your finger on the relevant pins, etc.. But this illustration makes it absolutely clear. It also makes the discussion clearer as the 514 is a 40/160 and 250 camera, and without a cartridge in the chamber (and hence with no asa pins pressed) the camera's light meter is working in its 250 asa mode (which is 160 when the filter switch is on 'sun' and 250 when the filter switch is on 'bulb').

Not all cameras with filter notch readers work this way ... but many do and its a simple test.

But wait, there's more!

When using E100d in this AND MANY 40/25, 160/100 cameras, it is ESSENTIAL to have the filter switch set to 'SUN'. Do not think 'better to be safe than sorry, and we'll use the filter switch as well as trusing the filter notch pin'. With this camera and many similar cameras, flicking the filter switch will over-ride the filter pin. Yes, the filter will be removed, but now the camera will base its exposure on the assumption that it is a tungsten based film, thus exposing the film as 160 asa with no filter.

So here's the deal: the filter notch pin removes or allows the filter but does not affect the camera's asa rating for any particular asa notch. The filter switch, on the other hand, adds or removes the filter AND IN DOING SO also adjusts the asa - 25 becomes 40, 100 becomes 160, etc..

cheers,

richard

Well, if you read the above post from Martin, then what I wrote is incorrect. Hmmm, Martin is usually right, however I disagree in this instance. yes, this camera was designed to handle Type G film. That is why it reads 40/160/250 tungsten and 25/100/160 daylight. The Type G 160 cartridge had no filter notch - hence its asa notch was to be read in terms of the 'daylight' asa cartridge specifications. It has a 0.1 inch bigger notch than the 100 asa daylight notch.

But there is an easy way to tell who is right here (and as I say, Martin is typically the one who is right!): all you have to do is open the film door, put a finger near the filter notch pin, have another finger near the filter switch, and look through the viewfinder. If what I am saying is correct and the 514 is indeed capable of reading 100 asa daylight cartridges, then if you hold in the filter pin with your finger, then flick the filter switch between the two settings (sun and bulb), you should see the light meter indicator move up (ie close down) 2/3rds of a stop when you switch from 'sun' to 'bulb'.

Simmilarly, with the filter switch left on 'sun', you should see no movement in the light meter when you press and unpress the filter notch pin.

My 514 is on loan at the moment, so I can't do the test myself.

Do these tests and find out for yourself then.

Martin is indeed typically correct!

Richard

Hello Christian,

actually you did the right thing. The 514 certainly does have a filter notch pin and as such the plus-x cartridge will have automatically removed the filter. If you had the filter switch on the 'sun' position, then the camera will have exposed plus-x as 100 asa. This is also the correct setting for Ektachrome 100d by the way. If you had put the filter switch to 'bulb', then the camera would still have de-activated the internal filter, but it would also have exposed the film as 160 asa rather than 100. This would be wrong. So you did the right thing.

rt

I wouldn't dream of shipping film to the U.S. from Ireland, Australia, unless I flew with it sitting on my lap. At least if there were an accident, I wouldn't live to see it probably.

 

 

I'd at least get the neg. and some protection done locally. Richard surprised to see there is that much of a price disparity. Double cost, really? Granted film isn't coated in Australia (although Japan is rather a bit closer, probably about the same distance as Rochester is from LA). Are there sever environmental regulations that make processing costs higher? Or is it just a far smaller demand for processing "down under" that accounts for that price disparity?

g'day karl,

regarding prices, for instance 16mm colour neg processing is about Aus 30 cents per foot. Just checked Spectra's price and its US 13 cents. Of course, go back ten years and 30 Aus cents was worth about 21 us cents. But now it is about 32 us cents. In the usa you have this funny old fashioned thing called competition. But really, it comes down to volumes. Everything film is cheaper in the USA. Kodak Aus charges a lot more for stock than Kodak USA too. Here 100' of colour neg 16mm costs about $58.

The fluctuations of the dollar are a big factor here. Companies can't change their prices up and down all the time. I remember 30+ years ago our dollar was worth about US$1.20. It went down from there gradually over the next twenty years to as low as 49 cents in 2001. But the labs haven't changed their prices much since then. Their costs aren't directly related to the exchange rate...

Thanks for that. I'll have to see if any 2-perf cameras are available in Ireland to compare costs; that's and interesting option I was unaware of. (I'll also run the S-16 numbers again, see where I went wrong).

As I read the replies to your question Jason (though you have hijacked a post from someone else by asking it) those that have replied might not have included the fact that you are after a blow-up to 35. But further, not being in the USA will make a big difference to the price as well. Here in Australia the costs for stock and processing are much higher (about double) what they are in the USA.

Perhaps consider sending the film there for processing.

richard

I will try to make it cheaper maybe 20 dollars a piece?

Have you spoken to any plastics manufacturers about your design? How many tens of thousand units would you need to have made to sell them at that price?

Don't mean to be a nocker, but I have taken Lomo spirals in to plastics manufacturers and the difficulties and costs would mean they would be very expensive to make.

But if you have a design, would be interested to see!

Okay, so lets say that I'm shooting Vision3 500T in my XL401 (which the camera would probably think was 160T or something). I have a 220° shutter and shoot at 18fps, so according to my calculations I have a shutter speed of 29.45. So with my light meter handy, I would set my ISO to 500 and the shutter speed to, lets say, 30. The reading should give me the correct aperture, yes? Thanks again!

Hi Josh,

not quite. That would be correct if the camera's reflex viewfinder system made use of a mirrored shutter. Most super 8 cameras don't use a mirrored shutter. Rather, they work like a bolex - having some kind of beam splitter (either a prism or a semi-silvered mirror) to divert some of the light to the viewfinder and let some light through to the film. So not only do you have to take the camera's shutter opening into account, you also need to factor in how much light is diverted to the viewfinder. This isn't something you can just work out. You have to shoot a carefully bracketed exposure test on reversal film (has to be reversal, no point in shooting such a test on negative).

That said, if you intend to only use colour negative film, then exposure isn't nearly as critical. I would suggest working with your exposure calculation, then opening up one stop to factor for light loss to the viewfinder and the results will be good. Better, however, to shoot a bracketed test though on reversal though, once and for all.

As for your question regarding how camera's light meters work, no, they don't just look at the brightest part of the field of vison and base the exposure on that. It is more likely that the meter will work by effetively averaging all the light coming in through the lens. Some cameras might have a 'centre-weighted' system, which puts more emphasis on the light in the centre of the frame, but in general, exposure systems in super 8 cameras aren't particularly sophisticated. A bright object or light source in the frame will affect the exposure, that is for sure. So you need to think about what it is the camera's light meter is seeing and basing the exposure on. If there is something bright that you don't want the meter to take into account (ie you don't want a bright white car to look like a grey car, or you don't want the camera to be tricked by a bright reflection of the sun from a car's windscreen) then frame up the shot without these things visible, and base your exposure on what the camera said when the bright objects were not in the shot.

enjoy super 8

richard

Some further thoughts:

your little viewer will run at more or less 18 fps, so you better shoot at 18. Also, when I have done this I found it necessary to increase the brightness of the monitor as far as possible.

enjoy,

rt

While it is the case that these days a normal proceedure for making 35mm master negatives is to 'write' digital files directly onto film using lasers (as in the Aari devices), there is no equipment made to do this onto 16mm, let alone super 8. The laser writing approach is of course relatively new. In the days of mass printing onto 16mm and super 8, there was no such laser writing technology. The masters for such prints if not made on the same guage were made by an optical reduction process using optical printers. The Kinescope - which is the technology black and white film factory uses - is the more traditional way of getting video images onto film. It was basically a cathode ray tube and movie camera combination - basically pointing a camera at a screen.

You will be able to achieve what you want to achieve, however I doubt you will find a commercial service for it. If you do, it will be of the kinescope variety. But these days, with computer screen technology, it isn't hard to get video images onto film yourself (it was much harder in the days of cathode ray tubes as you had to contend with the slow scanning rate).

Here is what I suggest you do:

for loading film in those little cartridges, you really are better off with polyester based prints rather than working with acetate. The poly is much tougher, and also thinner. Acetate seems to have many more problems in looping situations.

The computer screen you film off is effectively 'daylight balanced'. That means it is best to shoot on a daylight stock, or if shooting on tungsten balanced stock you will need to use an 85 filter.

There is one lab in the world that is able to offer colour prints from colour negative super 8. That is Andec in Germany. These prints are polyester based, so ideal for your purpose. Andec will be able to make several copies of your original quite easily. The stock they use is in fact the only colour print stock available for super 8 (Karl in Germany do perforate orwo bw print for super 8). There is no colour reversal print stock available for super 8 any more.

So I suggest you shoot directly off the computer monitor at 24 fps (this works with no flicker). Either film on Vision 200t with an 85 filter on the lens, or better still use PRO8 250d stock (which is daylight balanced). The 250d will give you more chance of having enough light.

Then send to Andec for printing.

Its quite easy. Do it yourself. You don't need to bother with frame by frame shooting these days.

good luck,

richard

sorry to bump an old thread, but what is the SO-420?

Hi Jamie,

SO-420 is an old colour intermediate film.

Yes, I need to look in to the viability of setting up the wet gate.

I would rather the printers had the older 'dry' bell and howell heads, but there you are. Until I set them up I won't know whether it is possible to run the Schmitzer dry.

The previous owner reported that they did try it dry once (and only once I think) and weren't happy with the stability of the image.

Any thoughts on the possiblity of using the Schmitzer heads dry?

many thanks, I do feel very lucky to have acquired these machines.

richard

good sugestion Hal, have contacted them. I have been buying a lot of stock from them lately too.

thanks for your reply rob, would very much appreciate a scan of the threading diagram! my email is richard@nanolab.com.au

all the best,

richard