Charles MacDonald

shows as "Private video."

Split reel to start is "safer" as far as avoiding a spill. but it can be done without. core adaptor is one way. I also sometimes use 35mm film from 100ft bulk still rolls and so I have saved a 1in 35mm core (square center hole, and 1 inch in diameter) which is what 35mm still film 100ft rolls often comes on. a movie core with a 1 inch hole will freely spin on that. the very first time I had to repool movie film I used that mounted on a piece of formica countertop to hold the supply roll. Not sure how much I risked static. A split reel is so much easier to use, if you can get one - mine is a well used on from e-bay. I have an antique 400ft daylight spool that I use for the first wind. although I keep it in the dark. then I wind onto the 100ft spools.

shooting tungsten film in daylight uses up a lot of your latitude in the BLUE area of the spectrum. you may be able to correct, but you might not be able to. Stick on an 85 and all three layers are used in their intended range.

your Fuji is at least a couple of years old, so you should expect some loss of speed and colour shift.

first off, which film are we talking about? I have never heard of any modern film which requires a specific brand of Chemistry, although some old colour processes from 30 or more years ago were like that. Also are you planning to print or scan the negatives?

unless you are talking about a batch that is cut to use an entire roll of film that is 58 inches wide and over 6000 ft long, I don't think Kodak would even think about it.

some labs will just do a test by taking a couple of feet from each roll and developing it. slap it on the densitometer and see what the fog levels look like. That of course will not show how much speed loss you have. BUT the labs often will do this for a good customer at a low rate. (if you are lucky even free) if you have a camera available you might be able to shoot a slate with grey card and grey scale, at box speed. include a number to identify each batch you are wanting to check and leave some unexposed film so they can do a densitometer check for fog as above. if you can load in the dark and cut off your samples in the dark, you might still be able to only use a few feet. talk to them about how they want you to pack the samples as they would probably prefer to splice them by their own methods. your lab may have other ideas of course, you don't want to end up paying for a minimum processing chage for each sample.

The 16mm DeVry I had took C-mount lenses if I recall correctly.

yes, you do have to get the film developed - and the lab then can scan the resulting negatives to create Digital files. (often one lab will develop the film and another will do the final scan.) and yes, if you do want to "push or Pull" the film, you have to make sure that the film for tose shots is on a different roll as the lab can only do Push or Pull on a roll by roll basis. Discuss this with your lab to see how many stops they can push or Pull, and what extra costs are involved. Normally the lab has to re-thread part of their processor or change temperatures or both to make a push or pull, and so the fees will likely be higher, and the specially handled rolls may be delayed. Film is generally good for a small amount of exposure error, and the general wisdom over the years is to overexpose rather than underexpose when dealing with colour negative. As always, the closer to accurate exposure, the more latitude you have to "fix it in post". while in the old days the lab was sometimes set up to provide sample images shown at various printer settings as part of the "daily" images returned between shooting days. that would again depend on the lab as to what they could supply you with the next day after the film is processed. you might want to check out some of the textbooks on production from the pre-digital age , as current film based production tends to be a hybrid between film and digital.

5231/7231 is a negative film, and will have a grey base. SHOULD be clear enough to print from. (it actually was a nice film, I still have a couple of 36 exposure still rolls of 5231 stashed away) perhaps the sample you tested was fogged?

Before grinding the sprockets make sure that the claw is on the correct side for single perf film. I have seen a few examples of 16mm equipment were the claw happened to be on what became the Soundtrack side. in other cases, if you can't find single row sprokets, you may be able ot get the unwanted set of teeth turned down. try not to change the diameter on the modified side as that may cause the film to want to pull to one side.

Great, I hope this means that Film stock will also continue to be available for "Other" than the major studios.

Err, I am sure there was some "Prior ART" But I have to wonder 1) why the specification of the focal length when the Image recording size is not mentioned. (negative or Sensor as needed) And for that mater why they specified 320 ISO when it is getting hard to find 320TX. 2) f5.6 and be there is a long time photography standard.

I have a related question, so pardon for resurrecting the thread. I did get a charger with the camera I bought on e-bay, and that is the most likely source to try and find one I would think. My question... I have a Scoopic with the Original style battery, which was recelled previously. It seems that folks are recelling these with NI-MH batteries, and sure enough the vendors in China have cells the perfect size.. My concern is the charger. The unit that did come with the camera Lights up when Plugged in, but I only find a couple of volts on the battery terminals. Perhaps this is normal without the battery connected? IS there a schematic diagram available for the charger? Does the charger have to be modified to use the NIMH cells.

Presumably the .3000 pitch film was eitehr produced in error, by using the perforating dies used for Positive film, or more likly made to a customer order, (High Speed cameras tend to use .3000 for example) .... The fact that it has been reported that the film was just marked UN54 rather than the "Keycode" style edge numbering fits with the special order theory. Stock purchased through the official channels SHOULD be the right pitch for normal movie cameras. It is nice that there is a choice, and also a 400 speed film. I am still hoping for a Quality 50 ISO B&W stock to emerge form somewhere.

lets see, NTSC lasted from 1954 to what 2010?

Are you talking about using C-41 to process Movie Film? the rem-jet is part of films intended for Movie use in ECN-2 Anytime I have tried to run some in C-41, I had to use the chemicals on a one shot basis as the rem jet is difficult to get out of the solutions, and will soak into the image layers.

is that price for 16mm perforated stock? or just 16mm unperforated. I was under the oimpression that Wittner was sliting the stock from larger size (ie 35mm) and perfoarting it themselves.

Freezing extends the life of film. (assuming that the film is factory sealed, and the data sheet allows storage at that low temperature. apparently some films don't like to be frozen) BUT the higher speed films tend to be affected by things like Cosmic Rays, and so they will fog over time no mater what the temperature. as far as the safety of film, my understanding is at is almost edible. You want to seal the cans to keep the mosture out, and to rpotect from condensation. I like to use Ziplock style bags to add an extra layer of protection. That should keep things under control until out open the can in the dark and inhale the WONDERFUL AROMA - Fresh Film!

lenses don't know what size the film (or sensor) is. It is best to just think of the coverage of a given focal length. I recall that the ASC manual had some charts showing lens coverage, but it is not hard to get a feeling for it. Set your zoom at a given mm seting and that is the coverage of any lens that size on regular 16. the fisheye lens is just used in the very center of its field on 16mm so the Fisheye distroion does not show (much)

The lab might not want to take a risk of your splice breaking when they run the film through the machine. :)

The two stocks (16 and 35) are the same. (UN54 is of course different than N74) The times in the Massive developing chart are for still use, movie use is often adjusted to slightly lower gamma.

500 Stock has quire a bit more grain than the slower stocks. Older stock that has been exposed to heat and humidity can have more grain than fresh stock. without a frame caprture from your project is it hard to say if your grain is more or less than typical.

I don't believe that there are many 3 perf projectors outside of film labs, so you would likely have to make your master negative as 4 perf. That means a foot and a half of film a second. say you end up with 12 minutes, that is 1080 feet. Use 1100 for figuring. http://www.niagaracustomlab.com/digitaltofilm.html has a listing of costs for going from digital to 35mm negative, sound negative and final print. It looks like the cost on there list would be 2.63 a foot plus the charges for the sound lab to make the sound negative. so you could pull it off for about 3-4 thousand dollars. I am only figuring based on their price list so by all means talk to them, and your local labs, The making of the master negative is a bit of a specially so some of the post houses may do just that part. Likewise the sound nagative may also have to come from a specialist. (and perhaps require licence fees if you need a dolby track) Some post houses can probably write your digital data out directly to print stock, but you would be back to square one if the print were to be damaged. NCL shows the price of the print once you have your negatives as under a thousand bucks each. I don't think that it would be practicable to go directly from a 3 perf neg to a 35mm print. and you would still need a soundtrack.

I currently have a couple of K-3 Bodies. The one I posted previously with the mount somehow being about 1mm too small to take the lens. I got a couple of the Russian Prime lenses, and they don't fit either. I then got another camera, (so yes it would have been cheaper at this point to buy a refurbished one from Du-all) which takes both zoom lenses, and one of the primes. (The other is obviously for a different camera as it interferes with the works unless set for close-ups. I shot a 5 foot test on N74 which I have in my film to be developed pile in the darkroom. (5 ft so I can use a still tank ;) ) Which should let me see if the camera is working. The unit sounded like a camera and the film transported well. (with all that out of the way) The reflex mirror in both cameras have many scratches. The camera that has the working lens mount has so many scratches on the mirror that it looks like there is a Newfoundland fog to look thorough the finder. Are the mirrors replaceable and would that require a major service? Or should I start building a nice set of soviet era bookends.