Charles MacDonald

I deal with B&W Film Fcatory in Toronto, they always wind the reveral film back onto the Camera spool and use that to return it, SO They do tend to accumulate. I have seen ads were the short end places want 7 dollars to respool a roll from a core to a Camera spool, so perhaps the lab you were talking to assumed you wanted them to do that task. When I was starting to play with 16mm, I actually shot one roll using the PLASTIC take up spool that Microfilm is supplied on, which is compatible but probaly would not be as light proof. Any microfilm places in your area? http://blackandwhitefilmfactory.com/ does list : 16mm Metal Reel {Daylight Spool 100'} in black plastic box $2.00 so I am sure it is a common item for labs to stock.

I thought that was the name for the outrigger arm on some of the older rewinds, that kinda rides on the outside of the roll. Looks like it was intended to let you wind up on a core WITHOUT a aplit reel, but I have never seen one up close to judge.

It all depends on what you learn Before ten Years that counts. I have had many french lessons and still bring tears to the eyes of the francophones at work. BTW, I did listen to your pronouciation, thanks, I was pronocing the last sylable as G_no, but it is more a You, like the french word for eyes.

NO. The B&H 200 series takes the little 50 ft Kodak Mags. They fit entirely inside the body, and are loaded by a door at the back.

THey charge the same price as they charge for regular film. The price varies depending if you want scans, slides, prints or some combination. Their web site is http://www.dalelabs.com/ Interestingly they did supply a return envelope which can be mailed postage paid if you mail it from the USA. They don't supply movie film, in fact I ordered their "replacement film" and it seems to be ferania c-41 with the cassette saying it is Process CNK-4/ECP-2 I wonder why the would be equating the ECP process with Konica's version of C-41. The cassette also did not have a bar code so your local minilab will probaly refuse to deal with it. I have been bulk loading short ends from Stock Options or Certified Film into empty cassettes. (One of the advantages to so much production happening in Toronto and Vancouver is that their are short end dealers in Canada now) I have been meaning to pass along some tips.. I have an "alden 200" Bulk loader, this is big enough to take 200 feet of film on a 2 inch core. I have saved a one inch core from Bulk still film, that fits on the center post of the loader and holds the Movie film cores from flopping arround. the 100 Ft Spools will fit on the center post just fine. I have not encountered an end that started life as a 1000 ft roll, but that might be tight if It was 200 Ft. (just looking on the web this may be becoming a rare item see: http://www.cambridgeworld.com/newmiscellaneousclearance.html ) The Alden 74 only takes 100 ft rolls but is more common.

It was a good home movie camera in its day. The EE probaly indicates the model with the light meter, so that may or may not work. I am not sure of the ASA Range, FAST film in the days that unit was made was EI 50 :blink: Java Photo in Athens GA has some magazines with outdated Plus X in his frezer, he has been listing them on ebay from time to time. Sugest telling him what you want, and to negotiate the best price. Loading requires 2R film, which is getting harder to find except on large qty special order for many stocks. The film has to be wound emulsion out, onto a small special core, so you may have to build a jig or two. :o

I got back my first roll from Dale (in the past ten years anyway) (2960 Simms Street, Hollywood, Florida 33020-1579 Toll Free (800) 327-1776 ) The slides were dated october 14, and they were in my mail box as of friday, so the postal delaty is a serious concern. They did do a clean job of processing the two triel rolls I sent, which were homeloaded from shortends. I asked for slides and also a CD from each roll. The slides have Dale's name on them, and also credit "Kodak Vison Film" By working a few shots out of the mounts, I found a slide with edge printing so that I could see that the film actually says K'odak 2383. (KODAK VISION Color Print Film ) The negatives were returned cut into strips of 4 frames as is a common proctice iwth still films, and the edge with the Keycode was Notched every frame so that the numbers were hard to read. The CD has each still frame in a 3K size Jpg file. Again if I was doing a test, I would have prefered the negatives uncut so that there would be less chance of the order getting upsetover a bunch of VERY Closely alike shots. Looking at the slides, each frame has a clear border including at the frame line so it may be that they are printing each frame individualy. That may make judgements of what a shot looks like evern more difficult than if they were just doing a "one light" print of the whole roll. I only sent a couple of "normal rolls for my first test, and so I amy try to include same over and under exposed shots in my next teat as well as trying a few differnt films that I have some sort ends from in my freezer. My short ends were obtained from ebay sellers so I cannot be sure how fresh they are. The results were interesting enough to try some more, and since it appers that they are doing the prints digitaly, they may in fact be able to tweak the contrast to make good prints from the MP negs. One option is to just get a cd from a roll that may be of interest in making storyboards. Of course I will now have to check to see if they are back up after the last bad storm when though their area of Florida before I try any more tests.

leader?

What the extension tube does is move the lens farther way from the film, so you effectivly make the focus ring longer. A bellows allows one to pick a continuous range. They don't often work with zooms, as the focus in a zoom frequently involves moving elements inside the lens relative to each other. One trick that is sumtimes used with still cameras is to turn the lens arround for a close up. The thorey being is that if you are very close, the lens itself ends up being closer to the subject than to the film, so you use the end of the lens intended to be closer at the subject end. The diopter is exactly like the reading glasses us folks over 50 find we have to use.

B)--> QUOTE(Steven B @ Oct 27 2005, 05:39 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Also, how will the tape stretching effect the print? I was afraid it might jump or something as it does in my projector. For printing reversal I suppose I should splice each side? Because I'm editing original reversal and then making a few release prints. So there is no way to splice reversal into a negative film the same way as it was originally shot without flipping the internegative? Is this negative flipping a common practice? OK I ma now lost... Are you talking about A) combining shots on Reversal (Positive) Film with shots taken on NEGATIVE film, all intending to end up as a positive? If so you would make an internegative of your positive shots, or an intermediate positive from your negative shots. and poabaly have to make the insert an extra roll for a/b printing. You may have to do an opical to get the emuslsion on the right side to splice then together. As Dominic posted the negative way is probaly more popular and also probaly has an edge on quiality. If you are talking about left to right reversal of a shot, then you might get away with the slight blur of having the emulsion away from the print. Having this down as an optical would also give better quality. About the only one you can probaly get away with is the old trick of using 2R film and holding the camera upside down, then the ends can be switched and the action will be backwards. Worst case with the tapes for you is they move enough that the printer sproket starts making new perfs in your original film. WOrst forthe alb is the film comes apart, and they have to dismatle the Liquid gate and throw away the fluid to clean up the mess.

It maight be easier if we could see a sample frame of two. Shuter problems, a malajusted gate, or a loose presure plate could give effects like you describe, as could a processing defect, or even a bad roll of film. You should not see very much dust and no scratches when the film is fresh out of the lab, if everthing else is OK. TRY a test by running about 10 feet of Fresh film through the camera, And look at it under a maginifer. (Just Pull it off the takeup spool, we are talking about looking at the effect of the camera on the physical condition of the unprocessed film). If you are getting any scratches on the film under those conditions you will have to figure out where they are coming from. If you can talk with teh lab, they may be able to identify the defects.

British or American? its like some folks write a check or a cheque.

Mit Out Sound! Either a noisy one, or one that does mot have a motor that can be synced closely. (a wind up camera for instance)

The reflected light meter is calibrated on the assumption - Which is true statisticaly that the average subject will refelct overall 18% grey. For quick shots, The Nickon scholl used to say aim the meter at the grass, and go from there. If you have ever had prints made from your stills at a one hour lab, you may have noticed the walls behind your subjects chage color with the clothing in the forground, as the printing machine also goes on the aumption that each still negative should add up to 18% grey. If you aim the refected meter at an 18% grey card, you should get the exact same reading as an incident meter. and your average subject should fall right on the money. If your subject is darker than average, say a head shot of a black actor in a navy suit, or lighter, say a swedish blond in a wedding dress. You may want to adjust the exposure to be sure that you capture everything. If you use a refected meter for these examples, one with show that you need more exposure, and one will show you need less, even though your light has not changed. It is up to your "artistic decison" to decide if you want to shift the exposure under these conditions. If you use an incident meter, or course it will read the same in there cases as for an average shot. Again you may want to fudge the exposure to get more of the range onto the negative, so that you can pull more detail out when you print it. (or these days scan it). The fudging in this case would go the other way as with the refected meter the meter has compensated for the subject "all the way" and you may want to tone it down, while the incident meter has not canged at all for the suject and so you have to add whatever compensation you think you need/want all by yourself. Again the bride, the refected meter would show MORE light, and call for LESS exposure, but you would probaly add a bit to compensate for the meter. other wise a one-light dialy would show the dress as Grey. The incident meter would not have changed for the subject so you might ask for a bit less so that the highlights don't get over exposed. - and you can see detail in the lace. You normaly see pro photographers and cinematographers using the incident meter, as it gives one less level of subjective interpretation. The clasic reference is probaly the books by Ansel Adams.

Congratulations, I am also on an old car list, and I have heard several stories like yours about CARS that speen years in the Shop. I think it was a year or two ago that the default changed to single perf. Most places USED to stock 2R as it is "universal" for standard 16. (will fit any camera, even old crocks like the Keystones. and my OLD Devry) Super 16 Does require the single perf. Folks that deal with Film school folks may be more inclined to order the 2R, as the chances are good that many film school students will need it. (AFAIK, most of the Kodak stocks and the Foma B&W can be ordered either way as long as you buy several rolls at once.)

1) For that mater, a little bit of expoxy could be used, or even perhaps opening the lens up and removing the spring, Thta method would alow you to sell the lensoff later if it turned out to be not sharp enough, a Still camera user would probaly WANT the auto diaphram to work. 2) a 28MM lens for a still camera is probaly about as wide as you will find at anywhere near a usable price. The still lens have to be made so that they can clear the Mirror in the still camera. THere may be some Russian wider lenses made specialy for the K-3 that you might find cheaper. I think that you can get away with a lens that goes back behind the mount on the K-3 , one that would hit the mirror on a SLR. (My experience is all with M42 still cameras and not with the K-3)

The K-3 basicaly uses the same lens mount as the Pentax Spotmatic and the Ricoh Singlex. most lenses made after about 1963 for these have an automatic diaphram, so that a sill camera can have the lens wide open until the moment of exposure. Most had a switch at the side marked A-M ... In the M position the lens stays stopped down. When the pentax SPF came out with full appature metering that switch started to dissapear. The Pentx lens have a little hidden lock that prevents the lens from being put in M on less it is on an older camera (little tiny pin on the part of the lens that hits the lens flange) The aftermarket lens folks just left it off as a cost saver. The Original spotmatic would also stop the lens down with the meter switch. Providing a way to press the stopdown pin would not make sense in a movie camera. Without trying on a K-3 I can't give a positive recomendation. If I was looking for a 28 MM lens I would probaly look for a Super Multi-coated Takumar for pentax, and make sure that it did have the auto manual switch. Vivitar and soligor alos made decent lenses, but they may not have considered the degree of enlargement that using the center of the frame to shoot 16mm involves. (pentax did not either, but they probaly did try to make a darn good lens. Note that the pentax 28mm lens is a f3.5, a lot of the off-brand 28mm are 2.8

you do understand that when you shoot film, that sound is recorded on another device, and synced to the pictures in post-production. Traditional was to use a special motor on the camera, and a special tape recorder with an extra track which kept a sample of the line frequency so that you could put the sound on Mag Film frame accurate., although Computer recording is also used.

My understanding is that the Ilford Unit in the Uk was placed under receivership a while ago. :o The swiss operation that makes Ink Jet Paper was not affected. :angry: If the Uk operation carries on, they would need a strong order to justify making a batch of MP film. Mind you, the Ilford MP film was suposed to be identical to their still film, except for the Perforations and lenght.

Actually, I have revere, keystone, sankyo, and Eumig "spool" regular 8 cameras. Althoigh I have not found a chart to tell me what the "letters" on the C-3 Eumig's light meter corespond to in modern film speeds. Spool film is still made by FOMA http://foma.cz and is sold in North america by http://jandcphoto.com/ The foks at "international film" http://members.aol.com/Super8mm/JohnSchwind.html also re-spool Kodak reveral B&W (as CINE-X 100 7265 ) and KMA kodachome for the spool cameras. They used to alos have have some VNF in that size. This is film 16mm wide, that is slit to 8mm wide after processing

Must admit ot never seeing a K3 up close :( But if it takes a normal cable release, your locak Camera Store (do those even exist in this digital age?) may have a release with a little knurled screw, that can be tightened to hold the relase in. Used in Still camera for taking long time exposures. :D

I could not quote the other one I wanted to reply to. The 16mm mags are quite different from the "regular 8" mags, although both had the same idea, making it easier to take "home" movies. Regular 8 is a format with film that is 16mm Wide, but with twice as many perfs. The film normaly came in 25 foot rolls, and was split down the middle after processing. FOMA still makes it, and Kodak sells it in Bulk. There was a KODAK mag for regular 8, which was pre-loaded, and is flipped over to shoot the other side. I can't recall seeing a Regular 8 magazine in nearky 40 years, a friend's famaily had an regular 8 mag camera when I was a kid. 16mm Mags were50 ft long. of double perf 16mm film, and had a good part of the camera mechnism inside. The film went form core to core inside the mag, (wound emulsion out) which even had a dial to show how much film was left! Where you may see them is that many of the mag camera use the same finders and lenes as the more conventional FILMO style cameras, and so sometime a lens can be bought less expensivly by buying a complete magazine camera. The 16mm Mag was also used in WWII gun cameras, which because they run on 24 volts, and are fairly rugged have been used as "Crash Cameras" being trigered remotely just before something messy happens. The metal magazine provides another layer of protection for the film in this case. Kodak sold the business that loaded the mags to "Alan Gordon" Last time I was searching for info they still offered to sell loaded mags, with various Color neg films at about the price that a magazine Filmo Camera goes for on e-bay. with an extra deposit that is only refunded if the mags themselves are returned in a month or so from date of original shipment. Both the 16mm and Regular 8 mags were marked to indicate that they actulay belonged to the film maker, and were "recovered" when the film was sent for processing.

I found out the hard way, if you pay the e-bay price the shipping is diferent than if you buy from his web site. (I was buying 100 ft rolls) Final price is simalar from both methods. It is best to call him on the phone I have found.

I have been tempted. I bought a filmo mag camera to get a three inch lens finder for my 70DL. There were a couple of KII mags with it, and since that can't be procesed anyway I opened one. I also got a copy of the loading instuctions from an Bulk Film old Catalog. There is sproket in the magazine itself that is 2R, and the film goes over it twice! I understand a fellow in Georgia has some outdated mags for sale.. http://www.athens.net/~macjava/filmpage.html and If I could get it processed easaly I might be tempted to try. I think the lab in toronto I use whould charge me for the full 100 ft, and for labour if I did not respool the film onto a camera spool or a core.

Their was a thread about this under film and processing,I recall the consensis was that the new 500T pushed one stop gave results about as good as the 800T