Robin Phillips

my experience is that you loose some grain detail going just to prores 4444. its not much, but if you are a sharpness freak like me you may notice. its mostly the details around the grains that can add a sense of a sharper picture, even if the line pair resolution is more or less the same. but lighting your film with a bit more contrast will probably create a greater sense of sharpness that outweighs codec concerns. if you were doing VFX, I'd say get the DPX or see if they can give you prores 4444XQ over traditional 4444. but the reality is that you are probably fine, especially if scanning at 4k.

I would just note that pull processing is not going to give you more detail, if anything it slightly softens the image. if you are doing a 4k scan, you really want to over expose. personally I usually over expose by at least 1/3rd of a stop and thats enough to make a difference. IMO over exposing a full stop is very much overkill unless you are shooting 500T and want that extra detail that comes from the over exposure. TBH though I dont think I've ever shot 500T at anything more than 2/3 over (320), so Im not sure if going a full stop over will not actually get you much.

I think Andree might be able to get it close penciled in. If Shruco cans till make you a custom one he could probably nail it, but even a few years ago it would take months to get something from him.

you basically need a ground glass that matches as close as possible to whatever ground glass you used in the 235. you should be able to find the latest version of the arri format guide in pdf form online. you might need to ask the rental house if they know which ground glass they gave you, though the format guide indicates what perforation cameras said ground glasses were ok for. as for a pickups ground glass, to be super precise you might want a penciled glass if Andree at AM camera can do it for you. but it just depends on how close you want to try to match it. also you probably want to verify the 2C actually has a super 35 gate and not just a normal one

now that the site is actually public, I can confirm I have been able to reach Artturi at the info@helgear.fi email

I'd reach out to Ratworks in the UK to see if they can help you. https://ratworksengineering.com/

I dont think theres any good way to do it with a 400ft load, though I suppose you could always build a really big cage. you might want to consider an arri SR camera instead. they're easier to mount in weird ways and will run while upside down. the SR3 advanced has two mounting holes on the top you could thread into. regular SR3 has one, but if you got one with an after market steadicam top mount you'd have a few more spots to attach to

try replying to your order confirmation email. I got some stuff from them a few weeks ago, and replying to the order confirmation got a fast response (less than 24hrs).

in fairness, digital vista vision has been the rage for a while now. but boy would it be fun to slap a set of supreme primes on an 8 perf film body.

so they're definitely closed? yikes. by any chance do you know who else is making regulated battery plates for film cameras now?

you're now mixing in a 3rd technology that is in a different basket from film and digital video. magnetic recording technology is very different from film technology

if you dont believe me, believe Mr Mullen. And if you dont believe him, you are free to go look up kodak's technical specifications for the films. I do think you need to stop thinking of film and digital sensors as similar technologies. they get similar results, but other than the image hitting an image plane theres a whole lot going on with digital that isnt going on with film and vice versa. And film is certainly not dependent on transistor sizes, traces, readout times per line for a given exposure at a given frame rate etc But the question of the films being the same, just cut in size, is a verifiable fact. thats just how kodak cuts the film for end use.

surface area and dynamic range are not linked. the dynamic range will not change based on gate size. You might be able to tolerate lifting the blacks a little more on a larger format due to the grain being relatively smaller, but the range hasnt actually changed. its the exact same film, just cut to different sizes

Aapo covered the contrast issue as best as one can. But no the smaller format is not more contrasty at all. its the same film, but a smaller extract of it. its the exact same formulation. s16 is just a narrower cut of the film than 35mm or 65mm. the negative has pretty insane latitude honestly. and being a negative image means that its kinda insane what you can actually recover in an hdr scan. so while pushing will have consequences, Im not sure how big of a deal they'll be. But I think ultimately it might help to know what you are trying to achieve, as the solution to what appears to be your goal, make s35 look like s16, is to just shoot on 16. its cheaper and eliminates this theory gaming. But it is not unheard of for some shows that are super 16 to shoot things like wide establishing shots on s35 for more resolution and less distortion, but just push a stop to up the grain some. Some TV shows that were on 16 shot their VFX on 35 with no push. But if you did push you could then dial back the saturation in the DI if it got a little high. Or you could not push at all, degrain the 35, and then regrain with s16 grain. The degrain/denoise then re-grain/re-noise procedure is the norm in VFX for decades on film and digital in order to integrate elements (critical when different elements have different noise profiles due to being shot on different formats), so its not like a wheel would need to be re-invented. Heck, de-hancer can even effectively reduce the resolution of an image if you want to. Ultimately flashing was more a technique to desaturate your image in camera in an era before the DI. Yes you can still flash your neg if you really want to, but the only reason to do it today is to bake in that aspect of the look so that it cant be as easily manipulated in post. If its just the look you are after, it can be done in post without the added labor costs of having to flash 35mm negative.

can you even get the ECN-1 chemical mix anymore?

super 16 is primarily different from super 35 in that you have drastically less surface area of the raw material to image on. or thought of another way, you are cropped in on the same material. this means your view of the grains makes them appear larger vs a scan of 35mm. But it is the same raw material just cut down. resolution comes down to line pair resolving power as seen on an appropriate chart. color gamut isnt even a thing that factors into it, its an analogue format. Though what scanner you use and what mode said scanner is in can affect various factors including stability of the scanned image and image saturation. A true RGB scanner will get you a better color representaion off the neg than a single flash bayer pattern scanner (though the 2 flash HDR scan on the ScanStation gets damn close to the results of something like a Scanity). its relatively common to shoot super 16 over exposed some to expose the slower, smaller grains and effectively (or perhaps the right word is apparently) get a resolution bump and a cleaner image. you can also do digital grain reduction, though if you take it too far you loose the contrast provided by the grains and it can kinda make the image a little softer. I usually shoot at least 1/3rd stop over. Some swear by 2/3rds over. some shoot a full stop over. Using less standard lenses on super 16 can help some, as the usual zeiss super speed set kinda has a look associated with super 16. so using a 35mm as your close up lens vs a 50, or an 8mm vs a 9.5, puts you more into the field of view world of other super 35 lenses that we're more accustom to seeing. super 16 will always have a 2 stop increase in depth of field vs s35 though. Flashing is probably not going to do much for you other than wash out the image. You can push super 35 to get a grainier image, but it has some additional color and contrast consequences.

I think a big thing is that if the registration is worse or the image is less stable in any way that compromises image quality over what currently is available, the concept is basically dead in the water. film, especially 35, is too expensive and needs to compete with digital in terms of sharpness and stability for VFX. And you just have to assume VFX is going to touch the images a camera will produce these days. this is just generally the problem with making a new film camera at all, it has to at least match the capabilities of the currently available cameras AND cost less than a good condition used one that still has a spare parts ecosystem. thats not to say I want to discourage anyone from building a new camera. But theres something to be said for examining how known cameras can have their build cost reduced and replicated and innovate where necessary vs building something a bit more revolutionary.

so I dont have a lens to test this with, but if I recall if you dont need to use the optical viewfinder on an SR3, you can rotate the main arm straight up and a master prime with just barely fit. at that point you're completely beholden to the video tap, so you want to make sure you have a good one. but I wouldnt rely on my recollection, I'd want to test it at a rental house to be sure.

I think broadcast solutions is still asking just 6k USD for those MELS 3 perf 535 cameras, includes 4 mags. MELS are also directly listing the 4 perf cameras for 3k, along with some separate 3 perf movement kits

I would just throw out there, 35mm is a lot more expensive to shoot than super 16. and a good, calibrated super 16 camera can work wonders if you just want to be shooting on film. on super 16 you're shooting only 400ft to get about 10 min runtime at around $220 per can. for 35 4 perf youre in the 750 range per can at 1000ft, so more costs for film, processing, and scan. right now the best deal for a 4 or 3 perf 35mm film camera will probably be the MELS sale 535Bs. I considered picking one up myself, but I dont enough climate controlled storage to add another camera. through the part sales site they are running separate from what broadcast solutions has, they do have the optical arm to attach a modern HD video tap for sale. But it should also be noted the cameras dont have the best reputation, seems mainly from weight and magazine issues. also FYI the 416's tap is not SDI, it is a BNC analogue out. you can get that tap converted to HD though via AZ Spectrum. Oli Millar also has a 416 replacement tap now I think that is budget friendly. best tap for it is the indie assist 416, but that tap is well over 10k USD alone.

Pawn shops in the US do not have a history of investigating items pawned with them

I dont believe that is how you do it. as I recall, if you have it in sync then at most you'll see a non rolling slim dark bar though the viewfinder. you want to then phase the camera while it running till the bar leaves the screen. this should put it at a minimum outside the TV safe area of the tube and just wont be visible. remember the TV is refreshing at 60hz, more than double the speed of your camera at 24fps, so that bar should be there regardless of your shutter timing. its not an off/off frame like shooting blankfire and seeing all the flashes in the viewfinder and thus you captured none on film. however, if Arri is the rental house you should be talking to them. they should be able to provide you with an ESU-1 and give you instructions on how to use it. if they have the remote pickup module for the CRT that should take care of you. you might (should) also be fine if you break off the TV input signal into the ESU-1 or CE box. this all being said, if the rental house isnt helpful I'd bring in a small CRT and shoot a test.

the synchro devices are still out there. they're sometimes used now to jam video walls when shooting on film. https://cinemaelec.com/products/filmvideo_synchronizing_control the Arri ESU-1 was the Arri specific synchronizer, and is the one that the 416 manual calls for. there is one on ebay right now for $500, which aint bad. you could always buy it, then flip it after you're done. no affiliation with the seller btw but heres the link https://www.ebay.com/itm/155829714150 IIRC an alternative is to set your shutter angle to 144 and then phase the camera while its running to eliminate any dark bar on the tv. Hopefully someone whose done this more recently or recalls better can chime in.

I have them but I've never had to file a claim. happy to hear recommendations for other companies if anyone has them

are you only looking at local rental houses? I'd expect panavision to have 4 perf movements. some boutique rental houses in LA like standard camera or old fast glass should have 4 perf. I'd think arri rental would too. if its an owned camera, Andree at AM Camera might be able to help hunt something down.