Jeremy Saltry

This thread is 2-3 years old. It kind of gets confusing when it gets dug up! It looks like its new.

Looking for Kodak 19 SEs and also all ASAs located on the east coast. If anyone has any leads it would be much appreciated

Its designed for 16. It doesn't fully cover s16 but that is what I have used it for.

FS: Angenieux 5.9mm T2 Wide Angle Lens in Arri B Mount This lens is pretty unique and I haven't seem many if any in Arri B for sale at the moment, only Arri Standard. Focus preset at 5 feet giving you 2ft-infinity depth of field, so no focusing is required. Glass is in great condition and body shows normal signs of wear. I have used this on Reds, Arri and SR3 and A-Minima but I really dont use it much anymore and trying to find a good home. DM with inquires or pricing.

Pending sale

Shot you a PM

Are these all B mount?

Just wanted to update this with some better images.

Sell my full set of Zeiss MK1 B Speed S16mm lenses. This set has been very well maintained, recently serviced, has normal signs of wear and cosmetically are in great shape. Front and rear elements have minimal signs of use. Cinegears with .08 pitch and updated diameter fronts are on all lenses except for the 9.5mm. These lenses are great and have served me well. Included is: 9.5mm 12mm 16mm 25mm X2 PL Adaptors X4 Front Caps X4 Rear Caps I understand that all of us taking a hit with jobs at the moment so I hope its not too inappropriate to post these for sale. When these sell I make sure to reply in this thread and are available unless otherwise noted. PM me for $$$ price or other questions.

One of my good friends just had this upgrade done. I think its the first one done. I can confirm that it is dope.

I am selling one of my 12mm Zeiss B Speeds as I have had this as a backup. This has always been very well cared for and maintained and only had two owners over its life. It was recently put onto a projector in addition to using it on a few different s16mm bodies and looks great. This lens includes front and rear caps in addition to the wings and any original screws and hardware that came with this. There is a very small amount of dust in the front element and the rear element is as perfect as you will get for an older lens. Aside from one lens I have come across that are literally new in box and unused, this is as close as you will get as it has been a spare lens and not seen much use though its life. $1200 USD

Thanks all! Its always great to get a mix of theory and tech. I really appreciate everyone sharing so much knowledge and thoughtful responses! I am excited to try and recreate all of the above. I will report back.

Thats a great observation and very logical. The more everyone saw advances with film stock and then eventually to digital sensors, more boundaries were pushed and the less you would have to light a scene. Thats a cool example of how technology directly impacts the art or aesthetic side of film and how it can shape an era or generation. You're spot on in that it is a culmination of a many things. Do you know how 90's films would typically be transferred to digital? I would assume a print would be scanned. I almost wonder if there was one or two scanners in particular being used. It seems like the difference would be negligible if scanned today on a ScanStation Director vs whatever the capture would be in that generation.

For sure. For instance anything from Whats Eating Gilbert Grape to The Shawshank Redemption, Groundhog Day or even Speed and Diehard I consider 90's. For me, growing up with these movies in SD on television then to re-watch them on a more modern HD television, they seemed to still have retained a certain aesthetic. If you look at Reservoir Dogs, even though that was made in 92, it to me has a more vintage feel from the 70/80's feel which was the point. A movie that looked like it was from the 50's but also the 70's but set in the 90s. I think this is a great example of what your talking about with lighting, filters, fashion, hairstyles, etc. Lenses also. Even movies from the 80's such as Ghostbusters seem to have a certain look and feel. Then move to the 2000's with one of my favorites Requiem for a Dream and it has a different feel and aesthetic which very well could be just a different approach to lighting and art dept. That era seemed to be when cinematographers and directors were really leaning into alternative processes like bleach bypass or C-41 X-Pro or even just the use of unfiltered T Stock in daylight and chasing a more stylized look. Whether its a theater experience with a 35mm print or watching on HD or SD, for me there has always been an inherent quality to early to mid 90's movies that is hard to describe and I think noticeable from both past and present films.

Ive been looking into exactly how to achieve that classic 90's film look of any big budget feature. I have shot on a good mount of stock from that era (though expired) and also EXR, Vision 1, 2 3 ect and it never really seems to capture "that look". I am leaning less towards film stock and more towards scanning or a combination of film stock, scanner and lighting in a specific way for film stock of that era. With high end scanners today, we are pretty close to having everything scanned on the same sensor regardless of scanner manufacturer. I feel like this may be a reason as to why there seemed to be a shift from one aesthetic to another. If anyone has any input it would be greatly appreciated.