Jump to content

Will Montgomery

Sustaining Member
  • Content Count

    2186
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    19

Posts posted by Will Montgomery


  1. Great answers here. Most important is maxing out what 16mm can do for you by using sharp lenses and proper focus & exposure and using the slowest film stock you can for the project. 4k scans will almost always be an improvement, how much of an improvement will be based on how well it's shot.

    If the image doesn't hit the film sharp and clear, higher resolution scans will only give marginal improvements and may not be worth the cost. When it's shot well, 4k absolutely improves the final result even when finishing in HD. Plus you can reframe a little bit if needed which is nice.


  2. On 6/20/2019 at 7:44 AM, David Mawson said:

    110 stills film performed waaay below what it should have done exactly because the film wasn't kept flat enough. That was one of the reasons Kodak introduced those weird disc cameras -

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Disc_film

    Discs are actually the best system for keeping film flat. The only problem is that a 400 foot reel would become a 70' radius disc...

    Basically a cartridge system for 16mm would have to be the same as SR mags to have a substantial and quality pressure plate to we're kind of back to where we started. Maybe you could make them of lesser quality material but probably not.

    Although the Disc idea would be fun. It would also be spinning so fast you could chop down trees... or a whole forest at once with a 70' radius.


  3. The Super 8 cartridge is incredibly cheap in every way. The plastic, the pressure plate, the spring, ect. are all made to be as inexpensive as possible yet still yield passable results. These are meant for one use and discarded. But even they add costs to the film because of the extra labor assembling them.

    To make a 100' or 400' 16mm (or 35mm) cartridge system would add significantly to the cost of film because it would have to be MUCH more substantial than the Super 8 system to hold up to professional use. So basically it would be like a new Arri magazine every time. Yes you could do a deposit/return thing like bottles but would not be very practical. Not sure where you can cut corners with that design either but it wouldn't save very much even if you designed a brand new camera (which would NEVER happen.)

    So we're back to loading our own magazines which goes really fast and isn't so bad once you do it regularly and is also why clapper/loaders exist. As my Kodak rep recently told me, loaders are getting twice as much money as they used to because its becoming a rare skill. (and too much responsibility for me!)

    • Like 1

  4. Quote

    Don't bother with collimation after taking out the internal filter. It is just theory and witchcraft.

    The "removing the filter then you have to collimate part may be witchcraft," but the point that a 4008 is what...35 years old and who knows what's been done to it is not witchcraft...always worth checking collimation every few years, especially if the camera is new to you. 

    But if you test it and have no issues then save the money. Checking it should be part of regular service so if it's a new camera to you then service by someone who knows what they're doing is more important than just collimation.


  5. If the internal filter is removed it is a good idea to collimate the lens. Actually, it is always a good idea to have that done. Björn Andersson in Sweden can help you with that.

    Filmkonsult Svebaco KB - Björn Andersson
    Vidholmsbackkarna 54 - Box 5136 - 165 72 Hasselby - Sveriges
    Telephone: +46 (0)838 1074
    Email: bjorn.andersson@brevet.nu
    info@beaulieu-service.com


  6. My results with the Wolverine were very similar to Daniel's example posted. It almost looks like it was captured at 360dpi and enlarged to 1080. Like I said, it makes otherwise sharp footage look like a Monet painting.

    If you want to say it does a fine job for the money, I guess maybe that's the case since it's $300...but it would be completely unusable for me in any situation other than simply to know what was on the reel.


  7. Shooting 7222 is like shooting some of the really old Hollywood Movie stocks...if you don't have big lights it can get very grainy. A beautiful grain in my opinion but could be a bit much. Highly recommend testing before a shoot.

    Movies like Good Night and Good Luck shot in Vision 500T then desaturated in post so keep that in mind.

    Just plan on having plenty of light; more than you think you may need so you're not shooting wide open on the lens. It's always easy to remove light in post but adding it in just leads to more grain and ugly blacks.


  8. Hi

    A good Eyemo that has been cleaned oiled and adjusted will make steady movies as good as an Arri 35IIc

    I have both cameras...

    very important is to really put the Eyemo in parts and clean each part and all gears of old grease and dirt. I have a few ones here that run super quiet. A speed check of the shutter with an old Strobotac 1531 shows how fantastic stable the speed of the camera is. Wind it after every shot.

     

    About film length, many Eyemo have a slot to attach a 200ft, 400ft or 1000ft mag and also electric drive.

     

    There are movies that have been filmed with an Eyemo as only camera, for example: Air Force (1943)

     

    About lenses: look for a good General Scientific Eyemo lens or just use a M42 adapter and put a nice Pentax lens on it, like a super takumar, you will be surprised how sharp it will look.

     

    In my opinion, to say that the Eyemo is only usable as stunt or crash camera does injustice to this nice camera.

     

     

    If you're a glutton for punishment you can make it work no doubt. Good luck with that.

     

    By the time you add everything on to it the cost and the cumbersome-ness would be crazy. Image can be more or less as steady as a 2c maybe, but not a 3 with registration pin.

     

    Not saying its a crappy camera (I have 5) just saying it's not what I would shoot a feature with. Would you really debate that?


  9.  

    Returning to its qualities: could it be even better than a Konvas, even if not motorized? It seems very stable, fits good lenses. Konvas, if not well supported, is a bit of an unknown.

     

     

    You're not going to make a feature with an Eyemo...1 minute at a time... They are great for crash cams and something where you don't want to risk a real 35mm movie camera; and perhaps for home movies if you don't mind changing reels constantly.

     

    They are not particularly stable compared to any modern (in the last 40 years) camera but not un-stable either. They give a noticeably improved image over 16mm even with cheap lenses.

     

    Here's footage from a wind up Eyemo...1080p transfer. Outer edges are extremely soft due to the lens but the center shows more detail than you'd get from 16mm in my opinion.

     


  10. I've had two Eyemos CLA'd by Bernie at Super 16, Inc. Might want to give him a shout ...

     

    Bernie & I go way back. I'll call him, thanks.

     

    Sorry, I just can help with the classic spring motor driven ones.

    The SCS got a lot of complicated electric stuff inside.

    There is not much left in them of the original mechanics

    Very true. But so nice not to have to constantly wind them. I do have a spring drive Eyemo that is as reliable as the day it was built. Also would work as an excellent bludgeoning weapon.


  11. I have several Steve's Cine modified (motorized) Eyemos that are looking for some service love. Since Steve is retired (don't want to bother him) it would be nice to find someone who services them. Might be expensive to send to Deutschland though...

     

    One is in pieces and another may just need a fuse for all I know; just don't have the time to sit down with them unfortunately.


  12.  

    I had about 300' of 16mm 7203 I'd shot mostly as a lens test and left in the fridge for nearly 10 months (oops). Finally sent it to get processed over at kodak along with some push process tests I'd done. I was shocked that the 10 month old stuff turned out just fine, such that I doubt I'd be able to tell the difference if I'd set it in right after shooting. So its definitely feasible to shoot, chill, and send a batch in to whatever lab.

     

    So even if you get a scan back that you think doesn't look great because of the age or temperature handling of the film, you might be surprised what a good colorist with film experience can do with the scan. They have tricks you won't find in a YouTube Resolve tutorial.


  13. If you're just shooting 100' reels it's worth saving up your rolls until you have at least 400' probably. Even though raw film costs have gone up significantly and processing has gone up too, the transfer costs are pretty reasonable for much better quality. 2k and 4k scans today give you great data to work with.

     

    I do slightly miss the days of scene-to-scene color correction by master colorists...or at least hard working but extremely proficient colorists. Now I have great scans to work with but must develop my color skills substantially.

    • Upvote 2

  14. I recently worked on a feature where the DP was paid $200/day for himself AND his personal Alexa XT.

     

    That completely blows my mind. How does anyone expect to make a living in California? Same guy/equipment would be paid $1200 minimum in Dallas...possibly more. Too many small fishes in a big ocean. $200/day is fine for a guy starting out with a DSLR but for a professional with an Alexa? Ouch.

×
×
  • Create New...