Jump to content

Will Montgomery

Sustaining Member
  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Everything posted by Will Montgomery

  1. If there is a real interest in this, I'd bet Tommy at Video & Film Solutions could do it. Definitely can make 16 & 35mm prints, I bet he could make some Super 8 negative to 16mm if not to Super 8; but only if enough people were interested. http://www.videofilmsolutions.com/digital-intermediates--printing
  2. If you're K3 dies, just by another one. Cheaper than trying to fix it for sure. You may have missed the best buying opportunities for pro level Super 16 cameras, but keep an eye out for an ACL or Arri SR 2/3 if you want to shoot with sound. Blimping a K3 seems like kind of a futile gesture...once you get it setup you'll have to take it apart to change your 100' reel out...not very practical for most shooting and that camera was never meant for that; it was meant as a step up from Super 8 for home movies and is great in that way.
  3. If you're making money at this price point then there is hope for the future. :)
  4. Kodak's new processing and scanning service will define what Super 8 costs will be while it lasts. I can't imagine they could sell the film, process it and scan it to 4k for less than $80 per roll+shipping...probably more like $99. For three and a half minutes? It will die quickly and be lampooned on the internet forever. We all know that's pretty much the cost of Super 8 with a decent scan, but the world doesn't know it yet. Is it worth it? Sometimes...guess it depends on what you're shooting. They SHOULD offer a budget service for just film and processing of Ektachrome for $50 or less. That might let it have a chance.
  5. I have the exact same lens/camera combo but with the Wooden Camera frame/pl mount. That Arri S16 glass is a great front end for the BMPCC.
  6. Yep. Big ugly bright colored tape means "think twice before opening." Old 2C mags might benefit from a little light leak protection honestly.
  7. If you don't have $350 for a CLA you're in the wrong hobby. Just one 100' roll of 16mm (~3.5 minutes) will cost you close to $100 to purchase, process and transfer.
  8. Great telecine as usual Rob! However, the Kodak "How To Shoot Film" book clearly states not to zoom while filming! It can make the viewer ill. :)
  9. Pro8mm can be just fine. From what I've seen over the years they seem to have an "A" team and a "B" team (maybe interns or the overnight crew?) so either your stuff comes out great or has big issues. Once you've been burned its hard to forgive, but honestly it would probably be fine to try Pro8mm. At least they can do the processing and transfer in one place. If you're in LA I'd check out Spectra as well...they can process and transfer Super 8 negative and reversal in one place too. Lightpress folks are great colorists. Their machine might not have the best specs but the result will be amazing. Gamma Ray Digital will give you an amazing scan (probably the best machine available) at a reasonable price. They love what they do and it shows. Great company. My flat scans from the have been great and while not cheap, good price for the high quality you get. I would suggest sending one roll to a place like Lightpress or Cinelicious to see what really good colorists can do for your film. Makes all the difference in the world but of course you pay for it.
  10. Unfortunately it's just not as cheap and accessible as it used to be. If Kodak comes up with an inexpensive HD transfer then that may go a long way to keeping film alive...although it will drive other companies out of business and I'm sure they are sensitive to that.
  11. I'm more interested in their processing & transfer system. If they can keep that reasonable I will shoot more Super 8. Right now I'd rather shoot 16mm since the transfer costs me about the same anyway. As far as the $2500 price point, it is high compared to all the used cameras we have but with good DSLRs costing $3000+ and the best Super 8 cameras back in the day costing a similar amount its really not out of the ballpark. They may not sell a ton of them but its not unreasonable for what's involved with making them. But if they wanted a hipster film revolution boost they need to get that down to $500 or so.
  12. With K3s you can just buy a new one when its time for service...less money than sending it in for service. :) Bernie at Super 16 Inc can work on those...his Laserbrighten process is particularly good on those to brighten the viewfinder. Don't know anyone in LA that works on hobby cameras but I'm sure there's someone.
  13. If it says Beaulieu, send it to Björn. The man is simply incapable of doing shoddy work. I think Beaulieu is his middle name. :)
  14. I have a crystal Scoopic. Great camera for casual shooting...lens is actually very good although fixed. Easiest loading 100' 16mm camera ever made. All that said, if you're shooting a feature or if it's your only camera, the ACL would have many advantages. The 200 and 400 magazines for the ACL are super helpful on a feature. Yes, you can get 400' adapters for the Scoopic MS but it's a little unwieldy and hard to use compared to the ACL. ACL's are more likely to be available in Super 16. Interchangeable lenses on the ACL give you many more options (although that Scoopic lens is really good in the middle apertures).
  15. I don't have the time or stones to properly clean my BMPCC sensor. Any recommendations for a tech that regularly does this?
  16. Yep. I've mixed shots from Canon AF310xl (possibly the worst looking Super 8 camera available) with my Beaulieu 4008 and it looks like Regular 8 vs. 16mm. night and day difference in sharpness. I've actually had noticeably better results with Regular 8mm shot with a decent lens than some cheap Super 8 cameras. Here's a sample of bad Super 8 cameras (and bad operator) and good Super 8 cameras in one piece. However, I actually like the out-of-focus shots in some situations...especially in home movies.
  17. Make sure you focus really good. Here's some regular 16mm footage when I was testing an Arri SR1 with a Zeiss 10-100 2.8 lens. A decent lens, sunny day and decent focusing can get you very sharp results.
  18. Grey cards are a neutral source to judge exposure in the film transfer process so yes, they are very useful (but not completely critical). And just FYI, they've been around for film longer than digital :) Make sure you put the grey card where your subject is so the lighting is the same...like right in front of a face. If you do that consistently it will help the colorist keep different film segments looking similar. You only need a few frames but make sure the lighting doesn't change in between shots. I believe Kodak still sells their grey card but you can get water proof ones from B&H easily. Not sure when or if they switched from 12% to 18% but these days it is 18%.
  19. I actually do love the stock, but it can be grainy without a ton of light and that can be an issue for online streaming. I have a music project coming up next month where I'm shooting in the studio as an album is tracked with Double-X. It's notoriously dark in those studios so I may wind up going 500T and killing the color if I can't bring in enough lights. Here's some 35mm Eyemo footage I shot with expired stock a few years ago for a test. What a great look! Definitely feels 1964 in both stock and art direction.
  20. There was a transfer house in Atlanta that used to do Super 8 Wet-gate transfers. They were SD I believe. It does make a difference, but can't say for sure whether modern software to clean scratches up might be better or simply cleaning the film really well first.
  21. If the loop was JUST oversized enough to hit something but not so oversized that it made a ton of noise that might account for it. SR3's are pretty dang quiet...but I've also found the mags to be easy to load properly (at least on measuring for the loop) and they seem to have plenty of safety margin to avoid something like that. When you say you shot for the first time, do you mean that film (Double-X) or do you mean first time with that camera? Do you own the camera? If so you should do some scratch tests with all the mags for sure. You want to make sure that doesn't happen again before using the camera on something that "matters." Love Double-X by the way...such a beautiful grainy stock...unfortunately most streaming codecs don't like it for the same reason. :)
  22. Bingo. Have you seen the thickness of a lens shim? They are so incredibly thin but are used to correct these issues by the tiniest adjustment. Hardest part is having the collimator.
  23. Try Bernie at Super16inc.com. He's revived several "dead" cameras for me over the years and made sure the ones that are working keep working. He can certainly help you diagnose the problem.
  24. Jon, what you're probably liking on that footage is the depth of field. BMPCC footage would not look like that with the same focal length lenses. As far as "quality"... you can achieve excellent quality on the BMPCC, especially with the RAW setting but you have to know your way around Resolve to get the most out of it.
  25. Yep. I have a PL adapter on the BMPCC and use my Zeiss 12-120 zoom on it from my S16 SR2. Basically the BMPCC is a decent sensor for my S16 glass. Like all Blackmagic cameras it's all about the post. It's designed so you spend time in Resolve getting it to look like what you want. The generally low contrast image out of the "film" mode is nice to work with...but you're still dealing with an HD image; not 4k. Depth of field is a consideration as well. If you're used to DSLRs and large sensors the BMPCC is an adjustment. It is certainly a good and inexpensive tool to have at your disposal. My only issue with it is it's unnatural consumption of batteries. External power is a must.
  • Create New...