Jump to content

Will Montgomery

Sustaining Member
  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Posts posted by Will Montgomery

  1. I shot about (6) 100' rolls this Thanksgiving of family stuff. (3) Vision2 500T, (2) Vision2 50T and (1) B&W Negative.


    I was visiting relatives in North Carolina so I had to fly from Dallas. I shipped the film there with DO NOT X-RAY all over it. After shooting, I was in a hurry and threw the film into my suitcase thinking that maybe the whole X-Ray thing was a myth anyway.


    Boy was I wrong. The 500T came back with a pulsing fog. Since I shoot with a K-3 I'm never quite sure if it's the film or the camera but the lab guys looked at the transfer and agreed it was probably X-ray damage.


    The 50D came back fine and looked truely amazing... the colorist said it was the first time she worked with this stock and it was wonderful. No damage was visable.


    So, if the bags did get zapped by a powerful x-ray, what would be the general limit to the speed of film so it wouldn't show damage?


    Of course in the future I will send everything FedEx with DO NOT X-RAY all over it.

  2. What about the Zenitar 16mm 2.8? Is that lens worth getting for a K-3? What would be the focal length equivilent? something like 30mm?? I see them on ebay and am concidering a purchase along with the Peleng.




    I just bought a Zenitar 16mm from Russia (man, its still weird getting something from there) and it gives a great wide view. The problem is there isn't a fully manual setting for the aperature so you have to wedge in the pin somehow to be able to change the F-Stops manually. I hate to have to "break" it to work properly.


    The other issue is lack of a standard filter mount. It comes with 3 filters, a green, red and yellow filter but I wish I could get an 85 for it.

  3. If you want a real bargain video tap, just duct tape a digital camera with movie capbilities to the camera, zoom it until it approximates the framing and put little shims under the camera until the angle is close and... BAMM!


    Sure its not really a tap and not very useful for framing, but hey, you get the bonus of audio recording and with a little audio filtering with Soundtrack in the Final Cut Pro bundle, you can even remove the camera noise!


    If you have a digital camera already, its free!

  4. For a profesional look I would shoot with a boilex h16rexVI...rick solid registraton compared to home movie super 8 format. A wedding only happens once or twice so think big. super 8 is not up to the jobs

    If you go with 16mm either buy 3 cameras and have them all loaded and ready to go or hire an assistant to load for you, even then I'd get 2 so you always have one ready. Missing a moment at a wedding could make for a very bad day.




    Super 8 can be fine for this application, especially if they are looking for the "home movie" look. Fast loading is a bonus, but I'd still pick up 2 of the same camera since they are so cheap.

  5. Kodak still makes black-and-white films on a regular basis, so they are fresh. As David notes, they have been improved over the years, especially for physical characteristics.


    Perhaps another American naming invention... like French Fries.


    image-wise, it's a classic silver halide technology, pre-T-grain.

    I have seen how the stock gives a unique look even though it seems many people are shooting color negative and removing the color in duplication or telecine instead of shooting actual B&W stocks.


    I assume this is done to get faster speed films, but the look is different.

  6. Do these two stocks intercut nicely or is it better to stay with one or the other?


    I have a shoot coming up that will have outdoor and indoor situations. The indoor scenes will probably be during the day and include sun through French doors and minimum fill lighting. Seems like Double-X would work well on those scenes but bright sun on outdoor scenes would like the Plus-X.


    The project will be telecined and is not bound for projection at this point.


    Are both of these films current runs and fresh or has Double-X been sitting around at Kodak for a while?

  7. Why do you think the resolution is better from the negative stock? I wold think K40 gives the least grain and sharpest image. You just need to be carful when exposing.

    Resolution and sharpness are slightly different animals, and I'm sure someone else can give a real explanation (there have been posts about this before) but even if its counter-intuitive, negative film can indeed give a sharper image. Next time you have film transfered, ask the colorist to explain (but not in the session... it could get expensive!)


    Actually most Telecine Colorists I've worked with love the unique color K40 gives (especially in 16mm) but for most purposes the Vision2 stocks give much more detail in the blacks and a low-contrast look that's popular now.


    From my untechnical background, it makes sense if you think about it, the blacks are now white (clear) on the negative so and subtle variations are easier for the scanner to pick up then trying to distinguish between very subtle shades of black on reversals like K40 or Ektachrome. (I may be completely off base here).

  8. The one thing to look out for on those M42 lenses is that they have a FULLY MANUAL setting for F-Stop. The Super-Takumar Pentax lenses do, but alot of the 3rd party manufacturers left that off and only offer a preview button that doesn't help very much.


    There have been a few posts on this subject, probably worth a search.

  9. I've had a similar experience with mine. For paying so little you can get great images. When the lighting and exposure is right, you can get some amazing shots on film.


    The lens that came with the camera gives very good results for me, although the S16 coverage is only past 24 or so. I just picked up a 28mm Super-Takumar M42 lens that I'm looking forward to experimenting with and have the 16mm Zenit on order as well. Good to hear you had such great results with that lens, I assume it covers the full S16 image?

  10. If I want a old home film film look for a day interior shot, what is the best 16mm film stock to use? I was thinking Kodachrome but there probably won't be not enough light even if i use the 1.2k HMI as a fake window....

    16mm Kodachrome looks surprisingly good and not as "home movie" as I would have thought. How about Ektachrome?

  11. I'm doing an SD transfer of some S16 footage on Thursday. Good machine & good colorist. I'll be going to DigiBeta (for archiving) and miniDV for quick editing in Final Cut Pro.


    Should I have them crop to 16:9 and then create an anamorphic image to tape like anamorphic SD footage from a DV camera? or should I just letterbox it? (hate to lose pixels...)


    I'm asking this here and not in the telecine forum because more people seem to read this one...

  12. My stupid question is.

    Wouldn't it be easier to convert a 35mm camera to super16 than to convert 16 to super?




    Brave question.


    Actually it would depend upon the the camera, but I'd conservatively estimate that it would be easier 100% of the time to convert a 16mm to super 16 than 35 to super 16. Mainly because you'd have to change every mechanism of a 35mm camera to accept the 16mm film.



  13. Would love something with a 400ft mag though, even another MOS camera.


    With a camera like the K-3 you could buy four of them, load them all before the shoot and just pick another one up when you need it. Of course you'd have to have them checked out and maintenanced properly, but I've had really good luck with mine.

  14. What speed film are you shooting outdoors?


    The rolls I've had issues with were Vision 500T and Vision2 200T. Normally wouldn't use that outdoors but I was doing a test on a new camera and that was all I had. The camera is Super 16 so the edge fogging would cut into the shot more and because it was a test, the lab carefully looked at the negative.


    Each roll was a Kodak 100' spool.


    Haven't had any problems since then, but I've been pretty paranoid about loading in as low-light as possible.

  15. I dont agree about loading the daylight spools above.


    These can be loaded in full daylight if you like, but you may risk slight edge fogging, although this is normally not visible and outside the safe margins of the frame


    As a rule load in subdued light - if it is a sunny day, go in the shade or something.

    Everytime I've loaded in daylight, even in the shade, I've had significant edge fogging. When I asked the lab tech he laughed and said there is no such thing as a daylight load film unless you're using Kodachrome or another really slow film.


    That doesn't mean it has to be complete darkness, but only enough to barely see what you're doing.


    The edge fogging may not matter that much if you're shooting regular 16, but if its Super 16, it could be more noticable.

  16. Do you loose much quality when you transfer to video? (Like I said, I'm a newbie to film, so forgive me if I ask any dumb questions ;) )

    In a sense you lose quality because its a transfer, but the loss doesn't mean anything because it'll be as good as video can possibly be... Film has more resolution than standard definition video, and in the case of 16mm & 35mm much more than even high definition.


    Many people use film to "future proof" their projects. 10 years from now when there's a Super HD format that is 4000x2500 pixels or something, you can just go back and re-telecine your film at the higher resolution.


    Film is just another tool for a certain asthetic, one that will blow you away if you're used to DV cameras.

  17. I have read recently on this board that Super 8mm film cameras can be purchased for under $500 and I have also seen 16mm cameras for less than the price of an XL2. Of course, film stock is quite a bit more expensive than MiniDV tapes.

    I was in a similar situation a few years ago. After transfering some old Super 8 family footage I would always hear from people watching it how much "better" it looked than video; certainly more warm.


    So I picked up a Super 8 camera for $60 on eBay and a shot some of the newer Vision negative stocks and had it transfered on a real telecine machine. It was really amazing. If you're used to the look of video, Super 8 is an entirely new look. I found that both miniDV and Super 8 can be combined in the same story for different effects. Letting the video camera run while I shot the Super 8 give me the ability to sync the sound in Final Cut Pro which ads another dimension.


    I recently upgraded to 16mm and the footage I'm getting back is another level above Super 8... it really looks like footage from a prime time TV drama shot on film (well... the outdoor scenes at least).


    Remember, shooting film requires a much different philosophy than video. In video you can leave it running all the time and hope to capture the perfect moment because tape is cheap (video editors hate having to sort through those hours of tapes though...) while in film, since its more expensive and generally much shorter runs, you have to think about the shot much more.


    I would pick up a cheap Super 8 and try it out. Doing it will help you understand all the costs and benefits. Here are some quick estimates:


    Camera: $75

    Color Vision2 200T film: $18 (about 2 1/2 minutes of film @ 24fps)

    Developing: $15

    Transfer on decent Rank machine: $20


    So somewhere around $60 per 2 1/2 minutes. Seems like each shot has to count huh?


    Stil, I would try it once so you can see why so many people here are hooked.

  18. With modern color negative films, as you increase exposure and put the scene information further up the curve, you also tend to get more "interimage" effects from the DIR couplers, which increases color saturation somewhat.


    Sure... you just made that up... :D


    Just recieved my first Vision2 50D, can't wait to test it. I've been so impressed with EXR 50D that I find it hard to imagine a better looking image... but I'll give it shot.

  19. There are plenty of Europeans that use Dwayne's photo (www.k-14movies.com) for Kodachrome processing... and they do have 16mm stock available, as does Kodak in the US.


    I would suggest ordering from Kodachrome from Dwayne's and having them process it. Seems like that's the simplest solution. Although any Kodak color reversal film will be close to the look you want and a little telecine tweaking will probably take you the rest of the way.



  20. Anyway if I can I may just shoot 24p and rent a DVX-100a who knows.


    You should look into Super 8... you can buy a starter camera on eBay for less than $50 and film/processing is about half of what 16mm is.


    If you are used to editing DV, both 16mm and Super 8 can be transfered to miniDV and edited just like it came from a camcorder... except it will have a TRUE film look.


    Even if you just try a roll or two, I'd would do it for the experience. So you can see the difference. Its important to know what kind of tools are available. You will probably be better off with a DV camera if you're just starting out, but try film to see how it works, you'll be impressed in the end.

  21. Bonolabs in Virginia can do a decent HD transfer at $600/hr to hard drive. But the good news is that thats RUNNING TIME not a 3 to 1 or 5 to 1 ratio. Downside: not scene to scene, just a good neutral balance and then its up to you to color correct.


    Most HD shops I've seen charge around $600-$900 per hour but generally its like a 4 or 5 to 1 ration depending on how many scene changes there are.


    It sounds like your best move is to go to SD miniDV or uncompressed hard drive for editing on your PC then transfer just what you need to HD when the money's available.

  • Create New...