Nick Mulder

Herzog's 'Rescue Dawn' ends with a freeze... You could hear the collective cringe/what-the!? (was watching it with about 1000 others)

this one is pretty cool: you can read the sign :blink: (thanks for the stills David)

How do they make sure the magazine isn't smashed and all the film fogged ? Probably a few different methods ?

you can get color shift. Best to get a bit of it 'snip' or 'wedge' tested at a lab - it doesn't cost an arm and a leg ... ask them to explain the results ;)

I was pipped at the post with a thread re. this film also ! :P ... it was in the Auckland International Film Fest that on occasion gets films pretty fresh off the boat though. Another recommendation is 'Tears of The Black Tiger' - I hear it only was released in the US recently, yet we had it about 3 years or so ago ... Other oddities were that both Sunshine and Transformers the movie appeared to be released here in NZ before the US - go figure.

http://www.cinematography.com/forum2004/in...showtopic=24532 which leads to: http://www.cinematography.com/forum2004/in...showtopic=23014 ;)

That would require changing the gearing inside if the shutters aren't the butterfly type (in which you could simply black one out) - you would also then only have half the shoot time per spring wind (hmmm, unless that might have to be the case in any of these modification suggestions)... You might tear sprokets at that speed, and image steadiness could be a problem with only friction holding the film in place with no registration pin or even pressure plate on some models. I sound pretty negative huh ... But go for gold! it would be a good learning experience, but just have a lot of patience stored up

To answer your original question - I'd say either a bad original super16 mod is to blame or the gate or mask screws (or both) got loose over time, which again is most likely due to them not being fastened correctly during the modification ... Any idea who did it ?

Not that I think you're arguing with me but I did say '...the shallow DOF that can be achieved...' - its nice to have the option ;) The reason why they look like film is probably because they dont have as much information per frame (i.e. grain) - yes yes ? no ? I think discussions often end up being 1 or 2 dimensional when in reality there are many more axes/factors to account for (not to mention personal preference fuddling things up)

One particular characteristic of 35mm originated films is the shallow DOF that can be achieved from using relatively longer lenses for the same angle of view that would be used on a smaller sensored HD camera... This however is changing with newer digital cameras having super35mm sized sensors... That and the usually larger latitude of stops film can handle in the front end acquisition are two big factors that aren't as subjective as the classic/romantic responses you might get.

When they were converted to super16 is when the misalignment probably happened... The holes in which the gate screws go through have reasonably large tolerances and there is also the screws that hold the whole prism mechanism down.. they sit in slots which can be moved both up and down... Basically, whenever any work is done with any of this there will most probably be a misalignment Not to mention the convex-planar lens that sits atop the prism is removed for modification and is replaced with a simple mask at the new aspect, this is where the actual alignment is done once all the other fiddling mentioned above is complete... Its pretty easy - it is held on by two screws so loosen them, now blast a light like an LED torch down the eye piece of the finder and then look at the prism from the front - you should now see the ground glass all lit up and showing your super16 mask ... - now set your camera to bulb mode and open the shutter (or simply run it if you have an EBM or EL) - now align the illuminated mask with the gate (takes a bit of fiddling and a light touch) - within reason the 'straighter' you are and the further you are away from the prism to remove problems with parallax the better, my results just from eye are fine as the mask is slightly smaller than the frame in any case (a small safety) - rotation is much worse than shift though - ouch! Anyways... done ? cool ! so screw the two screws back down and double check to see the screwing down didn't move the mask again ... easy ! (and free) now - you might find that in your finder view the mask in its proper position is now off to the side and obscured by finder internals - easy fix again... open up the top of the finder and adjust the sprung adjustment screws on the 90deg prism at the front until it lines up somewhere the whole frame can be seen and is not obscured (they usually don't need much movement at all)

well, get in contact if you want to sell ;) I just put my 10mm with a century 6mm adapter into my underwater housing which has even more 'wideness' in the front portal and got some major angle of view - like about 120~130deg - it didn't cover super16 though, the front of the various lens housing I think was/were in view which I could if I wanted to remove, but then that would destroy the resale value (even though the specs were improved, I'll make a decision one day...) - regular16 was good though if I ever need it ^_^

again... not my area of expertise but: rotoscoping as it is refered to mostly nowadays refers to the work done in lieu of a color, luma or otherwise keyed composite scene - ie. the mask is done frame by frame (tweened keyframe to keyframe) pretty much the same as original rotoscoping but with a different end in sight (a mask). Its a lot of work compared to getting a good key in the first place, which in turn is more work in the front end... Depending on different factors, you may decide to go either way - its the process where a lot of the "we'll fix it in post" is acheived Get a manual for After Effects or similar and have a read ;) Many special effects books at your library will go through the historical processes that have now been emulated digitally (and hence the nomenclature remains) - well worth a read also

heh heh - thanks for gaving me the heads up on that one.

You're correct in that it has been posted before - try a search ;)

have a look at the 'showreel' section of this page That will give you some hints for the front end - as for the post side of things programs like Shake, Flame and good ol' After Effects will help you out there, although depending on the complexity and time constraints you could nut out the same thing in FC - that is not my speciality though (if I even have one ;))

the 5.7 covers ? cool ! is it nice and sharp when opened fully ?

The other ideas were not to go super 16 but still use the current pull down but double the wideness of the shot... So no claw mod needed but lenses with larger coverage and a re-centre ... You'd scan it 'normally' and then pull it apart and reformat into a proper sequence in post... What speeds do your favored models for conversion run at ?

How are you going to achieve the extra pull down with the current claw > ? That and the lens mount are the show stoppers here. There are some other variations on the theme though that could be fun if you had the time ... Search the forum archive for added enjoyment ;)

With the Bolex EL and EBM you can shoot 400' in one go - no 30 second restriction ... they dont have any spring-drives in them. Even with the spring wound RX5 or SBM you can do the same with the appropriate motors. Either 400' or 100' daylight loads if you prefer (with opens up the use of the non-mag top models also) Yeh, I know I bag on about Bolexes - but somewhere down the line you've got your wires crossed ;)

I mentioned what I did because of direct anecdotes I've heard from more than two professionals here (colorists and producers) who have been amazed to find out that what they were looking at were shot using a Bolex (the footage was used in nation wide Television commercials) - to quote them "I thought it was 35mm it was so sharp" ... Albeit 'sharp' being very subjective and not properly defined here, and feel free to not have any faith in their respective ability to determine picture quality ... I myself have chosen to do so however As for comparing them to super speeds - well, I didn't ... I called them 'Zeiss sharp' and it was simply to offer a different perspective to the original posters: If I wanted to compare Zeiss super speeds and Switar Presets I'd write something like: "the Zeiss Super Speeds 25mm speed is T1.3 and the 26mm Switar Preset speed is 1.1" (t-stop unknown) (cheeky!) anyhoo, like I said earlier> maybe us Bolex freaks should just keep mum about them (so they keep under the $500 mark) :ph34r: ... Saulie> I have a meter that allows for the prism compensation to be programmed in, so its zero hassle if I choose otherwise its a minimal tweak of the aperture... so yes, its not perfect - but take a look at the cost, you can now afford to be a camera owner ;)

I'll just chirp in here and mention the preset Switar lenses used for Bolexes are Zeiss sharp - and fast too, 1.1 for the 26mm ... oh, and super cheap reletive to other 'proper' lenses with the same specs I dont know why they are bagged so often - maybe us Bolex freaks should just keep mum about them :ph34r: As for the finder, yip it is dark but you get used to it and/or you can measure and dial in the focus - you can get the GG laser brightened also ...

its redundant as Sam has already mentioned - its 16mm stock ...

For gawds sake please consider the dogs safety - these beasts live for chasing the lures and will do so to their own peril without a moments hesitation ... I've seen a dog hit a wall at full speed, put down 10 mins later ... Then later in the same day another hound ripped its own leg off on its own steam (not kidding), put down 10 mins later ... magnificent creatures and good luck with whatever system you go with ;) (I have my own shoot up my sleeve also, hence the research)

I'm getting some transferred soon, and have access to heaps but am busy busy at the mo' - I'll keep you updated ;) Its pretty much the same as any other non-reg pin MOS 180deg super16 (its 170deg) - only difference being the more probable use of a Switar lens than any other and the different camera shape gives it different nodal properties when on sticks.