Eric Eader

Hello, My first thought was some kind of Nagra-Kudelski product; but now I believe it was just a cobbled together box of parts to look good enough for the show to make us ask questions all these years later.

Hello David, The quickest way to find out thread size might be to take it to an Automotive Machine Shop. They probably have the tools necessary to make the measurements.

Add: Elevator to the Gallows (1958) Les Diaboliques (1955) which purportedly led to Hitchcock creating: Psycho (1960) Time spent studying (all the above posted films), is not wasted time.

To add to the list, many of which can be streamed online: "Harakari (1962) A very brutal movie, in Cinemascope, as sharp as the real swords (since banned), used in the fight scenes. Extremely stylized, taut, crisp gorgeous B&W. (Catch the Sound track as well). Compare to a more ragged, shaggy, grainier image style in "Rashomon" and "Seven Samurai." Remember, the cinematography fits the story. All three of these Japanese movies are great in their own way. Cry Vengeance (1954) Out of the Past (1947) Cry Danger (1951) Some Like it Hot (1959) Charles Lang's Camera loved Marilyn Monroe. The Hill (1965) The Spy Who Came In From The Cold (1965) In Cold Blood (1967) Young Frankenstein (1974) The above posters have given you a short list of films with superb photography. (A few of a great many). View them and let us know what you think.

Hello, "La Notte" (1961), photographed by Gianni Di Venanzo; directed by Michelangelo Antonioni, and starring Jeanne Moreau, Monica Vitti, and Marcello Mastroianni. A good story. Luscious gray scale, compelling camera movement, staging and blocking, capture of atmosphere. Black and White photography at its best. The artistry and skill of Gianni Di Venanzo as presented in this film cannot be overstated.

A quick call to them confirmed that even though the website is 2023 they are still open, looking for customers. A job for someone perhaps? And, they sold the La Brea site and the new buyers tore it down, so Mole escapes the wrath of Building Preservationists.

Google shows them as being at: 15148 Bledsoe St. Ste A Sylmar, Ca. 91342 (323) 851-0111 The expendables store on La Brea Ave. was torn down (sparking controversy), in 2014. This puts it just north of the 405/5 freeway junction (south of the 210frwy), at the Roxford exit Eastbound to San Fernando Rd. south, to Bledsoe, (West, a Right turn). (Page 481 in my 1997 Thomas Brothers Guide). I don't remember which side of the street, but I don't think you can miss them. Not as convenient as the old Sycamore address (a block east of La Brea), but much larger for enlarging inhouse manufacturing.

Hello, For what it is worth, I wholeheartedly agree with the Arri-16S and its variants. Heavy is relative, though. So, unless you are hiking up and down the ski slope and not using the ski lift, I don't think it matters. Three prime lenses, wide, medium and long with battery and cable are most definitely run and gun. I shot sports: football, basketball, baseball, and parades/marches (and more), with a 16SB, a 12-120 Ang. zoom, 400ft. mags, and the battery belt. It was the best we had... superior images to the TV station's Auricon Pro600, Frezzolini, or their Bell & Howell 70DR's. (My trainer would not let me operate those cameras until I could correctly and quickly thread them blindfolded). When the USS Nimitz was commissioned the CBS Network cameraman next to me was using an Ang. 24-240 zoom on his Frezzi camera. His was a tight head and shoulders shot while my 12-120 on a CP-16 was just a medium wide shot. (But I did have more headroom, LOL). The three Angenieux zooms 9.5-95, 12-120, or 24-240 will get you closer and closer as you require. Pick the one you need. Maine is both windier and colder than than it was at an East Carolina College football game on their stadium roof, but that was where I learned the 16B's battery needs warmth to run properly. So, a jacket and handwarmer or two wrapped around the battery on the tripod would be a starting point for solving that little problem. Spring wound just seems to me courting disaster as the film stops at the one moment you don't want it to. Whatever setup you choose, set aside some time to work with the lens zooming and follow-focusing so you are never out of focus no matter what the fstop. With practice it can be done, I promise. The 400ft. mags meant that a mag change at Halftime usually was good for the entire game with only one battery needed. Be sure each mag has its own torque motor... makes for quicker camera re-threading. 100ft. loads do-able? Yeah, sure. But how much action will you be missing while changing film? Another thing to consider: light leaks at head and tail of film, and shorter run time with camera running at 30fps. Truly a lot of work. Nose to the grindstone labor. And less image time. Because they are not zooms, (or maybe they aren't that good?), no one has mentioned the once popular Century Precision Tele-Athenars Telephoto Prime lenses used on many surfing movies. One last comment: An unmentioned real drawback to the Canon Scoopic is that to set the aperture, one must rotate a knob on the front upper corner of the camera; not rotate the aperture around the lens barrel as is normal on almost all other motion picture lens/camera combinations. Much easier to alter the setting while picking up/setting down the camera. When my station bought two Scoopics when they first appeared, I set aside my personally owned B&H 70 and thrilled to reflex viewing (too bad it wasn't 9.5 to 95). But that was then and this is now and all the cameras I once used are all old or dead, but, ARRI 16S's are the most robust and easy to use, considering the expense of Eclairs, Aaton's and ARRI SR's and associated repair problems today. The non-orientable finder is the biggest downside (not 16x9 frame either), and digital offers huge advantages, so limiting it to less expensive 16mm cameras/lenses the Arri 16S would be a workable choice for a film camera. (It is a pin registered camera). But that is my opinion, and I'm glad I don't have to make that choice today, because angst aside I would probably have to choose digital.

Adrian, The 5008 is not a sync-sound camera. The motor speed may fluctuate causing loss of sync during shot. I don't believe the later crystal sync models solved the motor drift problem either. My "twin towers" approach is not the only way to solve the very real problem of body flexing while follow focusing. You might want to reach out to the news crew that aired a news segment filmed entirely on Super-8 (about Super 8), to determine what, if any, sync problems they had. Other than that, rigging a mattebox and follow focus can be done, but not completely from "off the shelf" stuff. Best of luck with the project.

Adrian, I had a major brain fade. The "twin towers" I describe allowed room for all the camera controls and had fingers/nubs that pressed against the flat points on both sides to prevent flexing. I used a hand-carved "Magic Rub" eraser to press the on-switch bottom of hand grip and a cable release on front trigger for start and stop. I'm sure there is a more professional way to do this. The flex point is where the grip casting meets the camera body at the bottom. My apologies for any confusion caused.

Hello, You don't mention what type of lenses -- Super 8 or 16/35mm -- you will be mounting. Lens size appears to mandate a "custom" mattebox/follow focus set-up. Do you require "Quick Release?" Again, custom design. Done right you could just leave it mounted and hand hold without breaking it down. Semi permanent rig. Custom "GO" bag or box. As designed/commonly used, tripod/handheld, the camera presents no problems except for angling the lens at subject. (With the head pointed earthward). The hidden problem is torque applied while follow focusing will almost certainly twist the body because it is not solid enough to resist it. (Base -- tripod mount area really flimsy). To test: lock it to tripod, grip top and gently move hand). (Not an Arri-S or CP-16R). Hence the need for "twin towers" aft of lens mount beside focal plane line. Integrated with 15mm rods base. The on/off -- run switch is in the hand grip area.... I had a remote switch but don't remember whether it worked only on my Canon Super 8, or both cameras. Without battery, the grip is sloppy/messy; and because of the viewfinder other batts won't fit back there. Two Hundred Foot Mag prevents battery shelf on top of camera. So cable to off-camera batt from grip. Maybe. Sorry if this reply seems too long, but my rig as described in previous post worked nicely. It has since occurred to me that maybe the machinist was a couple of seconds or minutes off in alignment of angled block and rods but not so one would notice just by looking at it, and that caused the body to twist. So..... maybe your mileage will vary. One last thing, a 5008-S is not a quiet camera. "Can't forget the Soundman." My advice, since you are in L.A. is check in with Panavision. If like Clairmont was, they're too busy, they may know someone who is good enough and not quite as busy, and point out other pitfalls not so obvious. Just some musings from an "old geezer." Best of luck with your project.

Adrian, There are a couple of problems, but fashioning a base plate and follow focus rig for your 5008 can be done. Back in the day, (80's, first Batman movie era). someone at Clairmont Camera sent me to a machinist on either Culver Blvd. or Jefferson Blvd. east of Sepulveda. Clairmont would have done it but showing me some Cadillac- fin sized silver bullets they had just made and indicating tons of other stuff still to be made, they begged off. This guy took some time but what he did really worked. I can't remember his name but maybe the guy from Clairmont (if still alive), will recognize those fins and my request and respond. If memory serves I had the 6 to 66 zoom. A geared ring was made for the zoom and a rectangular plate (3/8"(?), aluminum, to which posts (1" wide), were attached allowed my Chrozeil 4x4 mattebox and follow focus to work very well (rods were under lens, not along the side). Angled blocks secured the camera to the plate to permit the base and eyepiece to point in the same level direction. (Sorry I don't remember the exact dimensions... strong but not overkill). The one NECESSARY correction was the addition of twin towers (just behind the lens mount along the sides), about the focal plane area that prevented the BODY from deviating/flexing when following focus. Torque here is tractor tough. The body is very flimsy, especially at its base, and oddly angled so those two problems must be solved. Panavision made some (model 4008), Super 8 rigs for "Flatliners" (80's) but I don't know if the rods were 15mm. Torn perfs were never a problem, but the first (and only time!!!), I left the battery on charge for too long the battery exploded and replacement cost was much more than the camera cost me. OOOOOOOOWWW!!! LOL. I hope this will help.

Larry, You may want to consider Cardellini Clamps combined with Matthews' Studio Equipment gobo heads and both long and short arms. With the correct adaptors you can place microphones where needed and avoid the hassles stands cause occasionally. (If memory serves, Cardellini was a San Francisco Grip so should be easy to find in your area). Mathillini's are cheaper knock-offs licensed from Cardellini--- but I always preferred the Card's to Math's but your choice. Using the clamps with small blocks of wood against Leather next to location surfaces goes a long way toward preventing damage to property. The easiest, cheapest way to acquire leather is to scour Apartment trash dump sites and cut sofas and plush chairs for all the leather you can possibly use. (Twice a week near where I used to live a guy rides his bicycle around several of these sites and cuts all sofas and chairs, of every fabric style for the loose change, collecting a fair sum of bills and change, so no need to feel bashful about cutting them for your needs). Any of the above mentioned lights if they have somewhere to mount a 5/8" spud can be used with this combination for more discreet working in tandem with regular stands. Mole Richardson makes furniture clamps of varying sizes with 5/8" spuds to fit where Cardellinis may not do so well. (Think wider). Lastly, two things: you can always make a light from coffee cans, soup cans (single lights), or aluminum strips (found at hardware stores for larger multi-lamp setup). Hanover Frost Gel has proven to be a useful item providing a lovely light. Grid Cloth (in varying strengths), is quite nice as well. BONUS: Dimmers for LED (and/or Tungsten), lights are very handy to have also. Hopefully this helps.

Hello, Mascelli's Cine Workbook from late 60's and early 70's had an explanation that went like this: 4% (Black) x 88% (White), then take the square root of that answer to get 18%. 4x88=352 Square root of 352=18.766166 I don't remember the reason for rounding down. (Latitude?) If I still had the workbook I would give his explanation. 4%= still some detail in black; 88%= some detail in white, maybe? Based on seven stops of exposure. Three above and three below middle. As for middle gray... there are some gorgeous face/skin tones to be found around middle gray. Sure some women were filmed a little hotter than mid-gray but others were stunning at or just below. Check out the B&W work of Ernest Haller, Joe MacDonald, Oswald Morris, James Wong Howe, Lucian Ballard, Phil Lathrop, Loyal Griggs, Burnett Guffey, Ernest Lazlo, Robert Burks, Charles Clarke, Joseph Ruttenberg, Robert Surtees, Russel Metty, Stanley Cortez, Joseph August, Lee Garmes, Gaetano Gaudio, George Barnes, Conrad Hall, Russell Harlan, Robert Krasker, Sven Nykvist, Greg Toland, and the only man to win an Academy Award for cinematography without even being nominated: Hal Mohr. Looking back over your post I've realized you may be more interested in shooting color not B&W. Sorry. With 18% gray you help to establish color balance, and a good relationship between light and dark tones all within the working limits of your equipment, set colors, costumes, and make-up etc. With the greater latitude of digital, 15-17 stops, 18% presents a challenge because the above formula doesn't work. And yet 18% persists. For those with an interest of the earliest days of Lighting, with photography as medium for testing, check out "Light and Shade" by M. Luckiesh, a research engineer for the newly created General Electric Corp. The book is more than 100yrs. old and I don't know about the quality of the reprints (expired copyrights). Since there was no one to ask for help, he had to experiment... test, test, test. He also wrote "Color and its Applications" with lots of color chips. Experiments and thoughts from the pioneering days of the 'modern era.'

Hello, Possibly: "Beam Projector." Think miniature WWII searchlight. (8"-12" Diameter) Originally used in stage "Theatre." Casts a straight and narrow beam for longer distances than "fresnel" or "LekoLite." I haven't seen or used one since 1969-1970 so my memory of their "innards" may be faulty. Check an old, old Mole-Richardson catalog. If you time a visit to a night-time movie premier along Hollywood Blvd. you should see the resemblance.

Hello, I'm not sure why your question resonated with me, but a quick check of imdb.com showed a digital output with no further tech details. Not having seen Hampstead, only the trailer (on imdb), several movies spring quickly to mind: Something's Gotta Give As Good As It Gets Hanna and Her Sisters Vicki Christina Barcelona Midnight In Paris. All the above share (in my mind), the qualities you highlight and the trailer indicates. A London library may have back issues of British Cinematographer Magazine in which to research Hampstead; and if there isn't that info, perhaps a letter/email to the BSC or DP Felix Wiederman will help. Thanks for pointing out Hampstead. I will check it out in the upcoming days. the BSC and DP Felix Wiedermann, BSC should be close by for further

In the legendary film "The Man Who Shot Liberty Valance" there is the distracting intercutting of standard B&W with Infrared footage during the scene in which John Wayne burns down his home. Wayne's shirt which is dark switches to near white depending on the camera angle. I too saw "Odds against Tomorrow" recently but thought that I was seeing a very strong Orange or Medium Red Filter. There is a scene, a wide shot, outside of the town they converge on with the grass field in the upper right part of the frame showing as white leading me to think a heavy Green filter was used on an overcast day. But, I wasn't completely convinced those were the correct solutions; Infrared, though, makes sense, and highly unusual choices in a really good movie. I thoroughly enjoyed "Odds against Tomorrow." Thanks for the insight on a nagging back of my mind 'What did they do there?'

Around the time "Tricky Dick" was having 'Watergate' problems, I had to drive to the D. C. photo company that maintained the Network News film cameras to have one of ours looked at for a problem similar to yours. Now your camera may not have this particular problem, but there is a spring (a steel wire about 1 1/2 inches long with loop in the middle), that maintains pressure on the pressure plate and over time (and use), weakens. If a loop is set wrong the camera rattles when the power is applied; enough so that your first reaction usually would be to shut it down and rethread. But if memory serves, the weak spring does not cause noise but the film dances like a child keeping a secret from its parent. As a Tech Tip, I was taught that no matter what was happening around me and how much of the action I was missing to ALWAYS roll the inching knob a few turns and if no rattle to apply a short burst of power to confirm proper loop, then close the door and roll off some more to clear the light leaked head. If you didn't hear a rattle (as opposed to quiet ticking), while filming chances are good something other than improper loop is the cause. Replacing that spring is a simple task, but I don't know if it is still available or how much it costs.

There is the argument (since the 1960's), that TRI-X still film is actually an ASA/ISO 200 film and rating it at 400 is underexposing it. As late as 2013 I knew a very respected Photo teacher (with extensive Military and Defense Industry Photo experience), who still argued this position. Virtually any B&W negative film can be processed as Reversal film, but... that is not a rigid one method and done process. Each film requires it's own 'tweaks' and 'massages' that vary greatly from each other. Some films don't respond well to this alteration. To find out why Kodak makes their recommendation, why not ask them? They are certainly in a position to know.

The Glass Web (1953) Edward G. Robinson, John Forsythe, and Marcia Henderson. A who-dun-it, in Hollywood, where an actress working a weekly murder mystery LIVE-TV show is herself murdered. A show producer, a writer, and her ex-husband are involved.

And the title is?

Hollywoodland (2006) Murder or Suicide? The death of George Reeves, the actor who played "Superman."

Another for the List: "The Disaster Artist" (2018)

Victor, I was taught to lick the emulsion side and stick it together after having given the film just enough curl for anyone to find it later (in the dark). Then bag it, can it, tape it, and label it. If the tape from the head of the roll is still available and can be found in the dark (but preferably before going dark), then use that. Curl it back on itself just a little so it can be found quickly in the dark. You won't be wasting any film because if it is going into any camera later, the head (the part you just licked/taped), will be exposed to light while threading a MoPic camera or loading a still camera. When using a changing bag, you can't lick it, so tape it. No tape, bag it tightly. If when opening a short end you find residue just break it behind the mess and carry on. If you can't find plastic tape, first-aid adhesive tape of appropriate size will work. Plan ahead and have either available before going dark (room or bag). Hope this helps.

With 'click stops' if you want a hair more or a hair less than the marked aperture, it many times wants to roll forward or backward into the 'click stop' denying you full use of the exposure range. Harder and slower to set precisely.