Jump to content

nathan snyder

Basic Member
  • Content Count

    75
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

0 Neutral

About nathan snyder

  • Rank

  • Birthday 07/09/1973

Profile Information

  • Occupation
    Other
  • Location
    Boise, Idaho USA

Contact Methods

  • Website URL
    http://owyheesound.com
  1. I own and have shot with Mitchell BNCR, Blimped Arri IIc and a few different Soviet era cameras. For hand held MOS go for the (un-blimped) Arri. I know tat Hammer Films preferred the blimped Arri to the blimped Mitchell back in the day but I can not figure out why. For everything else Mitchell BNCR all the way. It is heavy but it is fun to work with a crew who takes care of the great old camera. I will confess that there is an elegance to the Arri, especially in the full blimp system (which is hard to find all the parts for anymore), and the Mitchell does look like some kind of giant industrial age steam locomotive, but it is a work horse with reliable performance and good user interface (big easy to use view finder and good follow focus). The Soviet cameras are cool and work good when you get a good one and that has not been beat up. Whenever I go back packing it is always a toss up whether I take my Bolex or my Krasnogorsk, it is hard to pick I love them both. But in my experience all Soviet cameras (which is also seen in the still cameras even the medium format cameras) just don't have the same durability or precision construction as the Arri and Mitchell cameras. Just my two cents...
  2. Charles and Adam, Thank you both for your comments. Normally I am very meticulous about details on my lab instruction form. When working on paid gigs I even photocopy my instruction forms and the labels on the cans just to cover my butt. This time I was not so careful because it was only 9 little carts with normal processing and I have never had a problem with any lab before, including alphacine. Adam, thanks for the heads up about the move. That kind of puts things in perspective and made me a little more charitable when i called back today. So, when I called back I asked Jean if she would look up the purchase of the film in their records to see if the cartridges where purchased with prepaid shipping. They were, so long story short I do not have to pay for processing twice. I just wish that this could have been done yesterday so I didn't have to be as frustrated as I have been. I have been thinking about how one of the obstacles I encounter to getting film students to shoot film for the the first time is their unfamiliarity with working with a lab. I think for someone who does not know how a lab works it can seem a bit mysterious and even intimidating. I guess for someone who has never done it before it would seem kind of weird to send your negatives, which you are not even sure if they have an image on them, to someone who does not know how hard you worked on your film, especially if it is your first film experience. I admit that that was how my first film making experience went, and I had even shot quite a bits with 35mm still cameras before I ever made a motion picture. It is interesting because I relayed these thoughts to a friend of mine who is an experienced film maker (he even shot a couple of imax films) and he responded saying that his experience with any lab has always been positive in the way that they have always help to finish the picture and to support the film makers vision. And that is the way that I know it can be, a good ab can help finish an image beyond what a cinematographer could do on his or her own and that is just the experience, along with good customer service, that I am looking for in a lab. In the end I will be going back to alphacine but I am a little hesitant and that saddens me. I think if I would have at least received an apology I would be much happier.
  3. ...at least they did a bad job regarding my last order's handling and customer service. Last Friday the 22nd of May, 2009 I sent 9 cartridges of super 8mm film to Alphacine for processing by USPS Priority mail. Each cartridge was placed back in its original box and taped up with a small bit of black gaff tape. Also, each box had the little prepaid sticker on it. On the lab instruction sheet I asked for a negative report. This morning Matt from Alphacine called with the neg report. I was unable to take the call so he left a message. He said the film looked fine with good exposures except for one roll that was half unexposed. He said it could have been rewound and salvaged but “…the people in the negative room left the lights on so it’s dark.” I am not even sure what this last bit implies. Before I could return calls this afternoon I get another call, and subsequently a message, from Heather at Alphacine who I assume is in billing because she wants to know how I intend to pay for the processing. I call Heather back immediately to clear up this misunderstanding. She tells me I owe $114 and some change and breaks it down for me after I ask what that amount is for. Then I explain that there must be some sort of mix up because I had prepaid processing. She said I did not because the cartridges were not even in their boxes that have the prepaid stickers, and she remembered clearly because she did not get much in that day. Then I described the box I shipped and how the contents where arranged and what the packing material was to help jog her memory but she said she could not remember the package. I assured her that I sent each cartridge in its box with a prepaid sticker on each box and then she flatly denied that I did any such thing. About this time I start thinking to my self about how the video camera is starting to replace the film camera and how much I lament that fact. But I am at such a loss on how to defend the use of film when getting it developed is left in the hands of people like this. I let Heather know that I will get a hold of the purchase receipt so we can clear this up, and she continues to insist that it is not a prepaid processing order. I ask her to please not be so definitive because I assure her that she will see that it is just as I say and that that is surely some sort of misunderstanding on her end. She is obstinate so I ask to talk to her manager. She says that her manager has just walked out the door, and that I can leave a message. I let her know that I will call back when I round up the receipt. The only problem with the receipt is that it is not in my possession because someone else on the production purchased the film. That could be where a part of Heather’s confusion lies. I even explained that fact to her before I got off the phone but she would not budge. Maybe the misunderstanding really is because she has some name mixed up but I don’t know how she is going to account for not taking the cartridges out of their boxes with the prepaid stickers right on them. I have been doing business with Alphacine since Forde was acquired by them. I have never had any trouble like this. Has anyone else had any bad experience with Alphacine? And does anyone have any suggestions for how I should handle this moving forward? Any comments are appreciated. Nathan Snyder Boise, Idaho 208-880-9090 http://owyheesound.com
  4. You know, I forgot about this post. Since about a year ago I have two complete sets of BNC mount Baltar lenses that I am doing nothing with. Does anybody have any ideas what to do with these lenses?
  5. There is an aerosol spray adhesive that you can get at art supply stores that works pretty good. Be sure to spray both the reflector and the board before you make contact. Doing this will insure good contact. I have used this method in a pinch to glue regular aluminum foil to foam core. It is a year later and I still haven't thrown those reflectors away because they actually work pretty good.
  6. I thought I would share with you all that I have a set of Cinepromars up for auction on ebay. I honestly hope some one buys them for 35mm and not video. They are a good set and I hate to sell them but they are jointly owned between me and a partner and I don't have the money to buy him out at present. Anyway, here the link: http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewI...E:IT&ih=003 They lenses need to sell quickly because payment is needed quickly. If you have any questions feel free to contact me directly. Nathan Snyder owyheesound Boise, Idaho 208-880-9090
  7. I have a documentary, DVD, called "Dr. Tellers Very Large Bomb" which is about the development of the nuclear bomb and the video show several shots of Mitchells being used to capture the explosions. But I always thought they were GC (Government Camera) and not NC (News Cameras). I guess there were a few NCs used by the military but since they actually had cameras made to spec for them directly by mithcell, I dont think they used many made for the private sector. But that is speculation on my part. BTW, I love mitchell cameras! I just wish I could use mine more.
  8. I got my DeVry (which was a Kodak interlock modification) 35mm interlock a year an a half ago (on ebay - I guess you missed that one, I did exercise the buy-it-now option as soon as I saw it, thanks to my friend Roman Growchowski in Virginia) I still have yet to use the mag track interlock feature, unlike my Graflex (which was a Palmer interlock modification) 16mm interlock which I have used a fair amount. The one thing I can recommend is not to use the mag track for the audio. Instead use the mag track as a controller for some other digital audio device. Simply by recording SMPTE code onto the mag track you can use a cheap decoder (as chaep as $15 on ebay) to control the playback speed of digital audio on your favorite sound or video editor on your computer. I have done it on my 16mm projector, and my 35mm projector, both using windows based PCs, and my friend Rich Roepnack in NewYork as done it with his Steinbeck editor and a Mac. It is frame accurate and allows for very complex multichannel sound high fidelity sound mixes with a first generation print, the best of both the sound and image worlds. I would like to say I am a little envious. I love getting a new/old piece of equipment to put into production. Good luck!
  9. You know Martin Hill has or had a couple of ultracam cameras and ultracam mount lenses (The ultracam mount BTW is similar to but not identical to the BNCR, it think that BNCR will go on an ultracam but ultracam lenses will not go on a BNCR mount or something like that, the FFD is the same on both though) I think he may also have either the prototype or the last production model left but I am not sure. I am pretty sure he ended up owning the ultracam name so he has the drawings and pile of parts gathering dust as we speak.
  10. I would like to fool around with one of those fiberglass blimps but I have to think they are not a quiet as the aluminum blimps. Here is a short film I shot with a 16S with the 400mag an torque motor: http://owyheesound.com/page_and_reed.wmv Please excuse the homemade quality of the video transfer. I never had a professional transfer done as I only intended it to be projected from a print. I used the blimp as it was originally designed to be used with the exception of the Tobin Crystal motor. I had to build a new wiring harness to pass through the blimp to the motor control box. With all of the controls on the outside I rarely had to open the blimp. It was less like blimped camera and more like a really big and heavy camera with all of the controls very accessible. With the very loud torque motor the camera is a bit quieter than a CP-16R. With out the 400 mag and motor the blimped camera is near silent. Similarly the 120s blimp is very quiet but incredibly heavy, however, the long lens extension and follow focus controls and zoom controls make up for the weight. Do the fiberglass blimps have the accessories like the 120?
  11. Hey Tim, I did listen to the file and no doubt that the noise reduction is amazing there is still the tell tail indicators of noise reduction having been used. I personally find those artifacts almost, and sometimes more, unsatisfactory than ADR. For example when the noise reduction is engaged it tends to sound more compressed, but more importantly the speech articulation frequencies (between 1.5Khz and 3Khz approx) are squished and the overall effect is a reduction of intelligibility. If you had layers of ambient sounds and lots of foley, and a bed of background music, I doubt anyone could tell the difference but if you just have the dialog, in a more realistic style of mixing, I think that most audiences, while maybe not being able to articulate it, would still know that something did not quit sound right. And George is right about the talent moving around, that will make a big difference, but not nearly as big a difference as if you have a moving camera shot. Try the test with an actor holding still and delivering lines and put the camera on a dolly and move it for the shot. The result will be an ever changing sound that no noise reduction algorithm can fix, because of the changing phase shift cause by the cameras changing proximity to the surrounding walls, not to mention any other acoustically reflective surfaces in the vicinity. John, I got the camera from a guy who purchased the camera at an auction in Sunnyvale California. After a friend of mine did some homework he discovered the camera was part of an estate sale of Boris Bookenowski. I am assuming he was collector because I later discovered that he had a large collection of BNC and BNCR even a few XR35 cameras, and several bnc and bncr mount lens sets, most of which I know were not in operable condition and were in a kind of collector pile rather than a operable assortment. The camera I have has had some modifications: it is a BNCR mount, has had at least one repainting (apparently done a while go because it is wrinkle paint, in the correct color, not like the modern repaint jobs done by some places I will not mention) It has the 80fps tachometer (which I suspect in not original because the little foam gasket that seals the space around the indicator and the body, was not quit installed properly) and has a high speed anamorphic gate. Oh, and he ground glass baffles where all removed. There is no apparent serial number anywhere on the outside of the body, and I didn't look for one when I had the thing disassembled. I have not had anything that I have shot with it telecined but the prints from the footage I have shot look very good on my DeVry projector. Well, as good as that old zoom lens could look, at least it is sharper than my old schneider cine xenons, about same color though.
  12. George, I think you are right about the sound of the arri being to complex to be able to use the pattern recognition noise reduction algorithms. Theoretically you could do several passes, one for each simple tone, but you still would have the problem of reflected sound from the camera which becomes many more times complex. I think Trevor alluded to this in his post about the proximity of the mic to the camera. I suppose if one were outdoors or in an anechoic room, and the microphone were sufficiently far enough away from the camera them maybe noise reduction would work without coloring the desired sound signal to much. BTW, I think my camera is about as loud as they get. It has doubtlessly had a hard life. When I got it was full of sand. No kidding. I did a complete tear-down and rebuild before I even turned the frame advance knob. I mean there was not a part of the camera that did not have sand in it, especially the gears. Runs good now though. I suppose if I lubed it up with some heavy grease I could bring the volume down a couple of decibels, but I think in the end an unblimped arri2 is a MOS camera.
  13. Hey Tim, I just passed through Portland last week. Anyway, you are right the 120s blimp is real heavy. With the long lens extension and camera I think it is heavier that a Mitchell BNCR. I recently lifted both cameras fully loaded and neither are light but the arri 2C blimped up in the 120s is a beast. As far as the technovision door goes... I love it. I have no reason to go back to the regular 2c door. The 2b door is really bad and the 2c door is a huge improvement but the technovision door makes everything much better. I think it is basically a converted Mitchell viewfinder system. It is just like MKII or a BNCR view finder. It has the two contrast viewing filters and zoom control (2X zoom on the Ground Glass) to enable precision focusing. Not to mention it provides a large and relatively bright image. The eyecup is just like the Mitchell and my camera ops can easily go between my Arri2 and my BNCR. Of course it helps that I have the anamorphic gate in my 2C so the viewing is the same between it an the BNCR. And when I get around to it it will be much easier to put a video tap on than a regular 2C door, lots of room in the viewfinder path.
  14. It took me a while, almost 2 years, but I found my sound level meter and finally made a short video for you all to check out how loud an Arri 2 really is.
  15. Hi Adrian, A 24V DC "mains" supply is relatively easy to come by if you are willing to use one that is not arriflex brand. You can simply hook up any 24V DC supply, with a good rectifier circuit, and has the ability supply equal or more amperage than the camera requires to run. You will have to fabricate or have fabricated a connector to connect the camera but that is all. By the way if you want to find a cheap device call it a Step Down Transformer (with a rectifier) rather that a Mains Unit. If you are willing to take this project on email me and I can help you with some sources.
×
×
  • Create New...