nathan snyder

Jim, Interesting. I will double check with my tire shop but I think that split rim dilema occurs at sustained high speeds faster than the 5miles an hour top speed I will be pushing this dolly. Also these wheels have innertubes and are not subject to the strains of the tubless split rim wheels. I did not pay nearly what I think the dolly is worth. I paid just shy of a grand (including shipping) and I will have to alot of work tuning the hydraulics up myself which I realize most folks dont do themsleves. But I want this dolly to perform as close to as it did when it was new as possible. So far I think I need to replace six O rings an rebuild the pump and possibly replace the accumulator (which stores the built up hydraulic pressure from the pump so the acuators or pistons can run silently for sound shots). Paul, I still think the Fearless is the better dolly, but this dolly weighs less (almost half as much as the fearless) has pneumatic wheels so it can runs relatively smooth on imperfect surfaces like asphalt, and fits through a 3 foot doorway. But if I were in a big studio with a perfectly flat floor I would put any camera on the Fearless before the McAllister. Hydraulics are cool but manual gears are better.

Hi Marc, Good to hear from you. I sent you an email through cinematography.com because I have lost your email addy. I was then block by your filter. I tried to comply with the filter requests to send you the email but neither the text image or the audio file would come up. Mail me when you get a chance- nathan@owyheesound.com

So I purchased that McAllister dolly that was on ebay a couple of weeks ago. Among other repairs I am trying to track down a couple of wheels (rims and tires). There are two wheels that don't belong on the dolly. They are not the right size and prevent the dolly from rolling or turning freely. I have already called Ray Wolf at Pyramid Films (who I gues owns Bardwell McAllister) and he tells me that the last time he replaced wheels on one of these dollys he used Cessna wheels. So, I called a couple of local aircraft parts suppliers, but they were no help. I called a friend of mine who flys and he is looking into it for me but he does not seem hopeful because the cessna wheels I am looking for are a 30 or 40 year old design. I also called Richard Bennet at Cinema Engineering, because he gave me some great ideas about my Fearless dolly. He told me that he remembers seeing a pile of wheels for the McAllister dolly somewhere but he could not remember where. The tires are a GoodYear smooth tire with an innertube. They are 12 inches in diameter and just over three inches wide. The marks on one of the tires says "3.4/ 3-007." and the Rims are split (two sides held together with bolts). Here is a quick photo I took when I was cheking the dolly after I recieved shipment. Notice the two tires that have tread, they are the ones I want to replace. Any help would be greatly appreciated.

I recomend the actual old news camera- an auricon, with a crapy curved field of view lens like a som bethiot zoom (and parallel viewfinder with parallax adjustment) and a colored filter for the lens, like a dark blue filter. I used this exact combination to get this look: http://owyheesound.com/prospector_pete_no2_raw.wmv I paid more for the film and telecine for this bit of image and sound than I did for the camera package. The audio, BTW, is recorded as an optical track on the negative right in the camera. I find the auricon pro-600 teddious to work with but worth the effort if you are looking fo an authentic vintage look and sound.

Andy, I feel your pain. The very first time I shot motion picture was with a K-3 and I had the very same symptom. http://owyheesound.com/web_hosted_cinema/k...restle%20dsl.rm http://owyheesound.com/owyheesound_product...he_trestle.html However, I don't know if we have the same problem. I have only recently figured out what the problem was with my K-3... a while ago I bought a K-1 on a lark and discovered, besides other things, that it had a smallplastic doohicky that elevated the film off of the supply reel before being taken up by the main sproket. This doohicky clips anto the post that is inforn of the main sproket. With out this doohicky the main sproket pulls more stronlgy on the perf side of the film since the main sproket has teeth only on one side. As a result it drags the film towards the inners of the body causing the loop to shorten which causes the film to pull the pressure plate away from the gate and results in the image I have shown. If you want to see if your camera suffers from the smae problem load your camera with dummy film and run it with the camer door open and see what happens. I have taken this plastic doohicky from the K-1 and inserted it into the K-3 and I have not had troubles with my K-3 since. I just shot a roll on Christmas afternoon with out incendent. BTW your images look good otherwise.

This may be a strange kind of analogy but I think of treating film stock like a candy m&m. If you leave an m&m out in a candy dish for a few weeks or maybe even a month or two you would still eat it and probably wouldn't even know that it was not fresh out of the bag. If that candy sat out for several months or even a year, I guess you could still eat it but the overall quality of the candy would not be as good. It would be noticeably stale. You would still be able to tell it was an m&m when you put it in your mouth but it would not be nearly as good as a fresh one. If you found an old m&m that had been laying around for a few years you could probably identify it as candy but it would not be much fun to eat, unless your into that sort of thing. You all should know that I have never been brave enough to eat a 1year+ old m&m. I have however, shot plusX that was six years old. It lost a little bit of the dynamic range and was grainier than fresh film but it worked for what I needed if for, but I would not try to use it with fresh stock cause it would not match.

Hey Paul, It sounds like you are using the video tap to create an off-line edit so you can generate an edit decision list without an work print or telecine. Is that right?

Hi Michael, The most economic way I know to do this involves synchronizing the audio playback to the camera. I believe that the 435 generates a SMPTE code. This signal can be used control the playback speed of some audio applications like pro-tools (for mac) or vegas (for windows). If your playback tech has a laptop loaded with Sony's vegas he/she will need two things to synchronize the audio playback to the spped of the camera. First a usb midi device. These can cost as little as $40 from any professional audio equipment retailer like hhtp://sweetwater.com or even http://guitarcenter.com Second a SMPTE-MTC conveter. I havn't seen one of these new for a while but I bought off ebay a couple of years ago for $20. The brand of the one I use is Midiman and the model is syncman SMPTE/Song Pointer Snyc Box. The camera plugs into the syncman box, the syncman box plugs into the usb midi interface, and the midi interface is plugged into a laptop, or whatever computer you use durring production for audio playback. The Vegas software has a button on the main console that needs to be selected. With the audio file loaded into the timeline it will play as soon as the camera roles, and it will play at the speed the camera is running at. I have even used the sncman to do the same thing with older camera that only output an old pilotone signal.

Brian, This is awesome! Really very cool. Thanks for posting. I cant wait to show these stills to my friend who is actually restoring an old technicolor camera. I have an idea for you for doing live action... simply gang the drive shaft of three bolexes. Kind of like this: http://www.sci.fi/~animato/3d/3d2.html You have probably already thought of that but I propose that you set all three of them up in a row side by side, and set the two on the out side on some sort of pivot so they turn inward for close focus and outward (parrallel to the center camera) for infinite focus. This wold be kind of like the parallax adjustment on old parrallel view finders on bolexes, auricons, and mitchells. What ever was focused on would have sharp color focus but there would be misalignments of things out side of the depth of field. I actually think this would only lend to the charm of this format, kind of like using anamorphic lenses were the stuff outside of the depth of field is either extra skinny(behind the subject in focus) or extra fat (infront of the subject in focus). Just an idea. Again, really good stuff. nathan snyder

I have a Telex 2230N which is the five blade (FILM CHAIN) version of the projector you are looking at. It is easy on films like a Graflex but the presure plate is not adjustable like on a graflex. The others to consider are the variety of Bell and Howell projectors that are available. I have many of them but my favorite is the B & H 1552, because it has and easy load, realiable movement and a great body design. I realize this last feature is not important to projection but, well I like it anyway. The graflex is a realy good projector. Infact it is the projector that the palmer company chose to conver to a dual system interlock projector for serious post production work. If your interested I have a page sort of on the topic: http://owyheesound.com/owyheesound_product..._projector.html

I just looked at the other auction for the blimp. The motor with that blimp is the very same one you got except it's power supply run on US current 120VAC 60Hz. If you had a step down transfomer with a 42V output you might get your motor to work, but many of those european motors are 3phase, so you may still be out o luck unless you get a special capacitor to make up the missing phase leg. And even then you would be using a sync frequency faster than the 50Hz it requires. You would be using 60Hz so the motor would drive the camera faster than 25fps. If I were you I would go for he blimp. I have one and love it. But you need a huge support head underneath it. I use a mitchell friction head or a worrall geared head. Here is a short film I shot with an arri-s in a blimp. Except I used a Tobin crystal sync motor instead of the AC sync motor: http://owyheesound.com/page_and_reed.wmv And here are a few more details about the arri-s blimp: http://owyheesound.com/owyheesound_instruc...x-16_blimp.html

That motor is a AC synchronous blimp motor to be used with the arri-s blimp and special power supply, probably 42volts. Even if it came with the powersupply, which it does not, it would still require 240VAC 50Hz to run. And even then it would be a synch motor it the modern term. But it could be used with a pilotone sync system, with a nagra, a resolver and an old dubber.

Here are a few photos from the feature I shot in June. http://smallpondfilms.org/discus/messages/...html?1151201853 You cn see that I used the fearless and my worrall. If you look, we only had one seat mounted on the fearless, which the camera op used most of the time, but we also ran all the sound rig to the fearless and had a headphone distrobution amp mounted right up by the camera on the worrall. This way the boom op, sound recorder and director could all hear what was being recorded. And finally you can see that there is a high deff video monitor mounted where the boom seat normally goes. There were even some small kinoflos mounted up by the camera for eyelights. They, the camera and the audio equipment were powered by some large 12V storage batteries that fearless had more than enough room for, so there were no cables to slow set-up changes. The camera could be repositioned almost as easily as if it were hand held. I think the fearless is a great dolly.

Hi Paul, The fearless (my fearless anyway) is 35" wide. Most commercial building doors, where I am from, are 36" wide. However, the doors stops encroach on this a few fractions of on inch often making passage impossible. Then I get a grip handy with construction to remove the door stops. The stops have to be put back on, the holes have to e patched and then the touch up paint is applied. In the face of making a movie it is really a very small thing. However, the last shoot I worked on I asked the producers for a studio. I made the case that building sets and shooting in one location would be time and so cost effective. Turns out I was right. BTW, when I say studio I don't mean a real facility, I mean a 30Ksqft warehouse with power (enough to tie-in my distro boxes) and running water (for make-up, craft services, and toilet breaks) The nice thing about all old hollywood gear like mitchell cameras, worrall heads, and fearless dollies is that any part can be taken off and taken to any machinist worth his wieght is salt and have a new unworn copy made. Old gear is the best for low budget productions because you don't need a specialist tech. You do have to have a basic understanding of engineering, but only very basic. Infact some of the machining is so simple I am thinking about buying myself an old milling table and do some of the less precie cutting myself. I did disassemble all the parts except the springs and the connecting boom gearbox. A few striped locking screw were the biggest probem I faced besides the decades of crud buildup. Cleaning off the old grease and applying fresh lube did wonders for all the movement. I used a fairly strong acid to clean the rust and corrosion off. I have only repainted a few part with wrinkle paint. Wrinkle paint is a lot of work to apply. All the other parts have been temporarily painted with a flat black acrylic, well except the chrome parts and the aluminum deck plates. My worrall is pretty tight. Small adjustment keep it that way. Though I suspect I will eventually have to relap the tilt gears.

Worrals are heafty but I would not trust much else underneath a blimped Mitchell. I have an old mitchel friction head that will take the wieght but the top heavy wieght of the camera would make for tilts that would require a couple of grips to hold onto the thing. I like my worrall so much I even put my worrall underneath small video cameras. I shot a feature this past June with a Pannasonic HVX-200 that I put on a high hat and ontop of the worral which was inturn mounted on a Fearless dolly. I replaced on the of the dollies seat mounts with a stand for a high deff video monitor. It was a great setup for working in a studio. Changing setups was lighting fast. As far as dollies go... I have an old Fearless panoram that I like quite a bit, in some ways more than the Fischer dolly. I have serviced mine so that it is smoooooth. Again it requires a a few grips to run it but after the choreography is worked out it can be a very good tool. Here are some details about my fearless: http://owyheesound.com/owyheesound_instruc...oram_dolly.html And if you are interested in getting a Mitchell serviced I would recomend Richard Bennet: http://www.cinemaengineering.com/ Richard has always been very helpful to me on the phone and has made me a few pretty good deals. Last I heard he still has at least one BNCR for sale at a great price.

I have a Mitchell BNC that was converted to a BNCR and it is a great camera. Here it is: http://owyheesound.com/owyheesound_instruc..._35mm_bncr.html Yes it is heavy, and it is not a camera that single person cn operate. But who is going to, or even can, make a film by themselves? Have a few more grips around is not a bad thing. Besides, when I shoot a project with my Mitchell camera I have not problem getting Volunteeres from the media debt. from the local universities. Getting a larger crew is a small inconvienience compared to the cost savings and potential high quality of shooting with a BNCR, especially since I added the video tap to it. I also have and use an arri II which I like also, even have a 120s blimp for it. The arri has it's place but it could never replace my Mitchell.

I have a schematic for the Cinema Products CRA-6 motor. The schematic does say 16-18volts for the supply voltage. I am suprised you don't get a sync alarm running them a 12volts. If you have no use for it I would be interested in purchasing it from you.

I have a arri-s and a IIC. The IIC is a bit louder. Remember that the 4perf 35mm camera moves four times as much film twice as fast as a 16mm camera. As a result there is bound to be more noise. I have been reorganizing my work space but I will watchout for my sound level meter. If I find it soon I will measure both cameras and post the results. Also, are you talking about an arri-s with or without the 400ft mag. That mag torque motor mades a huge racket! By the way I recently made the jump from 16mm to 35mm and don't regret it a bit, especially when I project prints at my local indie theater. Man what a difference!

Well, the motor does not run. But, I have finally come up with the schematics for the CRA-4 and CRA-6A. So, I am going to get the motor repaired. If anyone ever needs a copy of the schematics just let me know.

I have a fastax 16mm. Have not yet shot with it. I have got some good advice from Martin Hill though. He has shot with the Fastax 16mm. I am sure he can give some general info about the 35mm. http://martinhill.com Call him during busness hours. He is a great resource for info and equipment, and very generous with his time.

Thanks Nick! There is not any make, model or serial number anywhere on this motor. I have taken the sleave (motor housing) off the motor and still have found nothing. Does anyone know a way to properly identify this motor?

Thanks Patrick!

I just received what was described as a Cinema Products Crystal Sync motor in the mail. I won it on ebay. Here is the auction listing: http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewI...AMEWN%3AIT&rd=1 Can anyone help me with the voltage requirments and which of the three pins to apply the voltage to? Here is a photo: http://owyheesound.com/hotlink/cp_motor_power_INPUT.jpg I generically labled the pins for easy reference. I would like to use this motor to finish this ( http://thislovelymachine.com/clips.htm ) prodution. Those clips are using a arri variable speed motor that is to "wild" to make referrence audio recordings for ADR. I am using a Mitchell BNCR for the sound stage shots but I have lots of tricky hand held shots that only my Arri II will work for. So I need to get this crystal motor running. Any help would be appreciated. Nathan Snyder

I recently came by what was described to me as a arri III 400' magazine. It looks like my arri II mags and it fits on my IIB fine. No problems. I havn't done a film test yet but it look pretty light tight. However, The take-up spool is a little unusual to me. It is what I have seen described as a "collapsable core." It is fixed in place and will not come out with using screw drivers or alan wrenches. I feel a bit like a novice asking but how are these cores supposed to work? I see how to load film onto them, and how the core expands when the film is locked into place with the little lever, and how when the lever is released the core shrinks in size allowing the exposed film to be taken off of the core. But this can't be how the lab want to get a negative is it? With out a core? Could some one let me know what the procedure is with these things? Thanks much.

I just got a set of schematics for the 120s blimp. They have some details about the pilotone output of the IIC camera. The blimp connects to the camera through the tuchel (din) plug. It does so to relay the pilotone signal out to a tape recorder, and to connect the blimps power supply to the buckle switch (film tension switch) in the camera. It does the latter because blimped camera motors derive their power from the blimp itself, so the buckle switch, in this case, not only controls the motor but also the other blimp systems. It is kind of handy design feature. If you are facing the back of the camera looking at the tuchel port there are 6 pin conections. Starting from the center pin (#6) we go to the bottom left pin (#5) and work our way around, counter clock wise, to the bottom right pin (#1). I tried to upload a diagram but could not get it to work:( Pins #4 and #6 go to the buckel switch. So for pilotone purposes you can ignore these. That still leaves 1, 2, 3, and 5. The schematics I have do not show any specifics about the camera wirring for pilotone but they do show that the cable that comes from the tape recorder has a jumper accross pins 4 and 5. So, this leaves 1, 2, and 3. I have recently purchased another camera. It hasn't arrived yet, I know very little about it's condition, or if it even has the pilotone out. If it does I will open it up and figure this out.