Mark Dunn

A camera original should be emulsion out, just as it went through the camera. Rewind it.

Nothing you can do will prevent a reflection like this when you're looking straight into a light. A prime with fewer elements, or a more expensive zoom, might reduce it or give it a better shape but there will always be something there.

Nikon to Bolex is no problem either because the Nikon flange focal depth is so much greater so there's room for a conical adapter. I've even got one in my drawer for C-mount.

A bit like asking a DP if he would like to sell one of his eyes, I suppose.

Listening to Mr. Irwin, I wonder if requirement no. 1 is 'don't wish you were a DP too often'.

There'a a story about Kubrick using the studio camera handheld, supported by many crew, for the shot of the astronauts descending into the TMA-1 excavation. That doesn't have to be true; its presumably unnecessary. Unless GP had all the handhelds- it would have been early '66.

If Marty Hart's piece is right, it's from May 1960, not '68.

A contact print should have the emulsion (dull) side facing the gate as you say. An optical print could conceivably be the other way round, but as Mr. Lewis says you can tell whether or not the action (and titles) are the right way round. If not, just do the double rewind as I suggested.

If it's at the beginning ('heads out'), you just need to rewind it twice, once with a twist and once without. The image should be right way up if you look at it above the spool (yours probably isn't, otherwise it would project)- it's then inverted going into the projector, and it's put the right way up again by the lens. You've somehow got the emulsion orientation wrong- whether it faces the lens or not depends on whether it's a camera original or a print. If it's a print the emulsion (the dull side) should probably face the gate, but it's not definitive, it depends on the kind of print.

Ditto that. www.walks.com Many are geared somewhat towards visitors but you learn a lot yourself as well. Only about a fiver.

The British Museum.

Haven't read it for decades and I'm just old enough to remember it going tabloid.

Just you wait for the Sunday Sun.

Tape across the can, not round the edge, for exposed film always seemed clear enough to me. The tape came off the can, went across the magazine (preferably over the latch) then back across the can.

>go's to show, you don;t knwo what you're talking about. CP is an alright camera. not worth >anything though. 300 bucks. lens is nice tho. Ditto. It's not on to queer someone's pitch, especially in Marketplace which is for selling. You might want to sell something sometime.

That's the best advice you can get anywhere.

"This isn't 'Mission Difficult, Mr. Markshaw, it's 'Mission Impossible'."

Just for the avoidance of doubt, once the factory seal is broken, don't refrigerate or freeze at all. Just keep cool.

A week is no time at all at room temperature. But now you have refrigerated it you will need to return it to room temperature gradually to avoid condensation. Next time don't bother for as short a period as a few weeks. Whatever you do now, don't put it in the freezer; the fresh stock was packed in dry conditions and any water vapour introduced since the seal was broken might be frozen onto the film. Defrosting then would be disastrous.

35 sound odd. Are you sure it's not 36?

The lens list is here http://cinematechnic.com/resources/arri_16bl.html The Schneider 10mm was pretty teriffic IIRC.

Hardly Channel 4 anymore. But BBC4 is pretty good nowadays. here's what happened: BBC 2 is like the old BBC1. BBC 4 is the old BBC 2. Just don't mention BBC 1.

You can watch it online for a limited time here http://www.channel4.com/programmes/the-story-of-film-an-odyssey/4od I don't know if this works outside the UK. No way of testing it really.

Crumbs. (That's English for 'wow', by the way.)

Well Mel Gibson has been supplying his own twang for years.