Mark Dunn

If it's not marked, just check the polarity of the good battery.

Oh dear. And my CIR splicer arrives today. Anyone got a 100' LOMO tank?

If I were in the market, I'd need a lot of persuasion not to go for the Beaulieu and be able to use just about any lens in the known Universe.

I'd say that the Pentacon/Leica comparison is a different argument. For stills, 35mm is better supported than rollfilm. It's the other way round with Super-8 and 16mm, at least if you stay on film. With movies a lot more happens between shooting and presentation than there is with stills. The Super-8 cartridge's built-in plastic pressure plate has always been a bit of a limiting factor, although you can now buy a precision metal replacement. But it costs as much as a couple of cheap Super-8 cameras.

Now that second-hand 16mm film handling kit is so cheap you might go that route. If you shoot reversal it's only about twice the price of Super-8 now. I got a Steenbeck, pic-sync and splicer for about GBP120 all-in (I already have a K-3) and will probably go the K40 route. The great thing about 16mm. is that you have a pro format to start with. The demise of process-paid Super-8 K40 removed a lot of the convenience of the format. Good luck.

If you're more curious, there are date code marks too. http://www.sabucat.com/?pg=datecode&z=1

Der....(that's English for Doh) you can only see the date codes on PROCESSED film. Excuse my brain.

If you're contcat printing there isn't really anywhere to put a mask and get it sharp. At college (crumbs, 24 years ago) we had an answer print hard-matted to 1.66, and that was done with a C-roll. And yes, we protected to 1.33; no booms in the rushes.

Andy, I emailed the chap recently and he only has the 33' tanks. Most of the ones on ebay are this model, meant for double-8, as with its leaders a spool of double-8 is 33' long.

Capt. Video, if you've ever used a spiral tank for stills, they're similar, just with a much bigger spiral, not motorised. The spiral is clear plastic so you can do the reversal re-exposure through it. There's lots of info out there which I won't repeat. Just do a Google.

Charlie Piech said it all. I looked at one for 16mm. but then my brain kicked in and told me not to. You can't possibly get decent consistency. Most of the film spends most of its time just sitting with a tiny bit of developer squeezed between it and the next turn of film. That developer is giong to exhaust very quickly. And the film which is in between spools is going through developer which is being agitated only by the movement of the film. It's not enough.

By the way, the Russian chap doesn't have the 100' LOMO tanks any more, unfortunately.

It really is quite easy to remove the auto-threading mechanism, and manual loading is a breeze. There are instructions on the K3 site. But don't do it if you're not slightly handy.

A belated thakns for the replies. I've had the baffle plate off, not much lube in evidence. I'll see what else I can get at.

The rebate is fogged as well which probably rules out the finder. That would only affect the gate. 4 frames is about half the length of the pressure plate, so it's happening at one end of it or the other. Very odd. Sorry, no help.

I don't know if the two are connected, but your gate is way over size. There shouldn't be image around the sprocket hole. Could this be allowing flare onto the film?

My K-3 slows down, sometimes to a stop, towards the end of its wind. It still runs true for about 20 seconds so is still useful. The problem doesn't manifest itself when running empty but there's no obvious binding of the film. Have I any chance of fixing it, or should I learn to stop worrying and love the Bomb?

Most super-8 cameras have beam-splitter viewfinders which absorb some light so you need to allow for that. T-stops refer to the effective f-stop taking into account any light loss in the lens- maybe a third of a stop for a zoom. (T2.5, f/2.2 for the Angenieux 12-120mm, for example). When you change lenses you need that number for consistent exposure from shot to shot. Typically an SLR with TTL metering makes that correction for you.

Frank Bruinsma http://www.super8.nl/english/e_index.htm is still processing EM-26 apparently, as well as Single-8, so perhaps he'd tell you the process.

I collected my pic-sync from an editing room (sorry, facilities house) Wardour St. last month. They've still got Ken Loach's 35mm. one.

I've looked at that Magnasync and the picture head is high up at the back. The pic-sync's is at the front and at the same height as the mag heads and just looks handier to use. The Magnasync looks like an add-on rather than an integrated design. I haven't used one, though. Also, pic-syncs go for much less in the UK than that Magnasync is making. As I said, I paid £1 for mine, and £75 for a Steenbeck.

As to the BBC, they don't cut much on film any more as far as I know, and the pic-syncs are made here. Still, I reckon if they'd been an American invention, the BBC would still have bought them, as no doubt they bought Moviolas before they had Steenbecks. They're that useful. I don't expect cutting equipment crosses the pond very often nowadays; it's a bit heavy.

Bearcub: you can get 35mm. Moviolas and pic-syncs. Watch ebay, or try the various dealers. I do know of one non-motorised 35mm pic-sync available in London, but shouldn't really advertise it here. If you're really interested contact me off-board.

EM-26 was the super-8 Ektachrome 160 process. Kodak ditched it a few years ago; I had to send a cartridge of E160G, bought in 1996, to Rocky Mountain Labs in 2001. It doesn't sound right for Single-8.

It's here http://www.theasc.com/magazine/dec05/kingkong/page3.html#

The pic-sync is motorised with a handwheel for inching. Each mag head has centre and edge tracks and the fourth mag track disengages for searching. You set it up on a bench with vertical rewinds like these http://www.acmade.co.uk/Accessories.html and let the film and mag drop into cotton-lined bins. They can hold a couple of shots without your having to rewind onto spools. I haven't seen an American version except for one Magnasync which wasn't as neat, more like a gang synchroniser with a viewer bolted on. It's gentler on film than a Moviola.

There seem to be plenty available second-hand here in 16mm but I could get my hands on a non-motorised 35mm. version. They're heavy, though, probably about 35 lbs. About $12000 new, though.

My pic-sync seems to be a very recent one; it looks quite new, and it's grey, not blue as they were 20-odd years ago or lime green before that. The screen is excellent, more even than my ST-1600, very sharp, and you get a very decent digital photograph straight off it.

You can still buy one from the man who bought up Acmade's stock and tools, but they're over 6 grand. I'd be rather surprised if they sold many.

Incidentally, if you've got a CIR splicer you've finished with, I'd be interested.

More power to you. Although you'll need a ton of money even to make a short film, the usual advice is that computer editing isn't cheaper if you're just having a few prints. There's nothing to beat getting your hands on the stuff, actually being able to see your images.

I haven't edited since film school, so don't quote me, but I reckon flatbeds are actually quite inconvenient for fine cutting and working with mag film. I'd want to use a pic-sync as well for that ( http://www.acmade.co.uk/35mm%20Compeditor%20JPEG ). I got mine (16mm) from ebay for £1; it complements my £75 Steenbeck but I don't know if they ever caught on in the US; perhaps the Moviola is your equivalent. It's used for synchronising rushes as well. You can't easily view single takes on a flatbed, they're more for viewing. And I'd say that edge numbering was essential. Good luck.

Film & Photo in Chiswick www.film-photo.com quote 60p/ft for a graded print and 40p/ft for optical sound neg but I don't know about comopt. But they only have a £100 minimum.

or there are these chaps http://www.cineco.nl/UK/prices/index.html#kleur in Holland.

'Gorilla' filmmaking. I love it.