Jump to content

Mark Dunn

Basic Member
  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Everything posted by Mark Dunn

  1. I think you're going to have to acquire a meter if you want to have a fuller understanding. You can even get a phone app to start with. Many DPs prefer to over-expose negative film somewhat- just set a lower ISO setting on the meter. You can't- or shouldn't- shoot film without one.
  2. But all you need to revive vinyl is the machinery, in Jon's shed. A projector requires an entire set of manufacturing industries, from stock manufacture to engineering, behind it. Without the demand those industries are gone. It nearly happened to Kodak.
  3. Why do the lights need to be on outside a take or lighting check? Car headlights in the UK are 55W, so two with sidelights will draw about 10A. If you need a genny anyway, that's no problem. Surely if the sound of the car running is necessary that will go on afterwards. The sound man can get a recording as atmos anytime and he may curse you for running the engine during a take.
  4. Those are the log densities in red, green and blue. As Dirk says, we don't know the stock, but here's a curve for Vision 500t (page 2) https://www.kodak.com/uploadedFiles/Motion/Products/Camera_Films/5219/Resources/VISION-500T-Sellsheet_US_4PG-180829-SP.pdf Your D-mins are a little higher than that so presumably you have some extra fogging.
  5. I'm going with X-ray damage on clip 2, because light leaks are usually yellow/orange. It's directional because of the angle at which the X-rays have struck the film- think of a beam of light, some parts of the roll will be in "shadow". Clip 1 is just very bad light leak through the spool flanges- you've lost several tens of feet instead of the usual few feet. The left of the frame is probably fogged as well, but that's the sprocket side so it doesn't matter. If you had shot standard 16 you would probably have got away with it.
  6. That link goes to my own Drive account. It will do the same for everyone, I suspect.
  7. SA.FETY- which according to my resource means it was made in Canada. Apparently there's supposed to be a vertical bar whose position enables you to determine the quarter of the year in which the stock was made. But that's getting a bit OCD.
  8. You've found the date and factory codes. They are really tiny- they're not meant to be easily read by eye as the edge numbers are. See here for an interesting story on date codes as relating to the faked "alien autopsy" film. Search for "1967". https://www.sacred-texts.com/ufo/alienaut.htm
  9. I'm afraid what you claim would turn decades of established practice on its head if correct. If there were a mysterious mechanism fogging fast film noticeably within days of exposure I think Kodak would have told us.
  10. Aargh, I've just noticed how big the file is so I'll wetransfer it. Happy to help. Just notice that the first section is about the counter, that's what "universalzähler" means. Welcome to the club, I'm at londonsteenbeck@eu5.org and on FB @londonsteenbeck. If you watch the BBC a lot you may see my 1600. best wishes Mark
  11. I have some schematics which cover '01s among others, mostly in German, but can't work out how to attach them here. Reviewing it I'm not even sure it covers the display counter at all, but you're welcome to plough through it. Could you PM me an email address? Or just post it here if you're happy with that. I have a 1600 and this is one reason I've stuck with it- being discrete component I've been able to fix things. No chance with all those chips in an '01! BTW if all else fails, I use a stopwatch and a ruler.
  12. Sorry, I didn't pick up that you were a Master of the Fluffy Sausage, you may not have exuded enough of that aura of well- upholstered superiority for it to show on the Internet. You'll need to work on that. And buy a bigger wallet- its gravitational influence should at least be noticeable in London from Brussels. In 500€ notes.
  13. Yes, it's the same. It has only been called "standard 8" since the introduction of Super-8, to distinguish it. The sprocket holes and frame size are smaller, and the film on the double-8 spool is 16mm. wide, run twice through the camera, and split lengthwise after processing. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Standard_8_mm_film
  14. I'll have to pass on that, not having been in the business. It is, as you say, a running joke between Robin and me and maybe Phil as well. It probably belongs to a more closed-shop era. More practically, I presume sound recording is less glamorous and therefore attracts less competition, so keeping the fees high. Anyway it tickles me at least, so it will probably stagger on for a while.
  15. Is it perchance a sound recordist's wallet counterbalance?
  16. Polish it up and put it on a shelf.
  17. In case anyone west of Calais is confused, in number notation Europeans use the comma where we Anglophones use the decimal point and vice versa. This extends to lens engravings. So 1,000,000 becomes 1.000.000 It makes sense, in handwriting at least- you can't confuse a comma for a badly written decimal point. You might see it on a hand-written bill at a bar: 4,50€
  18. Indeed. There's a saying here. When you're in a hole, stop digging.
  19. Mine is a bit yellow too. Not as warm as yours, but as Luigi says, if that's direct sunlight coming in, it's probably accentuated it somewhat. Sunlight photographs warmer than daylight. Presumably the glue used to fix the finder elements has gone squiffy. Nothing to worry about.
  20. Perhaps a middle way is to apply the lubricant with a cotton bud, or spray some onto a piece of paper and use that to dribble some only where it is needed. I find that spray goes everywhere too.
  21. Then be careful with your English usage (and spelling). When you say that you "do not pay much attention" to the opinions of and Oscar- and BAFTA- winning DP, in a professional cinematography forum, it does at least suggest that you prefer your own. Which, considering your respective reputations, does not reflect well on you.
  22. You have 42258 near the beginning of the roll, so at two numbers per foot, the last edge number on the roll will be something like 43058. J2 57 won't change, probably for the whole 6000' length of the master roll. If I'm right about that, you'd have to shoot 156 million feet to get two identical edge numbers, Mr. Kubrick. You'll see that they bear no relation to the can codes. No reason to- the can roll codes are to identify the machinery if the stock is faulty. Back in the day there would be production samples of every single roll, and roll cut, processed and carefully filed.
  23. There should be some tiny characters as well, every few feet, the same side as the edge numbers, usually "KODAK S.AFETY FILM", a stock code, and a shape pattern as per the link I posted. The position of the dot in "S.AFETY" tells you where the stock was made, in this case Rochester. I don't have any b/w stock to check so I can't be sure they appear on it. The edge numbers are to identify individual frames for matching the camera original to a cutting copy. The larger number increments every 20 frames, the smaller one obviously much less often. So every cut in a film can be uniquely identified by its offset from the nearest edge number.
  24. Not this one? 32mm? Pricey though, I've made lens caps out of card before now. https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/Kern-Paillard-Bolex-Aluminium-C-Mount-Lens-Cap-for-16mm-Movie-Cameras/352648876295?hash=item521b82d107:g:PKEAAOSws6dcWDy6 Camera shops-remember them?- sometimes used to have a box of odd caps to rummage through.. Long gone.
  25. 😀Too right, 60 features, an Oscar, three BAFTAs, hasn't a clue.
  • Create New...