Mitchell cameras for modern filmmaking.

[James Steven Beverly]

I was thinking about buying a Mitchell GC and wanted to know if these cameras were still viable fir filmmaking today. What problems to expect and if there were problems I should be aware of before seriously considering buying one. I seem to remember someone saying they took a 96 volt battery? . Also can they be converted to a crystal sync motor and blimped or barring that how effective are barneys for them? Please enlighten me as I know vertually nothing about these cameras other tha they are supose to be heavy an a but unwieldly, how heavey I'm not even sure of. Thanks B)

[David Sweetman]

I'm under the impression they're quite unbelievably heavy...although that may give the presence of the camera a "heavier" feel, which could be what you're going for. Personally, while I do like heavy equipment, I think I'd stay away from things that would only add to set-up time if I didn't see that they offered any real benefiets.

 

Here's something about the camera: http://indycine.com/manuals/GCu.htm

 

It seems the "GC" stands for "Government Camera," which were, I guess, the government-issued ones.

[Stephen Williams]

I was thinking about buying a Mitchell GC and wanted to know if these cameras were still viable fir filmmaking today. What problems to expect and if there were problems I should be aware of before seriously considering buying one. I seem to remember someone saying they took a 96 volt battery? . Also can they be converted to a crystal sync motor and blimped or barring that how effective are barneys for them? Please enlighten me as I know vertually nothing about these cameras other tha they are supose to be heavy an a but unwieldly, how heavey I'm not even sure of. Thanks B)

 

Hi,

 

About the only use for a rackover GC today would be effects work, motion control, background plates or stop motion. Many were converted by Fries engineering for through the lens viewing, modern crystal motors are also available. They are noisy, MOS only. The movement was designed in the early 1920's, and is as steady as any camera ever made. Needs oiling every day @ 24 fps and every take above 100 fps. A Hand crank was provided as a back up so the military could go on filming without batteries!

 

Stephen

[Daniel Stigler]

Please enlighten me as I know vertually nothing about these cameras other tha they are supose to be heavy an a but unwieldly, how heavey I'm not even sure of.

 

 

The blimped BNC weighs 122lbs, the unblimped NC 70lbs.

[Stephen Williams]

The blimped BNC weighs 122lbs, the unblimped NC 70lbs.

 

Hi,

 

The GC was never designed for sync sound, but can shoot high speed. A NC/BNC movement is only rated to 32 fps, but was designed for shooting sync sound in a blimp.

 

Stephen

[David Sweetman]

The blimped BNC weighs 122lbs, the unblimped NC 70lbs.

 

Geez...that's no good.

[Nate Downes]

the GC is not made for sync-sound work. it's a high-speed and fx camera, and for that kind of work it's really one of the best out there. For sound work, you'd be better served with a BNC if you insist upon Mitchell (I love the guys, personally) or a self blimped camera.

[nathan snyder]

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.

[David W Scott]

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.

 

Interesting to hear that you are an enthusiastic BNCR shooter.

 

I have a copy of Dan Chamness' Film Budgeting and Script Breakdown book (1977) and he enthusiastically recommends the BNCR. At the time, rental prices were a fraction of modern camera packages, but the BNCR delivered the goods.

 

I'd be curious to know if others think that this is still a reasonable option for low budget features. Obviously, a full crew is a must -- no MiniDV-style run and gun shooting.

 

Can you find cheap rentals? Or only sales now?

Who does good service work?

What about lenses?

Is it feasible to match lenses between a BNCR and a smaller MOS camera (IIB?) so that they will intercut?

[Stephen Williams]

What about lenses?

Is it feasible to match lenses between a BNCR and a smaller MOS camera (IIB?) so that they will intercut?

 

Hi,

 

Super Balitars and Cooke Speed Pancro's serII will IMO cut quite well. Color matching & sharpness even between sets was not that good. It was normal to test a selection of lenses at a rental house to make ones own set!

 

Stephen

[Dan Goulder]

Is it feasible to match lenses between a BNCR and a smaller MOS camera (IIB?) so that they will intercut?

You can put a BNCR front on an Arri 2B. However, the BNCR lenses must be those with a tapered mount. Then they can be used in either camera.

[Leo Anthony Vale]

The GC was never designed for sync sound, but can shoot high speed. A NC/BNC movement is only rated to 32 fps, but was designed for shooting sync sound in a blimp.

 

NC movements are quite quiet. Listen to the movement running without film flapping through and you'll hear a barely audible whir.

NCs can be used for exterior sync without much of a problem. They're not too different from a 35BL'one' without the lens blimp. Tha BL might be a more practical camera choice.

[Nate Downes]

NC movements are quite quiet. Listen to the movement running without film flapping through and you'll hear a barely audible whir.

NCs can be used for exterior sync without much of a problem. They're not too different from a 35BL'one' without the lens blimp. Tha BL might be a more practical camera choice.

 

You know despite all this, I still would love a Mitchell as my main camera.

[Bob Hayes]

If you are trying to save money I would look into an XR-35 by cinema products and an old Mitchell gear head. Old school all the way. It?s very heavy and hard to move but? A lot of stuff has to move when you change set ups. When you think about it is moving the lights and re-dressing the set that takes time. You want to own a cheap 35mm sound camera. The XR 35 ain?t for hand held but for old school Hollywood style films this isn?t a bad choice.

[David W Scott]

My shooting style is very restrained -- no matter the camera, I like careful compositions on the sticks, and occasional dolly creeps.

 

With that in mind...

 

...what are the dolly requirements for a camera as heavy as the BNCR (or XR 35)? Any dollies that simply won't handle that weight? Any recommendations for a good match between dolly and camera?

[Leo Anthony Vale]

...what are the dolly requirements for a camera as heavy as the BNCR (or XR 35)? Any dollies that simply won't handle that weight? Any recommendations for a good match between dolly and camera?

 

A BNCR and a Worrell head on a Moviola dolly will wobble.

 

No one's mentioned Worrell heads yet in the thread, they're quite hefty too.

I think there was a fluid head made for the CP XR-35.

[John Holland]

Yes think it was a Worrell fluid head ,a big one XR 35 must have been half the weight of a BNCR , only used one once , not many of them over here . John Holland , London.

[nathan snyder]

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.

Edited September 1, 2006 by nathan snyder

[Leo Anthony Vale]

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.

 

The plate on a Worral is an exact fit to the base of a BNC. Obviously it was made to be used with the BNC.

 

After Worral went out of business CP bought the inventory. So wound up servicing and selling them.

I think the XR-35 fluid head was made by O'Connor.

 

Way back when I was at Sawyer a Japanese crew came by searching for a Mitchell friction head to rent.

We still had a couple laying around. They were Ecstatic.

[John Holland]

Leo you are correct it was a O'Connor , big but worked well with XR 35 . John Holland .

[Nate Downes]

Which modelO'Conner head works on the XP35?

[Brian Drysdale]

I'd tend to get this camera onto a dolly for most shots, otherwise setting up would become painfully slow if you have to use a tripod all the time.

[John Babl]

I worked on an XR35 that was very corroded-(it was basically a Mitchell w/ variable shutter, and the body was a lightweight blimp)-the magazines also had very bad corrosion, this happened to a lot of magnesium made products like PL mount conversions for 2C's etc. If the paint was chipped and then ignored, corrosion started to do its damage- a white powder that would take over if left untreated. I saw a 2C w/ CP mount that was stored for years, and the lens mount corroded so badly it was almost beyond repair-anyway, a properly maintained XR should work fine, but they are huge-

 

I like the R35 and MKII Mitchells(modified ones are used in the Spacecam system by the way, w/ 1000'mag at the bottom )but if what you're trying to do is shoot sync sound, it's probably difficult to find a blimp for them. A 2c w/ blimp would be lighter

 

John Babl

Miami

[Paul Bruening]

Hello Nathan,

 

How do you get your Fearless Panodamnit through narrow doorways? Also, what's the lowdown on your rebuild of it? Did you have to get parts cut specially for it? Likewise, where do you get parts for the Worral?

[nathan snyder]

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.