Roberto Pirodda Posted February 22, 2016 Share Posted February 22, 2016 it is very tricky to upload pictures here, let me know your mail and i send you, then you can upload for me, ok? Freya, what do you mean " combining" ? you must to shoot framing for S16 or U16, they have different aspect ratio. In U16 the frame is between sproket holes, as you know, and the aspect ratio is wider. The edge codes are placed in line with the half perforation, so let say that the safe area is 13 mm wide, that is 2.16 aspect ratio, better than S16 anyway Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Freya Black Posted February 22, 2016 Share Posted February 22, 2016 (edited) it is very tricky to upload pictures here, let me know your mail and i send you, then you can upload for me, ok? Freya, what do you mean " combining" ? you must to shoot framing for S16 or U16, they have different aspect ratio. In U16 the frame is between sproket holes, as you know, and the aspect ratio is wider. The edge codes are placed in line with the half perforation, so let say that the safe area is 13 mm wide, that is 2.16 aspect ratio, better than S16 anyway I mean it is kind of neither ultra 16 or Super 16 in a way. You are extending the width of the gate out further into the Super 16 (soundtrack) area than you would for Ultra16 and also out into the Ultra 16 area at the same time. Maybe beyond if I am understanding you right? Obviously you also can't use the height you get in Super 16 either because you are between the sprockets on the other side but it doesn't matter as this would still give you a wider native aspect ratio. Edited February 22, 2016 by Freya Black Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roberto Pirodda Posted February 22, 2016 Share Posted February 22, 2016 well Freya, i do not know the exact SMPTE specs ( if any) for U16 frame, what i have done is simply enlarged the gate to expose the frame from side to side , saving one mm per side to support the film, so i have the freedom to chose which to scan, S16 or U16 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Freya Black Posted February 23, 2016 Share Posted February 23, 2016 (edited) well Freya, i do not know the exact SMPTE specs ( if any) for U16 frame, what i have done is simply enlarged the gate to expose the frame from side to side , saving one mm per side to support the film, so i have the freedom to chose which to scan, S16 or U16 Well there aren't SMPTE specs for U16 I suspect but generally it only goes a little way into the soundtrack area, i.e. it doesn't use that much of the Super16 part of the frame as the basic idea was you could shoot 16:9 with standard16 lenses instead of having to have lenses that don't vignette like in Super 16. I think it also means you don't have to re-center the lens either (although that isn't always done on cheap Super 16 conversions either) which saves more work too. I suspect you are going much further on both sides than would be normal for U16. I'm interested in this as it seems like you could get even better results when shooting for wider aspect ratios like 2.39. It could even give an improvement for 1.85 over Super16 too! It's an interesting idea and it may well be that its time will come, edge code or no edge code! Freya Edited February 23, 2016 by Freya Black Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doug Palmer Posted February 23, 2016 Share Posted February 23, 2016 it is very tricky to upload pictures here, let me know your mail and i send you, then you can upload for me, ok? Freya, what do you mean " combining" ? you must to shoot framing for S16 or U16, they have different aspect ratio. In U16 the frame is between sproket holes, as you know, and the aspect ratio is wider. The edge codes are placed in line with the half perforation, so let say that the safe area is 13 mm wide, that is 2.16 aspect ratio, better than S16 anyway I see yes. So almost 2.2:1 which is a pleasant aspect ratio..... like the 70mm composition. Would love to see any images of your modification. Here's my email doug@filmisfine.co Well there aren't SMPTE specs for U16 I suspect but generally it only goes a little way into the soundtrack area, i.e. it doesn't use that much of the Super16 part of the frame as the basic idea was you could shoot 16:9 with standard16 lenses instead of having to have lenses that don't vignette like in Super 16. I think it also means you don't have to re-center the lens either (although that isn't always done on cheap Super 16 conversions either) which saves more work too. I suspect you are going much further on both sides than would be normal for U16. I'm interested in this as it seems like you could get even better results when shooting for wider aspect ratios like 2.39. It could even give an improvement for 1.85 over Super16 too! It's an interesting idea and it may well be that its time will come, edge code or no edge code! Freya Yes, as aspect ratios seem to be getting wider these days on PCs and TVs it could encourage a 16mm system like this. And as I think I said before, maybe manufacturers could be also persuaded to keep those code markings well away. On negative as well as and reversal film. Ferrania team please take note :) Of course this idea is not new, it's been tried before, but maybe then the latent markings were not such an issue. Two pioneers at opposite ends of the planet !........ http://www.filmisfine.com/blog/can-16mm-become-wider/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doug Palmer Posted February 23, 2016 Share Posted February 23, 2016 This afternoon Roberto has kindly sent me this, showing the format he has achieved with Bolex. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mark Dunn Posted February 23, 2016 Share Posted February 23, 2016 So how do you deal with edge numbers? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roberto Pirodda Posted February 24, 2016 Share Posted February 24, 2016 Thanks Doug ! Mark, this scan comes from Kodachrome film, and edge numbers were visible only on underexposed or dark shots. With negative films the codes were always visible, so no full frame availability Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doug Palmer Posted February 25, 2016 Share Posted February 25, 2016 Another big close-up photo Roberto has provided, showing the actual gate of the Bolex. It looks to me as if you have chamfered the edge towards the film ? Is this to provide more strength ? And what is that reddish paint please. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roberto Pirodda Posted February 25, 2016 Share Posted February 25, 2016 As you can see it is a homemade work :( , The film path has been chamfered for not to scratch the film. The red paint ( it is brown/black), is put to darken the milled steel edges. The right side is lower because there are the perforations, so no need to bore further Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tom Chabbat Posted February 25, 2016 Author Share Posted February 25, 2016 Love your homemade work ;) but it doesn't look like it was milled but filed, am I wrong ? Right now I'm wondering about purchasing a milling attachement to my Unimat 3 to get the job done, I think that should do the trick... Has anyone modified himself a NPR, be it in S or U16 ? There's a LOT of screw around the gate and I wonder which are the ones I need to get off to put just the gate away. Still on the NPR, does the U16 modified units got a new ground glass with proper marking or do you just put a frame mask on the slot just before the ground glass ? (And how did you get the ground glass/make the frame mask ?) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Site Sponsor Robert Houllahan Posted February 26, 2016 Site Sponsor Share Posted February 26, 2016 I thought U-16mm was 0.7mm taken off each side of the Std-16mm Gate. A EDM machine would be for making the gate wider, hand filing often leaves the gate pretty rough. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roberto Pirodda Posted February 26, 2016 Share Posted February 26, 2016 @ Tom , yes, pardon, English is not my first language, the gate is hand widened/filed, but the left edge, the film path , is machine milled ( it should be impossible to do it by hand). @ Robert, my customization isn,t exactly an U16, it is a sort of full frame exposing Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Freya Black Posted February 26, 2016 Share Posted February 26, 2016 I thought U-16mm was 0.7mm taken off each side of the Std-16mm Gate. Sounds about right but Roberto is going much wider on both sides which is why it is so interesting. Maximum use of neg for wider aspect ratios! :) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doug Palmer Posted February 26, 2016 Share Posted February 26, 2016 And here's the wider view. Roberto, did you do anything to the sprockets or was there no scratching or wear from these ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roberto Pirodda Posted February 26, 2016 Share Posted February 26, 2016 (edited) the sprokets rollers had been lathed on the upper side ( photo reference) till 1 mm, so no scratches in the S16 area, in the sprokets side was not possible to do any lathe machining, anyway is was very clean and gentle with film Edited February 26, 2016 by Roberto Pirodda Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doug Palmer Posted April 22, 2016 Share Posted April 22, 2016 For these very wide ratios it would be good if the manufacturer's markings did not intrude into the image area :huh: So I asked Ferrania whether it might be possible, and they have replied today: " In theory yes is possible of course. In the case we can propose on the market a limited number of pieces in that format to test the size of the audience." Ultra-16 and Varispect / Variscope users....maybe then it would be helpful to email Ferrania and let them know your preferences before 16mm production commences. My ideal film would have very small name markings at the extreme edge of the film, with perhaps numbers for identifying frames, but not spreading into the area between the perforations. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mark Dunn Posted April 22, 2016 Share Posted April 22, 2016 (edited) My ideal film would have very small name markings at the extreme edge of the film, with perhaps numbers for identifying frames, but not spreading into the area between the perforations. Looking at some old pre-Keykode VNF, even the small edge-number figures are bigger than the space outside the perfs. But the tiny 'Kodak safety film' script with the date code is outside the perfs. If edge numbering went there as Robert says it would be susceptible to fogging. It might not be able to designate a particular frame unambiguously for neg cutting as the current edge numbers do. Edited April 22, 2016 by Mark Dunn Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doug Palmer Posted April 23, 2016 Share Posted April 23, 2016 Looking at some old pre-Keykode VNF, even the small edge-number figures are bigger than the space outside the perfs. But the tiny 'Kodak safety film' script with the date code is outside the perfs. If edge numbering went there as Robert says it would be susceptible to fogging. It might not be able to designate a particular frame unambiguously for neg cutting as the current edge numbers do. But surely edge-fogging might only happen at the start and end of a daylight roll ? In the case of fogged information I guess you'd have to eye-match the frames. Or scratch a tiny mark between one or two images on the regular-16 frameline. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mark Dunn Posted April 23, 2016 Share Posted April 23, 2016 You can't match to marks which weren't on the raw stock. Surely the answer is, as mentioned, for U16 users to negotiate a special run. The rest of the world ought to be able to rely on stock being compatible with the systems which have existed for many years. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doug Palmer Posted April 23, 2016 Share Posted April 23, 2016 You can't match to marks which weren't on the raw stock. Surely the answer is, as mentioned, for U16 users to negotiate a special run. The rest of the world ought to be able to rely on stock being compatible with the systems which have existed for many years. No I meant scratch a mark or two on the developed original, between the ultra-16 (or wider) frames. So it then gets scanned or workprinted for matching. But would that really be necessary in practice ? Edge-fogging if it happens usually preserves some information. Having said that the best take always seems to be the last one on the spool :D Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now