Jump to content

Super 16


Jon O'Brien

Recommended Posts

I never discussed 2 perf because part of your stipulation appeared to be a photochemical finish of some kind, whether it be prints or even editing.

 

Unfortunately 2 perf 35mm has none of that; no 2 perf viewers or projectors (that are available to the public). Also, sync sound 2 perf cameras are either very old and/or priced way above a normal person's ability to own them.

 

I love 2 perf personally, any day over 16 if you can afford it.

It's sad that nobody introduced a 2-perf projector that would be affordable to film societies and arts cinemas, like I think you Tyler once had ideas about (?) As for a sync sound camera, again it's entirely possible maybe for a firm like Logmar who knows. I'm sure there'd be a ready market. And as an Australian, Jon did you ever come across Laurie Buckingham's plans for a self-blimped and very small 2-perf camera ? He made a prototype not long before he died.

https://filmisfine.com/blog/henry-l-buckingham-widescreen-pioneer/

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Good convo & just because this topic popped up, here's a recent experiment I did with S16 and 1.3x Anamorphic. I wanted to understand the usefulness of the format even with this sketchy windup camera setup. The extra FOV obtained by the 1.3 squeeze was great (since there are very few wide lenses for a K3) and shooting through the 'sweet spot' of the anamorphic was bonus.

 

Edited by Matt Figler
  • Upvote 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

For another set of movies to look at and compare, rent / stream "The Wall" for an anamophic s16 and maybe Silver Linings Playbook for 2perf. Once you get into considering anamorphic anything, the "feel" of it as as important as the math re: FOV. 2 perf and x1.33 s16 definitely feel different when viewed, and its worth considering that before the budget questions come into play

 

 

Yep, sorry, I have jumped over into another topic a bit there. I've no intention of watching 2 perf on a projector, so I see what you mean. Just can't help but compare S16 and 2 perf.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

this looks great, resolved surprisingly well for an adapter. any chance you shot charts?

 

Good convo & just because this topic popped up, here's a recent experiment I did with S16 and 1.3x Anamorphic. I wanted to understand the usefulness of the format even with this sketchy windup camera setup. The extra FOV obtained by the 1.3 squeeze was great (since there are very few wide lenses for a K3) and shooting through the 'sweet spot' of the anamorphic was bonus.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Premium Member

It's sad that nobody introduced a 2-perf projector that would be affordable to film societies and arts cinemas, like I think you Tyler once had ideas about (?) As for a sync sound camera, again it's entirely possible maybe for a firm like Logmar who knows. I'm sure there'd be a ready market. And as an Australian, Jon did you ever come across Laurie Buckingham's plans for a self-blimped and very small 2-perf camera ? He made a prototype not long before he died.

https://filmisfine.com/blog/henry-l-buckingham-widescreen-pioneer/

 

I've re-thought a lot of stuff recently and even though it would be a lot of fun to make a 2 perf 35mm projector, I'm afraid there is no market for it. Plus, being more involved in the photochemical process today than ever before, I realize that our salvation is 70mm prints, not 35mm. So I'm focused on that industry right now, rather than 35mm.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Premium Member

Kodak once wrote a white paper suggesting 3-perf 35mm as a new standard for projection.

 

Yep, it would make the most sense. Working with Dolby as the only soundtrack, it would be a smart idea. Projection adoption could also be done very easily with 3 perf, few gear changes and a gate, that's it really. The problem of course is that when you introduce a new playback format, you then have to make it backward compatible. My rotary shutter projector concept would have used electronics to sense frame edges and on the fly compensate for the different mediums. Can't do that with a Century JJ lol :P

Link to comment
Share on other sites

... And as an Australian, Jon did you ever come across Laurie Buckingham's plans for a self-blimped and very small 2-perf camera ? He made a prototype not long before he died.

https://filmisfine.com/blog/henry-l-buckingham-widescreen-pioneer/

 

Hi Doug, no I never met Laurie and I only found out about him through the excellent post you wrote about him on your website. It would be great to track down the original plans for his camera - not that I would be able to do much myself as I'm not very mechanically inclined. I know enough to know how cameras work, but not much more. It's interesting to learn about Laurie, as back in the 70s I must have lived less than 5 minutes away from him, if he was in Mordialloc. But I didn't start to make films myself until just after I moved to Queensland.

 

 

Good convo & just because this topic popped up, here's a recent experiment I did with S16 and 1.3x Anamorphic. I wanted to understand the usefulness of the format even with this sketchy windup camera setup. The extra FOV obtained by the 1.3 squeeze was great (since there are very few wide lenses for a K3) and shooting through the 'sweet spot' of the anamorphic was bonus.

 

 

 

That looks really excellent Matt. Any chance you could post some photos and further details of your camera, lens and anamorphic set up?

 

 

Yep, it would make the most sense. Working with Dolby as the only soundtrack, it would be a smart idea. Projection adoption could also be done very easily with 3 perf, few gear changes and a gate, that's it really. The problem of course is that when you introduce a new playback format, you then have to make it backward compatible. My rotary shutter projector concept would have used electronics to sense frame edges and on the fly compensate for the different mediums. Can't do that with a Century JJ lol tongue.png

 

Even though my main interest is shooting on film and then projecting digitally, I still think someone could make a 2 or 3 perf projector pretty easily. There are factories in China or elsewhere that could do this. Even here in Australia, Blackmagic Design recently came out with that wall-mounted film scanner. People just have to be patient. If there's a will there's a way. But if film projection dies, it won't be the end of the world, as film origination will live on through digital projection. But I think that interest will grow in real film projection. It will never go back to the way it was before, of course, with all theatres having film projectors. Too expensive and not enough interest from 'lay' audiences.

 

This is a very 'liberal' thread. Feel free to let the discussion roam to wherever it will ... 2 perf, 3 perf, anamorphic, or back to S16. I'm enjoying all the ideas and input.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Premium Member

Even though my main interest is shooting on film and then projecting digitally, I still think someone could make a 2 or 3 perf projector pretty easily. There are factories in China or elsewhere that could do this.

It would be a lot easier to convert, but even then there are huge hurdles. For instance, Dolby Digital is based on samples taken at 4 perf speed, when you reduce the samples will it work. Even DTS or separate audio on disk systems, would need timecode put onto the film to work and there is no reader currently that allows for reading the edge.

 

So it's not just the mechanics, the audio is also a real problem when using the full width of the frame.

 

Even here in Australia, Blackmagic Design recently came out with that wall-mounted film scanner. People just have to be patient. If there's a will there's a way.

Desktop scanners have been around for a long time. Blackmagic, bought cintel and designed a new scanner based on the old movement. Plus, it's not a projector... it doesn't have a shutter or stop the film on each frame, it's a line scanner, much like the Spirit Data Cine.

 

But if film projection dies,

It died December 31st 2013.

 

it won't be the end of the world, as film origination will live on through digital projection. But I think that interest will grow in real film projection. It will never go back to the way it was before, of course, with all theatres having film projectors. Too expensive and not enough interest from 'lay' audiences.

Film isn't film when digitized. Yedlin's video series pretty much sums that up in every way possible. http://www.yedlin.net/DisplayPrepDemo/DispPrepDemo_web.html

 

Yes, in our future I'm sure digital projection will get a lot better. However, nothing will have the feeling of film itself. An excellent photochemical finish is like a great vinyl album. It's unique because it's a living breathing entity that eventually will stop working. When you see good film projected, it's an eye opening experience because you realize that's what the format is suppose to be.

 

In the end, I'm glad we have filmmakers who care about film prints. At the same time, we need more people to care, younger filmmakers who force studio's to release their products on film in order to keep the ball rolling for future generations. If I hadn't grown up on vinyl, I may not have them today. Same goes for film prints, our college students need to see them and understand what they're missing in the world of digital and aspire to release their personal products on film in the future, or it will die. Camera negative is a small business compared to film prints.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, I would be over the moon if film projection came back here, in my country. But it's not going to in my lifetime. We are the country of digital, she'll be right, mate. So I strike a compromise that works, shoot on film and digital for all the rest of it. But I agree with you, Tyler, and I wish I could regularly see film prints projected. Last year, I walked a long way through Brisbane's Fortitude Valley to discover a cinema, tucked away in a side street, so I could watch my first real cinema experience film print in a long, long time. I was charmed and invigorated by the experience. You see? I'm an artist. I'm a rare breed. I go the extra distance for quality. But most audiences? Pff!

 

And as you know, film projection hasn't quite died yet. It lives. It didn't die in 2013. It's like the robot in Lost in Space, the original series. Yes, we can reverse the polarity and get that heart to beat again! Maybe.

Edited by Jon O'Brien
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Getting back to S16, what lens works well with the Krasnogorsk 3 camera that the Panasonic LA7200 1.3x adapter fits onto? Does this adapter work well with a zoom? What about PL mount lenses this anamorphic attachment would work well with?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree about vinyl by the way. For listening to classical music, eg. symphonies, I always said you can't beat a stereo with tube amplifier, LP records and proper large cabinet speakers. Yes there's crackle from static, and the stylus and records eventually wear out (not all that quickly, though), but it's a better sound because really it is the amplification of an actual physical acoustic process. The stylus is physically reproducing the sound in your own home and then it is simply amplified with the help of the input of some electrical energy. Same thing with real film projection. Light rays interact (shine through) a physical, chemical medium and are focused by the lens. There's no intermediate series of numbers getting between you and the physical process. So it really explains why there is a charm to these things. I do have on my list of projects to get my record player back up to functioning again but there are many other things to do before that. So digital for now :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Getting back to S16, what lens works well with the Krasnogorsk 3 camera that the Panasonic LA7200 1.3x adapter fits onto? Does this adapter work well with a zoom? What about PL mount lenses this anamorphic attachment would work well with?

It's hard to say as this was the only combo I've used it with on s16mm. It's a funky lens for sure and something that would allow focus closer than 4-5 feet would be nicer, diopter are a must from my limited experience. Much has been written on this lens and its also limited to lenses with 77/72mm front I believe.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's a funky lens for sure ...

 

Thanks Matt, that is a huge help! Looks great. Yep, no doubt a funky lens set up but perfect in some ways for 'arty' projects. And fun too I would think. But for professional filmmaking sure the Hawks would be the way to go but I won't be going that way most likely. Too difficult as no one has the lenses here, as Dom said. I will just stay with cropped S16 or 2 perf.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Does anyone know anything about projecting anamorphic 1.33x S16? There's a place in my heart for such a project ...

 

No 1.3x projection lenses seem to exist. Okay, well the 1.3x lens attachment is still interesting, for scanned Vision 3.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

No 1.3x projection lenses seem to exist. Okay, well the 1.3x lens attachment is still interesting, for scanned Vision 3.

Surely you project through the same attachment? That's what I used to do with my Kowa 8Z. It's what you were expected to do, just buy the one lens, with a bracket for the projector.

Edited by Mark Dunn
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ah-ha! Thanks Mark for clarifying that. I wasn't sure if that would work well enough, never having had anything to do with anamorphic, though the idea did occur to me. Not being the greatest of optics I'm wondering if the results would be disappointing, effectively going through the glass twice. But I'm getting really interested now in this Panasonic adapter.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The majority of 16mm projectors have the lens set very far back and set in close to the side of the projector, so putting the Panasonic adapter into that space seems unworkable. Fair enough, back to concentrating on scanning real film and working with it on computer. Projection seems too much of a distraction from the main thing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The majority of 16mm projectors have the lens set very far back and set in close to the side of the projector,

It's the same for Super-8, which I was referring to, but as long as the whole of the projected image passes through the anamorphic without vignetting it doesn't matter. The adapter doesn't have to be particularly close to the lens. Mine was effectively in front of the casing. The bracket attached to the feed arm- it looked like a lollipop.

The closest to it I can find online is this

https://www.google.com/url?sa=i&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=images&cd=&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=2ahUKEwiym4urjqbeAhXIxoUKHbiVAOsQjRx6BAgBEAU&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.worthpoint.com%2Fworthopedia%2Fanamorphic-bracket-kowa-elmo-gs1200-494224776&psig=AOvVaw29BzIPKCTQS6oOk_WTq2-q&ust=1540712152497057

but if you're really interested I could set mine up and send you an image. I no longer have the lens, but nobody wanted the bracket.

Edited by Mark Dunn
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, you've got me interested in this anamorphic projection again, Mark. I'd be interested to see how you did it, if it's not too much trouble for you. I didn't realize the lens attachment could have a largish gap between it and the projector lens, as long as all the image passes into the rear element. That is probably doable.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Premium Member

S16 is an acquisition format ONLY, let alone S16 anamorphic. There have been a few people creating S16 projectors for their own use but not widespread.

 

If you'd like anyone other than yourself to project it I'd consider going standard 16 anamorphic. Then you can make prints and share and show at festivals more easily.

 

Talk to Tommy at Video & Film Solutions in Maryland if you want any technical advice. He can also do soundtrack prints for 16mm.

 

http://www.videofilmsolutions.com

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

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 account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...