Jump to content
Marco Leoncino

Beaulieu R16: a big Saturday headache

Recommended Posts

Dear all,

I am getting a big Saturday´s headache which almost makes me crying for desperation...

I am using a Beaulieu R16, which I bought from Ebay. The camera is almost in new conditions and was delivered with a certificate, which was proofing that the camera has been lubrificated, tested, etc, by Filmkonsult in Sweden, on June 2018. I have added an Angenieux Retrofocus 10mm and a Som Berthiot 25 mm, both in perfect conditions. I also have a Meopta Openar 80mm, but I find it too much long lens. The original lens was a cheap Canon TV lens. When I mount them on the camera I can clearly focus the subject (the Angenieux is a fixed focus lens, but I can clearly see a focused image).

Last sunday I have used the camera to film a steam locomotive, this was my first test. I have used all the lenses, Fomapan R100 film, which I have exposed at 80 Asa, measured light with a Sekonik exposure meter, used 25 frame per second. Light was very low (raining day), then I was working almost at full aperture.

Today I have developed the film, and the result is shown in the following photos. Apart some frames in which I can see the locomotive´s steam, I can only find a disaster.

I have some film on Super 8 which I self developed and there I can see the image more clearly, even if the frame is 1/2 the size of a 16mm one.

Fomapan film has been developed at the state of art in a Lomo Tank. Bleach was the one with Potassium Dicromate (because this film is known to be extremely delicate to Potassium Permanganate).

I know that the problem is very strange and difficult to find, but, do you have any hint? I am planning to make a further test with a Kodak 7222 film (being a negative it is faster and easier to develop).

Can somebody please try to help me?

1) do you think the camera is not working properly?

2) do you think there is some offset between what I see in the eyepiece and what impresses the film? I have put a small piece of tape on the film gate and I can clearly see a focused image, even if it very small and difficult to check. Being a TTL camera, I should always see what I impress on the film, or not?

3) do you think I messed up something with the processing?

4) small hint: when I have opened the camera to remove the finished film, I have noticed that the film was fully loaded in the take up spool, but it was not very tight, it was a bit loose.

Thanks a lot!

Marco

 

.rsz_img_20191109_122407605.thumb.jpg.67ea1ae873903a4d1e43e5489ee45e59.jpg

rsz_img_20191109_122458023.thumb.jpg.b694a3c4c88f396348003244335859c8.jpg

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Your camera seems to have a problem with the film transport. The Bealieu has no registration pin, right?

No one can tell if it's the camera or just loaded incorrectly, maybe the loop length was too short? Besides, you may have forgotten to push the film plane flap back?

Did you load it like on the video below?

 

 

Edited by Philip Reinhold
add video

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Dear Philip, 

I have loaded the camera like in the video you are referring to and of course I closed the film flap. About the loop, I am not sure. Can it makes such a big impact? 

Is it possible that the viewfinder and the film plane can be shifted (I mean, that what you see is not what you are impressing on the film?) The Angenieaux is a wide angle with very broad dept of field, no focus regulation for this lens... in the viewfinder I can see in focus... I had the terrible fear that the diopter regulation was wrong, but I just checked again and it is regulated well.

About the transport: I have tried to use an old film to check the transport, but I didn´t notice any malfuncion. 

 

 

 

Edited by Marco Leoncino

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well on your picture it looks like you have a  moving and slightly overlapping expsore because of transport issues. Not sure about the shutter here as well, but can´t tell this from that far photographed.

In general you should find a sharp line between each exposure. Also, the exposed image should always be between 2 perforations at 16mm. On your pictures the perfoation is next to and moving.

I think a wrong loop can do that on a "non registered pin" film camera. When the loop is too tight for example it won´t run fluently thorugh the film plane -flap. But i never used a Beaulieu 16 only Bolex (no reg-pin) & arriflex (reg-pin) 16mm cams. So its just a guess from my side.

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Philip,

I fear that in the whole process (taking, developing, etc...) I made this mistake in the loading. I have probably underestimated the problem of the loop and the "max. 2 mm distance" indicated inside the camera. Does it mean that the film can also stay in contact to the lower plate? I think that an expert could not have overlooked a transport issue. In the copy of the service note by Filmkonsult i read:

"Camera stripped, cleaned and re-oiled. Main drive friction gear changed, main selector switch repaired and re-adjusted. Speed/asa readjusted, claw and Cmount plate adjusted. Montage, functional control".

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, Marco Leoncino said:

I think that the only way to understand better would be to make another test with film: am I correct? 

Yep.

 

31 minutes ago, Marco Leoncino said:

Does it mean that the film can also stay in contact to the lower plate?

Sure! The worst thing what can happen is that it can scratch the film a bit. But it should be polished to avoid this anyway.

32 minutes ago, Marco Leoncino said:

I fear that in the whole process (taking, developing, etc...) I made this mistake in the loading.

Well, the development looks pretty okay.

🙂

Edited by Philip Reinhold
Add the last quote

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Philip,

I make a small off-topic: the inversion process is really exhausting... to deal with the chemicals used in this process is very an hard life (expecially with the two ones used in the bleach...). For this reason I am thinking to use Eastman 7222, which is a negative and easiliy processed in just three baths. Fomapan R100 and the reversal films are indeed beautiful, but also suffers a less exposure latitude compared to a negative...

Just my two cents...

To return on topic, if the bad result I got is related "only" to a loading mistake, well, I feel like a stupid 😪

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We learn from our mistakes. Try it with negative. Before that a few more times film-loading practice with old or exposed stock… If you are familiar with everything and everything works fine, the effort of reversal development is well worth it again 😉

If the problem is still there, you should bring it to technician. Unfortunately the Bealieu a very unpopular camera. Otherwise, invest again in a Krasanorsk or Bolex. Or just an Arriflex ST up with reg-pin.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Marco Leoncino said:

.. to deal with the chemicals used in this process is very an hard life (expecially with the two ones used in the bleach...). For this reason I am thinking to use Eastman 7222, which is a negative and easiliy processed in just three baths.

 

I used to develop B&W reversal as negative a lot and there's no problem with that. If reversal is the available stock and you just need to check the camera or lenses, just use that. If you are careful not to scratch it you can project it. Check for scratches first with a loupe.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Philip Reinhold said:

If the problem is still there, you should bring it to technician. Unfortunately the Bealieu a very unpopular camera. Otherwise, invest again in a Krasanorsk or Bolex. Or just an Arriflex ST up with reg-pin.

I have the luck to be in the same small village in Odenwald where one of the German Beaulieu expert is living. We know each other because he has already checked a Beaulieu 4008 and a super 8 projector for me. I have contacted him again!

I really hope that I just loaded it wrongly!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Gregg MacPherson said:

I used to develop B&W reversal as negative a lot and there's no problem with that. If reversal is the available stock and you just need to check the camera or lenses, just use that. If you are careful not to scratch it you can project it. Check for scratches first with a loupe.

I agree to you... but the fact is that the dicromate makes me very worried and during the process I am not so amused to have it on my working place. I am not enjoying the developing moment very much. There is not a valid replacement for this chemical, however. The permanganate bleach causes many problems to the film, expecially the Foma R100.

Edited by Marco Leoncino

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Philip Reinhold said:

Well on your picture it looks like you have a  moving and slightly overlapping expsore because of transport issues. Not sure about the shutter here as well, but can´t tell this from that far photographed.

In general you should find a sharp line between each exposure. Also, the exposed image should always be between 2 perforations at 16mm. On your pictures the perfoation is next to and moving.

I think a wrong loop can do that on a "non registered pin" film camera. When the loop is too tight for example it won´t run fluently thorugh the film plane -flap. But i never used a Beaulieu 16 only Bolex (no reg-pin) & arriflex (reg-pin) 16mm cams. So its just a guess from my side.

 

Looks like Philip has already answered this one perfectly, even with a guess!

I would agree that the loop is probably the cause here. As mentioned, the images are blurred and there is no frame line visible between each exposure, which means the film was moving during the exposure phase. This can be either because the shutter is out of sync, the pressure plate is not holding the film properly, or (most likely) the loop is too small or too large and pulling/pushing on the film when it’s meant to be still. 

Try another test with the right size loop.

If it has been recently serviced I doubt the shutter timing is out, but you could check it yourself by removing the lens, marking the emulsion side of a length of film with a sharpie (make a squiggle that goes from edge to edge) and then looking through the lens port while running at the slowest speed (or advancing manually). The marks on the film should stay still during each exposure.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Dear Dom, 

thank you for your hint. I have taken the test film (unfortunately this is doubly perforated, while the camera takes single perforation film) and I have drawn a curve with a red pen. I waited until the ink was perfectly dry, loaded the camera, set to the minimum speed.

IMG_20191110_102347734.jpg.352e3891a0b70aa3db7c63379eb4170b.jpg

I removed the lens and took a small video as you suggested. I think that you should go at the end of the video to see better.

 

Furthermore, this is a test at lowest speed:

and at circa 25 frame per second:

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Your test loks fine- hopefully you had just misloaded the first time.

Incidentally, double-perf film is no problem in a camera made for single-perf. It's the other way round that's not possible, but cameras with a twin sprocket that have to use d/p film haven't been made since the 1930s. The only exception is high-speed cameras in which the film has to be transported from both sides.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1950s, not 1930s. Bolex are twin sprocket up to 1952.

Edited by Mark Dunn

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

HI Mark,

I apologize, I had only some meters of test film with double sprockets. Nice to hear that this is not a problem: I was also thinking that a camera with single sprockets is just "blind" to the second sprocket. In principle I could have used the 15 meters I have processed yesterday, but I want to keep them "for the record"...

Edited by Marco Leoncino
additional info
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The 1945-46 Mitchell 16 Professional loads with double-perf stock.

Marco, it’s important that the film is all the way down in the canal under the pressure plate. It can occur that it slips upwards, i. e. to the left side in the upright camera seen from behind camera towards scene. Make sure it sits on the claw with a perforation hole as in the video by R. H. (known to me). Then close pressure pad. Also the film loops should not touch anything. As per your video, make the loops a step smaller each. The film in the upper loop should rub on that round flat knob under it.

Ho sbagliato nel altro forum.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Simon, macht nicht! 😀

I have under-estimated the problem to load the camera properly. I will do that! And keep all posted!

I just need to wait to receive the Eastman 7222 in 16 mm, ordered from Wittner. I hope to make a test this week already!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've had similar results on many 16mm cameras when I failed to load properly. The only exception is the Scoopic MS with the auto-load feature that has never failed me. (knocking on wood.)

You'll have no problem once you do it a few more times.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.



  • Abel Cine



    Tai Audio



    Just Cinema Gear



    New Pro Video - New and Used Equipment



    Rig Wheels Passport



    Visual Products



    Ritter Battery



    FJS International



    G-Force Grips



    Gamma Ray Digital Inc



    Paralinx LLC



    Media Blackout - Custom Cables and AKS



    Metropolis Post



    Glidecam



    Broadcast Solutions Inc



    Serious Gear



    CineLab



    Wooden Camera


    Cinematography Books and Gear
×
×
  • Create New...