Jump to content


Photo

Continuous scratch along non emulsion side of Krasnogorsk 3

16mm krasnogorsk 3 film k3 scratch

  • Please log in to reply
21 replies to this topic

#1 Dorothy Lee

Dorothy Lee

    New

  • Basic Members
  • Pip
  • 6 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Los Angeles

Posted 15 December 2017 - 12:37 AM

Hello,

 

I bought a Krasnogorsk 3 off of Ebay and it shipped over from Ukraine this Monday. 

 

I have a shoot this Saturday so I know it is a bit of a rush but it arrived early enough for me to test the exposed film and I found out that there is a continuous scratch along the non-emulsion side of single perf super 16mm film... 

 

I thought since this is a regular 16mm camera, maybe the scratch is where the other claw is trying to pull down?

It is not in the middle but rather the edge.

 

But I know K3 takes both double perf and single perf and this scratch is very concerning, not really sure where it is picking up the scratches from. 

 

When it is going through the upper loop through the roller I see a single scratch and when it comes out from the lower loop and out into the take up spool, I see another scratch. (2 lines as indicated on the picture)

 

So I am assuming it is from the main sprocket or release pin...

Please let me know if I got a crappy one and if or if not this is fixable to start anywhere, because I am sure it is not a dust since it is consistent line all along the film.

 

Thank you so much

Attached Images

  • Screen Shot 2017-12-14 at 9.36.41 PM.png

  • 0

#2 Simon Wyss

Simon Wyss
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1452 posts
  • Other
  • Basel, Switzerland

Posted 15 December 2017 - 02:23 AM

Search the cause like everybody else. Thread up fresh film, run shortly, stop mechanism, mark contact areas on film back with a felt pen, remove film carefully, compare. Open film guides, feel for burrs with fingers.

 

As much as I can see from your picture, you have scratches on the emulsion side. That points to the aperture plate of the gate. Inspect closely with enough light to see whether there’s something around.


Edited by Simon Wyss, 15 December 2017 - 02:24 AM.

  • 0

#3 Dom Jaeger

Dom Jaeger
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1668 posts
  • Other
  • Melbourne, Australia

Posted 15 December 2017 - 02:43 AM

What Simon said. If you can, use a piece of fresh film, maybe snip the first few feet off an unexposed roll. Make sure the camera is clean, brush it out, wipe down the pressure plate, etc. Run the film through with the lid closed but before it runs out stop the camera, open it up and mark with a sharpie on the film where it enters a sprocket and at either end of the pressure plate. Then remove the film and find where the scratch begins relative to your marks. You should be able to work out exactly where the problem is.

The loop formers are notorious for scratching, but that would be on the emulsion side. Hopefully it was dirt or a film chip, otherwise it could be a burr on the pressure plate or sprocket guide.
  • 0

#4 Mark Dunn

Mark Dunn
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 2555 posts
  • Other
  • London

Posted 15 December 2017 - 04:40 AM

Search the cause like everybody else. Thread up fresh film, run shortly, stop mechanism, mark contact areas on film back with a felt pen, remove film carefully, compare. Open film guides, feel for burrs with fingers.

 

As much as I can see from your picture, you have scratches on the emulsion side. That points to the aperture plate of the gate. Inspect closely with enough light to see whether there’s something around.

Simon, that image is of the base side.


  • 0

#5 Simon Wyss

Simon Wyss
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1452 posts
  • Other
  • Basel, Switzerland

Posted 15 December 2017 - 07:00 AM

You’re right, I see it now. Damn, how superficial one can be!

 

In that case, Dorothy, you’ll probably be finding something with the pressure plate, if it wasn’t loose debris.


  • 0

#6 Dorothy Lee

Dorothy Lee

    New

  • Basic Members
  • Pip
  • 6 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Los Angeles

Posted 15 December 2017 - 12:46 PM

Search the cause like everybody else. Thread up fresh film, run shortly, stop mechanism, mark contact areas on film back with a felt pen, remove film carefully, compare. Open film guides, feel for burrs with fingers.

 

As much as I can see from your picture, you have scratches on the emulsion side. That points to the aperture plate of the gate. Inspect closely with enough light to see whether there’s something around.

 

Hi Simon, 

I have scratches on the non-emulsion side where it has to be scanned.

I have mentioned that the scratch appears from the first sprocket guide into the upper loop and then after going through the pressure plate, into forming lower loop and out through the second sprocket guide, I have another scratch.

So I am assuming it will be the main sprocket guide...


  • 0

#7 Dorothy Lee

Dorothy Lee

    New

  • Basic Members
  • Pip
  • 6 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Los Angeles

Posted 15 December 2017 - 12:49 PM

What Simon said. If you can, use a piece of fresh film, maybe snip the first few feet off an unexposed roll. Make sure the camera is clean, brush it out, wipe down the pressure plate, etc. Run the film through with the lid closed but before it runs out stop the camera, open it up and mark with a sharpie on the film where it enters a sprocket and at either end of the pressure plate. Then remove the film and find where the scratch begins relative to your marks. You should be able to work out exactly where the problem is.

The loop formers are notorious for scratching, but that would be on the emulsion side. Hopefully it was dirt or a film chip, otherwise it could be a burr on the pressure plate or sprocket guide.

 

 

Hello Dom,

 

Would the burr mean the whirring of the camera or the dent on the sprocket that is causing the scratch? 

I have brushed down the whole magazine compartment but I still get scratches on the non-emulsion side. 

The emulsion side is clean so I don't think there is any dust or dent on the gate that is causing it.

If it is the sprocket, then how do I make it flush?

If anything I will have to have a professional take in to fix it :(

Thank you all for the replies!


  • 0

#8 Dorothy Lee

Dorothy Lee

    New

  • Basic Members
  • Pip
  • 6 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Los Angeles

Posted 15 December 2017 - 12:54 PM

You’re right, I see it now. Damn, how superficial one can be!

 

In that case, Dorothy, you’ll probably be finding something with the pressure plate, if it wasn’t loose debris.

 

Hey Simon, 

I have wiped down the pressure plate but also the scratch forms before entering the pressure plate.


Edited by Dorothy Lee, 15 December 2017 - 12:54 PM.

  • 0

#9 Mark Dunn

Mark Dunn
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 2555 posts
  • Other
  • London

Posted 15 December 2017 - 01:43 PM

Looking at my K3, it seems that your scratches are inside the sprocket guide rollers so I suspect either the metal plates which travel the full width of the film- could there be a chip stuck in there?- or the plastic fitting to the left of the sprocket.
There is also a metal ridge in the middle of the roller so you could check that.

  • 0

#10 Dorothy Lee

Dorothy Lee

    New

  • Basic Members
  • Pip
  • 6 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Los Angeles

Posted 15 December 2017 - 01:49 PM

 

Looking at my K3, it seems that your scratches are inside the sprocket guide rollers so I suspect either the metal plates which travel the full width of the film- could there be a chip stuck in there?- or the plastic fitting to the left of the sprocket.
There is also a metal ridge in the middle of the roller so you could check that.

 

 

Maybe so, I have not mentioned earlier but there was a tiny triangular metal piece that broke off when I have received it.

It was running fine so I did not think it was a big deal (it probably is but part of me did not want to believe it haha)

It may need a part replacement or something if I have gotten a broken camera; or get a refund from the seller.


  • 0

#11 Dom Jaeger

Dom Jaeger
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1668 posts
  • Other
  • Melbourne, Australia

Posted 15 December 2017 - 04:50 PM

Hello Dom,
 
Would the burr mean the whirring of the camera or the dent on the sprocket that is causing the scratch? 
I have brushed down the whole magazine compartment but I still get scratches on the non-emulsion side. 
The emulsion side is clean so I don't think there is any dust or dent on the gate that is causing it.
If it is the sprocket, then how do I make it flush?
If anything I will have to have a professional take in to fix it :(
Thank you all for the replies!


A burr meaning a high spot, a sharp edge or point that is protruding out past the flat surface. If you mark the film carefully you should be able to determine where the scratch begins within a couple of mm, then examine that area carefully with a loupe or magnifying glass. You might need to remove a sprockets. (It's been many years since I looked at a K3 so I can't be specific about the disassembly needed).

You may need to use a very fine file or emery paper to remove the burr. I would use a deburring stone, which is a very hard and flat tool designed for this purpose but not easily found in shops. Be careful not to roughen any surface that touches the film.
  • 0

#12 Dorothy Lee

Dorothy Lee

    New

  • Basic Members
  • Pip
  • 6 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Los Angeles

Posted 15 December 2017 - 04:54 PM

Thank you so much Dom,

 

I could not see inside the sprocket and have not yet attempted to disassemble it lest breaking it even more.

I will try to look into the sprocket with the magnifying glass-- it is a great call haha.

I have contacted the seller and he said he will gladly exchange it for me, which is a great news because the repair would cost me even more than I had anticipated.

I just hope the new one does not have any broken parts.

 

A burr meaning a high spot, a sharp edge or point that is protruding out past the flat surface. If you mark the film carefully you should be able to determine where the scratch begins within a couple of mm, then examine that area carefully with a loupe or magnifying glass. You might need to remove a sprockets. (It's been many years since I looked at a K3 so I can't be specific about the disassembly needed).

You may need to use a very fine file or emery paper to remove the burr. I would use a deburring stone, which is a very hard and flat tool designed for this purpose but not easily found in shops. Be careful not to roughen any surface that touches the film.


  • 0

#13 Simon Wyss

Simon Wyss
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1452 posts
  • Other
  • Basel, Switzerland

Posted 16 December 2017 - 04:40 AM

There are so many better made 16mm cameras on the market that I can hardly understand why the Krasnogorsk get that much attention. Yes, mirror reflex finder, yes, low prices. But the film path is weakish. The GIC 16 has similarly cheap guides at the sprocket. Even the old Ciné-Kodak has more dependable mechanics. Isn’t the way the film is treated most important?


  • 0

#14 Samuel Berger

Samuel Berger
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1046 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Seattle

Posted 16 December 2017 - 12:08 PM

There are so many better made 16mm cameras on the market that I can hardly understand why the Krasnogorsk get that much attention. Yes, mirror reflex finder, yes, low prices. But the film path is weakish. The GIC 16 has similarly cheap guides at the sprocket. Even the old Ciné-Kodak has more dependable mechanics. Isn’t the way the film is treated most important?

Not to someone without any money to get started, no. K3's were built in the thousands, available practically new with filters and leather cases, and don't look near as intimidating to learn as a Bolex.

But yes, mostly it's the price point of $100-$200 to get started in a hobby where the next option up in price is usually something heavily used from someone's attic, that might have been stored or decades with a fully wound spring coil.


  • 0

#15 Simon Wyss

Simon Wyss
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1452 posts
  • Other
  • Basel, Switzerland

Posted 17 December 2017 - 03:36 AM

I feel awfully sorry about my repetitiveness. The 16mm format technology was developed to semi-pro and professional levels, we have a consciousness of how it looks and what’s possible with it. I have a hard time with each such discussion from which it is obvious that somebody wants to save on the food money. Filmo 70s can be found for less than $100 today, sure, not necessarily in good shape, but the differences in design and construction to a Soviet made camera are deafening.

 

Over the years I could accumulate detailed knowledge of and gain experience in the performance of varied cameras. I’m even of the opinion that all the amateur ciné cameras manufactured behind the Iron Curtain are West designs, pure transfer of technology. Responsibles in the Soviet union didn’t have the deep and broad understanding of fine mechanics the specialists had in Chicago. Only as an illustration, Kodak is struggling to bring a camera to the market right because they’re as innocent as Breshnev was what regards motion-picture machinery. The Kiev 16 Alpha has quite a flubbed film trajectory, not seldomly the film jumps out of place. The Krasnogorsk offer similar unnecessary insufficiencies.

 

If you want a certain degree of product reliability, you better invest in proven and well repairable products. Price differences aren’t that big but the after market life is. I must complete the picture by saying that there are rather bad European and American cameras. The Pathé WEBO M is one of them.

 

Why do Ciné-Kodak Specials in decent shape still cost several hundreds? They are well made. Technicians can bring them back to perfect functioning. CKS means big flat base, 1600 frames continuous run on a wind, finely adjustable speeds down to 8 fps (also to double or triple the amount of light reaching the film), quick-change magazines, a reflex finder usable prior to shooting, and oilers for fast moving parts.

 

The Revere 101/103 have a first class film canal and automatic threading. Paillard-Bolex H are good entry-level products. No plastic. By the way, there’s a reason for metal film spools: less static charge. Film acts as an electric capacitor when rolled.


  • 0

#16 Samuel Berger

Samuel Berger
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1046 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Seattle

Posted 17 December 2017 - 08:57 PM

But there aren't that many Revere's on eBay or in general, not near as many as there are K3s or Bolexes. I think the K3's work fine so long as they aren't amateurishly converted into S16. As you know I own a Revere 101 but I don't trust it unless I get it overhauled first. I also don't trust the lens system. It looks great and fun but I am also concerned about that plastic byproduct that seems to come out of them. I wonder if there is any inside the camera itself,.

 

Anyway, most people won't be happy without a reflex viewfinder or a focusing ring on the lens. And they definitely don't want to spend $25 on a camera only find out later that it costs $400 to overhaul, which is what happened when I bought that Revere. ;-)


Edited by Samuel Berger, 17 December 2017 - 08:58 PM.

  • 0

#17 Simon Wyss

Simon Wyss
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1452 posts
  • Other
  • Basel, Switzerland

Posted 18 December 2017 - 02:15 AM

Yeah. Get yourself an Elgeet Cine-Flex. There were a model for 16mm and one for 8mm cameras. Very light.


  • 0

#18 Dirk DeJonghe

Dirk DeJonghe
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 611 posts
  • Industry Rep
  • Kortrijk,Belgium

Posted 18 December 2017 - 02:55 AM

Each roll of 100ft 16mm you will shoot will cost at least 100€ (stock + processing + telecine). Having a good reliable camera is self-defense. 


  • 0

#19 Gareth Blackstock

Gareth Blackstock
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 140 posts
  • Other
  • Ararat, Victoria Australia

Posted 18 December 2017 - 05:26 AM

Simon, I think you are being a little heavy handed in the way you imply Eastern European technology as being archaic.  I think that what you say is quite broad and fails to take into account a huge amount of variables.  For a time, Eastern European technology was highly respected, and in some industries, is still considered the "standard" to achieve.

 

I asked a cinematographer years ago for advice on buying a camera, he basically stated that considering the mechanisms that advance the film have remained essentially the same since photography began, he said focus on the really important stuff, the 6 inches in front of the film, and the 10 inches looking through the view finder, ie: pick a good lens and learn your craft.  Good advice, I'm still trying to get there... anyway  I figure if you screwed a modern lens onto a 1907 handcrank, and shot with some nice Kodak film, you just might get the same footage as a modern Arri, etc.  Perhaps I am being too broad, but you get the picture?

 

And what you say about borrowing technology, well companies have been adopting, adapting, stealing, copying etc off each other for centuries, it's considered standard practice.  One story every motorcyclist should know, Ernst Degner, defected from Eastern Europe in the 60's, and with stolen technology enabled Suzuki to rule supreme of the 2 stroke racing world.  In other words, the West has been pilfering technology from the East just as much as they are accused of taking from the west.  And, suggesting that Eastern Europeans simply copied technology, flies in the face of so many unique and advanced designs in many industries.

 

I am of the opinion that if you find a camera, clean it, do what you can to get it running, shoot some film, and learn about it enough that you can fix or adapt, and modify the camera to suit your needs.  If it scratches, smooth out the burr, a light leak?  strap on some gaffer tape, thats what it is for, if the camera is too heavy, get someone else to carry it, if it squeaks, lube the bugger, if you can afford it, get it serviced, if you get chased while filming, throw the bloody camera at them, if it's a K3, go back and pick it up, it'll still work.  Try that with an Arriflex.

 

While I imagine this board has multitudes of industry pro's who make money from film, who can get their equipment claimed as a tax write off, who probably get free stuff, and perhaps smirk at the grubby little film makers messing around with obscure cameras and expired film, spare a thought that the very best camera operators, directors, gaffers, editors, cinematographers, et all, from any film industries "golden period", were filming in a time where skills, initiative, imagination, and daring were more important than the name plate riveted to a box on a tripod. 

 

IMHO. :rolleyes:


  • 0

#20 Mark Dunn

Mark Dunn
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 2555 posts
  • Other
  • London

Posted 18 December 2017 - 06:22 AM

I don't think Simon wasn't offering a critique of Warsaw Pact industrial policy- he was stating the fact that the K3, for example, was a ripoff of, I believe, a B&H camera, done without an appreciation of its design principles or quality control So you can end up with a bad example just by virtue of the way it was made- by the yard- in a way that simply didn't apply to Western designs.

  • 0



Also tagged with one or more of these keywords: 16mm, krasnogorsk 3, film, k3, scratch

Glidecam

Media Blackout - Custom Cables and AKS

Broadcast Solutions Inc

Technodolly

The Slider

Aerial Filmworks

CineTape

Abel Cine

Wooden Camera

Visual Products

Paralinx LLC

rebotnix Technologies

Tai Audio

Willys Widgets

Metropolis Post

Gamma Ray Digital Inc

CineLab

Ritter Battery

FJS International, LLC

Rig Wheels Passport

Glidecam

Abel Cine

Rig Wheels Passport

Ritter Battery

Visual Products

Wooden Camera

Technodolly

CineTape

Tai Audio

CineLab

Gamma Ray Digital Inc

Willys Widgets

Paralinx LLC

The Slider

FJS International, LLC

rebotnix Technologies

Media Blackout - Custom Cables and AKS

Broadcast Solutions Inc

Aerial Filmworks

Metropolis Post