Jump to content


Photo

Anamorphic on Eclair.


  • Please log in to reply
85 replies to this topic

#21 Samuel Berger

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

Posted 01 November 2017 - 12:48 AM

 

Is there any evidence of this at all, or a reference to someone observing it or having an opinion about it. I've never heard of it and my guess is that this is fiction.

 

I suppose I could hunt down the trails, yes, just not now as I'm off to sleep. But ironically it was a man named Martin Hill who first told me about this, and in fact why I chose the NPR over the ACL back in '89. He was a collector, I guess you could say. He also had an odd theory about fruit flies but that's another story. Anyway, ever since that meeting with Mr. Hill I started observing films shot on the ACL to see if it appeared and every now and then it would get commented on the internet.  That and some flicker issues.


  • 0

#22 Samuel Berger

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

Posted 01 November 2017 - 12:51 AM

 

I have never heard of this breathing you speak of. And not seen it on any of the eclairs I have operated.
 

This was a result of conversions done by Les Bosher mainly. He is not really reliable when it comes to Eclairs at least, despite being the only repairman in europe.

The light leak was a temporary issue with the ones he had converted, otherwise, not an issue at at. The flicker come sometimes occur when the 144 degree shutter was not installed either, or timed correctly.

As for english mags, I have never used them. But I have only heard that the few repairmen around will not touch english mags because they are so....unreliable?

C

 

Carl,

 

Would you mind elaborating on what went on between you and Mr. Bosher? My understanding is that he will no longer speak to you. I was going to get him to service a camera, but I'm most curious to hear your experience before I go forward.

 

I'm happy to hear yours is worked on by Bernie, that amazingly kind Irishman. Blessed be, him.


  • 0

#23 Carl Nenzen Loven

Carl Nenzen Loven
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 172 posts
  • Student
  • San Francisco

Posted 01 November 2017 - 01:00 AM

 

Carl,

 

Would you mind elaborating on what went on between you and Mr. Bosher? My understanding is that he will no longer speak to you. I was going to get him to service a camera, but I'm most curious to hear your experience before I go forward.

 

I'm happy to hear yours is worked on by Bernie, that amazingly kind Irishman. Blessed be, him.

 

Well, it isn't really that complicated.

He converted a ACL 1.5 to a Super 16 a couple of years ago, but forgot to adjust the shutter. Now the guy I bought the camera from, a man named Volker in Germany, was a very nice man. He even agreed sending it in to Les for another service before I he sent it to me.

But when the camera arrived from Bosher, no CLA had been done, nor had he corrected the timing of the camera, or fixed the shutter (Volker did not know of the shutter issue since he screened prints just, never did telecine where the flickering is very obvious unlike prints)

I was trying to figuring out was wrong, while using whatever small resources that still existed online. When I eventually found out the “mistake” Mr.Bosher had done, I asked that the seller contacted him as well as me. But he ignored both me and him (he had replied to earlier emails in my troubleshooting stages). Ever since I have at least not recommended him to anyone else.

Bernie might have charged me for the repairs that Bosher didn't do, but now my camera works perfectly fine, and all mags run smooth as they should. Mr. Bosher does not seem to care about reputation, nor customer contact/service. So that was it for me.

C


  • 0

#24 Heikki Repo

Heikki Repo
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 421 posts
  • Director
  • Finland

Posted 01 November 2017 - 01:31 AM

I have seen the mentioned "breathing" issue only in some of my super-8 films, never on anything I have shot with my ACL.

As for flicker, I had a hole in my lens mount. It was fixed by Bernie. I occasionally do still get flicker when strong light comes in from a certain direction and then apparently gets reflected inside the camera. This is a flaw related to the mirror design, one that I'm ready to live with since the same design allows one to use C-mount lenses on this camera.
  • 0

#25 Gregg MacPherson

Gregg MacPherson
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1883 posts
  • Other
  • New Zealand

Posted 01 November 2017 - 01:42 AM

 

.... Les Bosher ...... the only repairman in europe.

 

 

Carl, I think there are one or two real experts in servicing ACL, in Europe (Switzerland..?).  When these people are identified we need to hang on to the contact data and share it.....We should have a rummage and see what we all come up with...


  • 0

#26 Carl Nenzen Loven

Carl Nenzen Loven
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 172 posts
  • Student
  • San Francisco

Posted 01 November 2017 - 01:55 PM

 
Carl, I think there are one or two real experts in servicing ACL, in Europe (Switzerland..?).  When these people are identified we need to hang on to the contact data and share it.....We should have a rummage and see what we all come up with...



Are you sure, never heard of this man. But you are right. This knowledge will soon be impossible to get so keeping an up to date list is important.

I'm considering visiting S16 Inc to have them train me as well. We need a new generation of techs.
  • 0

#27 Samuel Berger

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

Posted 01 November 2017 - 07:25 PM

By the way, is it true that ACLs have no pin registration?


  • 0

#28 Gregg MacPherson

Gregg MacPherson
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1883 posts
  • Other
  • New Zealand

Posted 01 November 2017 - 07:35 PM

By the way, is it true that ACLs have no pin registration?

Yes, just like the Aaton.  And the Arri II... :lol:


  • 0

#29 Gregg MacPherson

Gregg MacPherson
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1883 posts
  • Other
  • New Zealand

Posted 01 November 2017 - 07:50 PM

Are you sure, never heard of this man. But you are right. This knowledge will soon be impossible to get so keeping an up to date list is important.

I'm considering visiting S16 Inc to have them train me as well. We need a new generation of techs.

 

As an exercise I tried chasing down one of the leads that I had....A chap selling an Aaton and ACL a couple of years ago mentioned an ex Eclair/Aaton factory tech who may still be living in the Valencia region (Spain?).  So I took a look,  joined a French forum for camera obsessives, found a message by Bernard Dechaumel, ex Eclair/Aaton tech, establishing last activity about 2007. A message by an Anthony Mills dated 2016 mentioned that Bernard Dechaumel worked on his Cameflex, not sure when. Left messages with Bernard and Anthony....we'll see.

 

It's good to look around...doesn't take much effort really...


  • 0

#30 Samuel Berger

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

Posted 01 November 2017 - 09:00 PM

Yes, just like the Aaton.  And the Arri II... :lol:

 

Whaaaat? Add that to the list of things I wish I knew before...


  • 0

#31 Jon O'Brien

Jon O'Brien
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 308 posts
  • Other
  • Brisbane

Posted 01 November 2017 - 09:15 PM

The Arri II seems to get by fine without pin registration though, on the big screen on major productions, usually as B camera. Lucas used it for at least a few scenes in Star Wars IV (1977), eg. some shots of the opening storm trooper scenes, storming Princess Leia's ship, and at least one shot of the raiders jumping on a Bantha. That amazes me, to think of that tiny little camera, used for that!

 

https://i.pinimg.com...63b9ae21f17.jpg


  • 0

#32 Gregg MacPherson

Gregg MacPherson
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1883 posts
  • Other
  • New Zealand

Posted 03 November 2017 - 05:24 PM

Arri IIs were a B camera option here in the 80s,  and some were shooting TV commercials with them also.  I heard (but don't know first hand, so could be speaking through my arse like you know who) that whole features were shot on Arri IIs in India back then.


  • 0

#33 Samuel Berger

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

Posted 03 November 2017 - 05:27 PM

Arri IIs were a B camera option here in the 80s,  and some were shooting TV commercials with them also.  I heard (but don't know first hand, so could be speaking through my arse like you know who) that whole features were shot on Arri IIs in India back then.

 

That is statistically possible since during the 1980's India produced about 5000 features per year.


  • 0

#34 Carl Nenzen Loven

Carl Nenzen Loven
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 172 posts
  • Student
  • San Francisco

Posted 03 November 2017 - 05:35 PM

Update on the anamorphic:
Today my adapter arrives to test my LG-AG7200 on my Ang 9-57mm

I know it isn't a S16 lens, but it is a start at least. I have access to an SR2 Zeiss Zoom as well, and if test today is alright, that is the next competitor.

C
  • 0

#35 Samuel Berger

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

Posted 03 November 2017 - 05:52 PM

Let me see if I am keeping track correctly: You borrowed a Nikon-to-Cameflex adapter and are using a Nikon mount Angenieux 9-57mm?


  • 0

#36 Carl Nenzen Loven

Carl Nenzen Loven
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 172 posts
  • Student
  • San Francisco

Posted 03 November 2017 - 05:58 PM

Let me see if I am keeping track correctly: You borrowed a Nikon-to-Cameflex adapter and are using a Nikon mount Angenieux 9-57mm?


Half right. Never got the adapter. Using a Arri S mount ang 9-57, which worked perfectly before...some slight vignetting. And on front I am mounting my adapter.

C
  • 0

#37 Samuel Berger

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

Posted 03 November 2017 - 06:01 PM

Half right. Never got the adapter. Using a Arri S mount ang 9-57, which worked perfectly before...some slight vignetting. And on front I am mounting my adapter.

C

 

Mike told me that the Angenieux 12-120 covers S16 only from 35mm onwards. I wonder if this is also true of the 9-57.


  • 0

#38 Tyler Purcell

Tyler Purcell
  • Sustaining Members
  • 3725 posts
  • Other
  • Los Angeles

Posted 04 November 2017 - 07:02 PM

Whaaaat? Add that to the list of things I wish I knew before...


Pin registration is unnecessary on the Aaton's because they have a spring loaded side rail that holds the film and prevents it from moving in the gate.

You've gotta pay quite a bit of money for a pin registered camera and generally, they're bigger/heavier than one's without, due to the extra movement. It would be impossible to make a quick-change 35mm pin registered camera without it being BIG to accomidate all the extra bits.

What's humours is that the SR's have pin registration, but they're louder than the Aaton XTR AND funny enough, have more "wiggle" in the image then the XTR.
  • -1

#39 Gregg MacPherson

Gregg MacPherson
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1883 posts
  • Other
  • New Zealand

Posted 04 November 2017 - 07:28 PM

The legitimate comparison would need to be between SR3s and XTRs, making observation of several properly serviced cameras. The prospect of a comparison is interesting, but needs to be made by a qualified technician with a scientific approach and an interest in unbiased interpretation....Same goes for the steadiness issue. Some of these issues have been clarified before (not humorous really).


  • 0

#40 Dom Jaeger

Dom Jaeger
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1604 posts
  • Other
  • Melbourne, Australia

Posted 05 November 2017 - 07:48 PM

Pin registration is unnecessary on the Aaton's because they have a spring loaded side rail that holds the film and prevents it from moving in the gate.

You've gotta pay quite a bit of money for a pin registered camera and generally, they're bigger/heavier than one's without, due to the extra movement. It would be impossible to make a quick-change 35mm pin registered camera without it being BIG to accomidate all the extra bits.

What's humours is that the SR's have pin registration, but they're louder than the Aaton XTR AND funny enough, have more "wiggle" in the image then the XTR.

 

Sigh. Here we go again. 

 

Plenty of cameras have sprung side rails - a Bolex for example, or earlier Arriflex models like the 16S or 16BL. Despite the internet's opinion, there's more going on in the Aaton design than that to keep them so steady.

 

The registration pin mechanics on an SR are very compact and probably weigh about a couple of grams. On an Arricam it might add 50 grams and make the movement a cm taller. Not sure where you get your ideas, Tyler.

 

SR3 dB rating is 20 +2, XTR is 20 -1 /+2, so almost identical. It always depends on the service history, mileage and condition, but those are the factory specs. 

 

There is no wiggle in the image of an SR3 in tolerance, I've looked at dozens of steady tests, they're rock solid, even at higher speeds. A worn SR1 or 2 might develop gate weave, but that's because it needs a service. In the past some telecines introduced gate weave because they stabilised the film horizontally at a different point than the camera does, and the film itself can have weave. These days stabilisation in post can pretty much eliminate these issues. 

 

If you encountered one noisy or unsteady SR it doesn't make it a general rule. As I've said before, SRs were industry workhorses far more than Aatons (probably because of their superior reliability), and many SR2s particularly got worked to death without proper servicing, but a serviced SR is neither loud nor unsteady. None of the dozen or so SR2s I looked after as a rental house tech were noisy, but some film school ones I saw were. Our SR3s were all dead quiet.

 

I've come across dodgy Aatons. Damaged electronics because the boards are susceptible to damage through the flimsy base (avoid hanging one from the base upside down for example), complaints of mags not latching properly, constant alterations in the design that make one slightly different from the next, a dropped mag bending the lid and causing a light leak because they're not as sturdy etc. Wear to the claw mechanism of an Aaton will introduce unsteadiness if it's not regularly serviced, just like an SR. But I wouldn't disparage them generally, they're fantastic cameras, just like SRs.

 

Having recently been involved in the prep of a production using a 416, I think that camera is the perfect blend of Aaton and Arri, absolutely beautiful piece of engineering.


  • 1


Aerial Filmworks

Ritter Battery

Gamma Ray Digital Inc

Abel Cine

Willys Widgets

Rig Wheels Passport

The Slider

FJS International, LLC

Paralinx LLC

Visual Products

Media Blackout - Custom Cables and AKS

rebotnix Technologies

Wooden Camera

CineLab

CineTape

Opal

Tai Audio

Technodolly

Broadcast Solutions Inc

Glidecam

Metropolis Post

FJS International, LLC

Rig Wheels Passport

Visual Products

Media Blackout - Custom Cables and AKS

Paralinx LLC

rebotnix Technologies

Glidecam

Ritter Battery

CineTape

Metropolis Post

Abel Cine

CineLab

Tai Audio

Wooden Camera

Technodolly

Aerial Filmworks

Opal

Gamma Ray Digital Inc

Broadcast Solutions Inc

The Slider

Willys Widgets