Jump to content


Photo

Was the reflex shutter developed by Bell & Howell Co. ?


  • Please log in to reply
29 replies to this topic

#21 Mike Short

Mike Short

    New

  • Basic Members
  • Pip
  • 7 posts
  • Other

Posted 16 March 2014 - 10:22 AM

 

Nice to know I was correct.  B)
 
That link is the best history of the Arriflex 35 (particularly pre-war) that I've ever come across, lots of fascinating info. Thanks Simon.
 
It deserves a good translation, or at least a better one than online translators are capable of. 
 
I haven't read this new book yet, though from the title it seems more focussed on the post-war, American history:
http://www.amazon.co...2/dp/1617037419

 

I agree! Truly fascinating history and it fills some of the gaps. Yes a good translation would be very nice.
  • 0

#22 Simon Wyss

Simon Wyss
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1508 posts
  • Other
  • Near Basel, Switzerland

Posted 23 March 2014 - 06:26 AM

Gave it a try:

 

Attached File  Translation of Part 1 of Lusznat   59.04KB   103 downloads


  • 0

#23 Tom Chabbat

Tom Chabbat
  • Basic Members
  • PipPip
  • 83 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Paris, France

Posted 23 March 2014 - 09:12 PM

Before you go any further, you should make a simple search in google patent. You will discover that yes, ARRI did not "invented" per say the reflex shutter, but neither did Bell & Howell. There's actually at least a dozen patents ranging from the 1910's to the 1930's of various origins and countries. The reflex shutter was an old idea floating around. Bourdereau apparently made a reflex camera as early as 1922 (source here). If you can read german, there's a good story about it here, citing a 1913 german patent (if you still have doubts about german engineering).

What ARRI actually did is to develop a method to successfully mass produce it. They certainly took some inspiration with the then successful Eyemo as they wanted to make a lightweight, portative model, but the link does not go further.


  • 0

#24 Tom Chabbat

Tom Chabbat
  • Basic Members
  • PipPip
  • 83 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Paris, France

Posted 23 March 2014 - 09:59 PM

Addendum, there's also a brief mention of the 1913 patent in the Lusznat article...


  • 0

#25 Dom Jaeger

Dom Jaeger
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1755 posts
  • Other
  • Melbourne, Australia

Posted 24 March 2014 - 01:12 AM

 ARRI isn’t holy. 

 

A little detective story I've just finished illustrates that..

 

I've been writing up a service guide for the Arri IIC but one thing was bothering me. Every online source of information and nearly every written one I've come across about the IIC - including an American Cinematographers Manual, Carlson's Handbook, Raimondo-Souto's books, even the Arri IIC manual itself - mentions that the shutter angle is 180 degrees.

 

But every IIC I've looked at or worked on has had a 165 degree shutter, except for one that was 172.8 degrees. And looking at the timing of that 172.8 camera, I noticed that the mirror wasn't covering the gate for the entire pulldown cycle, a corner was being exposed as the film was still moving. A 180 degree shutter would almost certainly create travel ghost. The only source that agreed with my experiential finding of 165 degree shutters on IICs was Samuelson's "Motion Picture Camera Data" book. What was going on?

 

After some digging around, I finally uncovered this explanation (revealed in the new Arriflex 35 book by Norris Pope, as told to him by Axel Broda):

A 180 degree shutter was introduced with the IIA in 1954, along with the new cardiod cam movement. But problems with the new design were encountered, and so when the IIB was introduced in 1958, the shutter was "quietly" reduced to 165 degrees, and remained so for the IIC. "The exposure difference was negligible, so the Arriflex company saw no need to change the shutter description". A remarkable decision that has caused confusion ever since. The real reason of course was that Arri didn't want to admit their mistake.  :ph34r:

 

172.8 degree shutters came later, to deal with flicker in 50Hz countries at 24fps, but I strongly suspect under certain lighting conditions they will show signs of travel ghost in one corner. I don't know if they were supplied by Arri or were after-market modifications.


  • 0

#26 Simon Wyss

Simon Wyss
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1508 posts
  • Other
  • Near Basel, Switzerland

Posted 24 March 2014 - 01:36 AM

Dom, that’s very interesting but not surprising at the same time.

 

Optically the ARRIFLEX shutter brings complications with it, namely because the sector edges stand away from the film, the further so the more one observes the right hand side (seen from behind film towards scene).

 

It had been clearly stated in advertisements by Paillard that their H camera is equipped with a “focal plane shutter” at about the same time when the ARRIFLEX appeared. As a matter of fact, the H-16/9/8 had an opening angle of 192 degrees in the beginning, 190 degrees of which are useable due to the distance from the aperture (and depending on the lens’s focal length). Shutter edges never form a sharply confined shadow on the aperture. The Paillard-Bolex H’s shutter has precisely 2.25" diameter, by the way (measured on serial number 10005).


  • 0

#27 Chris Millar

Chris Millar
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1642 posts
  • Other

Posted 24 March 2014 - 10:49 PM

You mentioned the 'B' word...

 

The amount of misinformation on the H16 shutter on the net is amazing - funny thing is, some of it actually comes from the manufacturer itself.

 

After pulling apart and super-16'ing both a SB and an EL I took some measurements of the shutter and the prism light loss - I don't have the numbers in the country at the moment - but they are different enough to be note-worthy, perhaps not so much in exposure but more that the incorrectness isn't even 'linear' with the information provided in some spec sheets. Seems like marketing were perhaps after easy numbers ...


  • 0

#28 Simon Wyss

Simon Wyss
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1508 posts
  • Other
  • Near Basel, Switzerland

Posted 26 March 2014 - 05:50 AM

More text:

 

Attached File  Translation of Arriflex Story, Part 2.pdf   68.32KB   111 downloads


  • 0

#29 Simon Wyss

Simon Wyss
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1508 posts
  • Other
  • Near Basel, Switzerland

Posted 05 April 2014 - 06:31 AM

Another detail:

 

Bell & Howell Double Eight Camera.jpg

 

Lens Release Mechanism ARRIFLEX.jpg


  • 0

#30 Simon Wyss

Simon Wyss
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1508 posts
  • Other
  • Near Basel, Switzerland

Posted 28 August 2017 - 01:16 PM

Learning every day, the above Filmo Eight Companion dates from around 1939. To make my point about the tweezers with the lens bayonet valid I have to show the first Bell & Howell camera bearing them, the 1935 Straight Eight Filmo:

 

Filmo Straight Eight Lens Mount.jpg

 

So two years before the ARRIFLEX. US Patent 2,067,189 to Albert Summers Howell, issued January 12, 1937, protects this clip-on mount. Application for it was filed June 24, 1935.

 

From US 2067189 to Howell.jpg

 

Note that the rotationally locating stud (28) was moved from twelve o’clock to nine o’clock.


  • 0


CineLab

Wooden Camera

Media Blackout - Custom Cables and AKS

CineTape

Technodolly

Glidecam

Metropolis Post

Ritter Battery

Paralinx LLC

Aerial Filmworks

Broadcast Solutions Inc

Tai Audio

Rig Wheels Passport

FJS International, LLC

Gamma Ray Digital Inc

Visual Products

New Pro Video - New and Used Equipment

The Slider

rebotnix Technologies

Willys Widgets

Abel Cine

FJS International, LLC

The Slider

Ritter Battery

Broadcast Solutions Inc

Rig Wheels Passport

Paralinx LLC

Visual Products

Media Blackout - Custom Cables and AKS

rebotnix Technologies

Metropolis Post

CineLab

Technodolly

Tai Audio

Willys Widgets

Wooden Camera

New Pro Video - New and Used Equipment

CineTape

Abel Cine

Aerial Filmworks

Glidecam

Gamma Ray Digital Inc