Jump to content


Photo

a clockwork orange


  • Please log in to reply
17 replies to this topic

#1 Joe Gideon

Joe Gideon

    New

  • Basic Members
  • Pip
  • 5 posts
  • Director

Posted 28 January 2006 - 07:45 PM

I was wondering if anyone knew what size lens Kubrick used for the handheld work in A Clockwork Orange? And additionally, what size lens would produce the same viewing angle when shooting 16mm.

thanks.
  • 0

#2 David Mullen ASC

David Mullen ASC
  • Sustaining Members
  • 19759 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Los Angeles

Posted 28 January 2006 - 08:05 PM

That was probably the shots done with the 9.8mm Kinoptic that you are thinking of, but he used other lenses as well.

In 16mm, anything super wide-angle would work, like a 4.5mm Elite, 5.9mm Ang., 6mm Century, 7mm Elite.
  • 0

#3 dd3stp233

dd3stp233
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 102 posts
  • Other

Posted 28 January 2006 - 09:49 PM

Interesting note: the POV shot of Alex jumping out the window while not hand held was actually the camera being thrown out the window. If I remember right, it had to be done more then once to get the camera to land lens down. The lens was destroyed and maybe part of the camera too.
  • 0

#4 Laurent Andrieux

Laurent Andrieux
  • Sustaining Members
  • 1527 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • France

Posted 28 January 2006 - 09:57 PM

I was wondering if anyone knew what size lens Kubrick used for the handheld work in A Clockwork Orange? And additionally, what size lens would produce the same viewing angle when shooting 16mm.

thanks.


I Remember I saw a picture of Kubrick shooting that scene. He was operating a ARRI 35 II C as far as I can recall.
  • 0

#5 Stephen Williams

Stephen Williams
  • Sustaining Members
  • 4708 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Europe

Posted 29 January 2006 - 06:19 AM

Interesting note: the POV shot of Alex jumping out the window while not hand held was actually the camera being thrown out the window. If I remember right, it had to be done more then once to get the camera to land lens down. The lens was destroyed and maybe part of the camera too.


Hi,

The camera was a wind up Newman Sinclair. The camera and lens survived 6 takes.(it was wrapped with polystyrene). I would not like to try that with a video camera!

http://www.archiviok...1972moderntimes

Stephen
  • 0

#6 dd3stp233

dd3stp233
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 102 posts
  • Other

Posted 29 January 2006 - 10:44 PM

Actually, yes, after rereading the interview, the camera survived but the lens didn't. -" On the final one it landed right on the lens and smashed it "
  • 0

#7 Mitch Gross

Mitch Gross
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 2873 posts
  • Cinematographer

Posted 31 January 2006 - 01:42 PM

In James Monaco's "How to Read a Film" (great book, btw), there is a picture of Kubrick shooting the rape scene from A Clockwork Orange, using an Arri 2c and a small prime. It's impossible to tell if it is a Schnieder, Zeiss, Angenieux, Kinoptik or whatever.

Other scenes from that movie plus other Kubrick films have used the Kinoptik 9.8. A good example is the chase through the maze at the end of The Shining. The little boy's feet occassionally get close to the steadicam and one can see the angular distortion in the 1.33 video transfer. In 16mm, the matching lens would be the Kinoptik 5.7, which is actually the same vintage and design as the 9.8 but redesigned slightly for 16mm coverage. This lens also covers Super-16 and like its big brother, distorts like crazy. I have one that I use for music videos, dream sequences, acid trips, etc. It is about 40 years old so it doesn't perform as well optically as new lenses, but it is such an extreme effect lens that it hardly matters. Modern lenses such as the Elite 4.5mm or the Optex 5mm will distort as well, but look different (cleaner, sharper, better contrast) than the old Kinoptik. You can rent a modern lens for maybe $50 for the day, and you can buy an old Kinoptik for under $1k. Doubt anyone has one avasilable for rent.
  • 0

#8 Andy Jesson

Andy Jesson

    New

  • Basic Members
  • Pip
  • 1 posts
  • Student

Posted 31 January 2006 - 02:36 PM

Other scenes from that movie plus other Kubrick films have used the Kinoptik 9.8. ... Doubt anyone has one avasilable for rent.


There's a "9.8mm Century/Kinoptic - PL mount T2.3" in Clairmont's rental catalogue for $60/day. Presumably a Kinoptic retrofitted with a PL by Century?
  • 0

#9 Laurent Andrieux

Laurent Andrieux
  • Sustaining Members
  • 1527 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • France

Posted 31 January 2006 - 06:11 PM

I've put my hand on the book I have. It's "Kubrick" by Michel Ciment.

There several pictures of the scene rape, were Kubrikk is had holding a camera that looks like a II-C to me.

There is also a picture of him handling a 35 mm camera with a 3 bayonnet turret l(ike the 16 st) - I don't remember the II C having such a turret but it's been years I've seen one...

It's not possible to see what set this picture was taken on.

And there's a couple of picture from the scene rape where I can read "CINE 60" on the camera's side, and the lens looks like a Kinoptic to me.

In this book, there is an interview of John Alcott, who says about Clockwork Orange" (excuse my poor translation) :

" We went back to 35mm after we used 65mm for 2001. For practical reasons, obviously, because we needed a versatile equipment in houses. The Arriflex seemed to us the best choice for this type of shooting, especially for hand held work. We used wide angles a lot and a french Angénieux lens, that open to T 4. (...) Stanley Kubrik operates himself a lot, especially for hand held shots, so he can see what is in the frame. He had found an easier way to hold the Arriflex in his hands, turning it into some sort of steadicam, before it existed. He's the only one I know who happened to give it such a stability..."

For what is about the the 5.7 mm kinoptik, I remember I used ones that were rented from Chevereau, in Paris. It's closed for some years, now, but most of the material (and the technicians too) went to Alga Samuelson Panavision in Paris. May be they still have ones. I couldn't find any on their online catalogue, though...
  • 0

#10 Mitch Gross

Mitch Gross
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 2873 posts
  • Cinematographer

Posted 01 February 2006 - 12:24 PM

There's a "9.8mm Century/Kinoptic - PL mount T2.3" in Clairmont's rental catalogue for $60/day. Presumably a Kinoptic retrofitted with a PL by Century?

That is a complete rehousing of the Kinoptik glass. It does away with the real filter tray, and it adds a focus ring. Yes that's right, the original 9.8 (and the 5.7 in 16mm) have no focus rings. Makes the lens much easier to use on modern cameras, but the look is the same. Both Kubrick and Terry Gilliam loved this lens, although I believe Kubrick moved on to more modern extreme wide angles by the time he shot Full Metal Jacket and Eyes Wide Shut.


The Arri 2c does indeed have a three lens turret unless it has been modified. Cine 60 was a New York Camera company that used to make a lot of specialized parts and modifications for camera gear. For the 2c is may have been a lightweight blimp housing, a crystal sync motor, a battery belt, or it may simply have been a camera that was rented from the company and therefore etched with their name.
  • 0

#11 Laurent Andrieux

Laurent Andrieux
  • Sustaining Members
  • 1527 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • France

Posted 01 February 2006 - 12:43 PM

The Arri 2c does indeed have a three lens turret unless it has been modified. Cine 60 was a New York Camera company that used to make a lot of specialized parts and modifications for camera gear. For the 2c is may have been a lightweight blimp housing, a crystal sync motor, a battery belt, or it may simply have been a camera that was rented from the company and therefore etched with their name.


Ok, thanks, things are more clear to me by now, since it really looks like what I recall of the II-C. I was unsure for the turret because - as well as for the 16 S - we like better not turning it, and stick to a mount, here in France... I only shot once with a II-C and didn't remember of the turret. So I think we can defenetly say (apart from the window shot) that the scene was shot hand held with a arri II-C from Cine 60
  • 0

#12 Leo Anthony Vale

Leo Anthony Vale
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 2010 posts
  • Other
  • Pittsburgh PA

Posted 01 February 2006 - 01:25 PM

[attachment=963:attachment][attachment=963:attachment]

Ok, thanks, things are more clear to me by now, since it really looks like what I recall of the II-C. I was unsure for the turret because - as well as for the 16 S - we like better not turning it, and stick to a mount, here in France... I only shot once with a II-C and didn't remember of the turret. So I think we can defenetly say (apart from the window shot) that the scene was shot hand held with a arri II-C from Cine 60


---Cine 60 made a fiberglass blimp for the Arri IIB/IIC and a flat base base for the motor.
I think the blimp wqas actually made in Germany.

The blimp was used in the rape scene. There are stills of it on the floor with Alex speaking directly into it, for POV of writer while his wife is being held in the background. Probably an 18mm since that was widest that could be used in the blimp.

Can't find that still but here's the blimp in another scene and the flat base:



---LV
  • 0

#13 Leo Anthony Vale

Leo Anthony Vale
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 2010 posts
  • Other
  • Pittsburgh PA

Posted 01 February 2006 - 01:57 PM

[attachment=965:attachment]

Can't find that still but here's the blimp in another scene and the flat base:
---LV


---Sorry about the attatchment. Here's the Cine 60 blimp at the milk bar:


---LV
  • 0

#14 Laurent Andrieux

Laurent Andrieux
  • Sustaining Members
  • 1527 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • France

Posted 01 February 2006 - 04:58 PM

I could scan and post the stills there is in Michel Ciment's book, but they're copyrighted, aren't they ?

There is a still of kubrick operating the same camera (the same blimp), with the old man in an harmchair. The camera is on a Cricket, with a snake and Kubrik is operating, himself sitting in an harmchair. Sure, as the camera shot was certainly tracking, I see the point, but I was thinking that he might even better have wanted to sit in an harmchair as well as to have somehow the same POV as the caracter... What d'you think?
  • 0

#15 Christian Appelt

Christian Appelt
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 470 posts

Posted 01 February 2006 - 06:55 PM

The 9.8mm Kinoptik lens used for A CLOCKWORK ORANGE, Kubrick's Arri IIC and the Arri 120 blimp with a special large port glass are presently on display at the Australian Centre for the Moving Image.

ACMI

Kubrick Exhibition Web Site

Edited by Christian Appelt, 01 February 2006 - 06:57 PM.

  • 0

#16 Dan Goulder

Dan Goulder
  • Sustaining Members
  • 1259 posts
  • Cinematographer

Posted 08 March 2006 - 02:00 PM

[attachment=963:attachment][attachment=963:attachment]
The blimp was used in the rape scene. There are stills of it on the floor with Alex speaking directly into it, for POV of writer while his wife is being held in the background. Probably an 18mm since that was widest that could be used in the blimp.
---LV

That scene looks like it was shot with the Kinoptic 9.8mm. There's an optional metal 'hard front' for the Cine 60, which allows it to be used with a zoom. That same front should work with the Kinoptic, and is what was probably used to get the shot.
  • 0

#17 Leo Anthony Vale

Leo Anthony Vale
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 2010 posts
  • Other
  • Pittsburgh PA

Posted 08 March 2006 - 02:49 PM

That scene looks like it was shot with the Kinoptic 9.8mm. There's an optional metal 'hard front' for the Cine 60, which allows it to be used with a zoom. That same front should work with the Kinoptic, and is what was probably used to get the shot.


---The 9.8mm Kinoptik is considerably shorter in physical length and wider angled than the 25-250mm Angie.
That combo wouldn't work. 9.8mm shots would have to be unblimped.

The record shop was shot with the BNC. From the stills that probably used the Angie 14.5mm. The lens was quite deep set in the BNC mount and the 9.8 would have protruded.

---LV
  • 0

#18 Dan Goulder

Dan Goulder
  • Sustaining Members
  • 1259 posts
  • Cinematographer

Posted 08 March 2006 - 05:20 PM

---The 9.8mm Kinoptik is considerably shorter in physical length and wider angled than the 25-250mm Angie.
That combo wouldn't work. 9.8mm shots would have to be unblimped.
---LV

I own a Cine 60 blimp with both fronts. Trust me, it'll work. (The lens isn't encased within the housing, it protrudes through a cutout in the metal front, and is still extremely quiet.) Since I'm going by your information that this blimp was used in that particular shot, this is how it would have been accomplished. The shot in question was definitely filmed with something wider than an 18mm. I've seen a picture of the reverse angle shot of the writer being filmed, and the Kinoptic 9.8mm is in clear view. It looks like the same lens is used to shoot in both directions.
  • 0


Broadcast Solutions Inc

CineTape

Abel Cine

CineLab

Tai Audio

Rig Wheels Passport

Glidecam

Media Blackout - Custom Cables and AKS

Willys Widgets

Metropolis Post

Paralinx LLC

Aerial Filmworks

rebotnix Technologies

Wooden Camera

FJS International, LLC

Technodolly

Visual Products

Opal

Gamma Ray Digital Inc

Ritter Battery

The Slider

Paralinx LLC

CineLab

Gamma Ray Digital Inc

CineTape

Media Blackout - Custom Cables and AKS

Aerial Filmworks

FJS International, LLC

Willys Widgets

Tai Audio

Ritter Battery

Wooden Camera

The Slider

rebotnix Technologies

Abel Cine

Metropolis Post

Opal

Glidecam

Rig Wheels Passport

Visual Products

Technodolly

Broadcast Solutions Inc