Jump to content


Photo

Single frames for stop-motion on an SR3?


  • Please log in to reply
13 replies to this topic

#1 Marta Bobic

Marta Bobic
  • Basic Members
  • PipPip
  • 12 posts
  • Student
  • London

Posted 03 June 2007 - 07:45 PM

So... seeing as I hate it when people ask questions on forums that have already been answered, I trawled through previous posts (and got sidetracked by lots of interesting stuff) but didn't find a concrete answer. What I really want to know is can you do single frames for stop-motion on an SR3? I know Arri have an intervalometer for the SR3, but did I read correctly that it can only do 1/2 second exposures for single frames? I'm shooting a short on s16 with both live action and stop-motion, and I would like to hire only one camera for both if possible. Both live action and stop-motion are being shot at each of several locations over a few weeks and I'd really like to keep it simple and not hire two cameras for the duration. Also, I'd obviously like to save as much time and stock as possible - I really wouldn't want to shoot a higher frame rate and have the editor extract the frames I need in post as this is seriously wasteful and a pain. Also, I hear that I might need a capping shutter to stop light leaking onto neighbouring frames? Can someone explain this any better? Also, is the fact that the frames cannot be advanced manually a problem?

If this isn't possible, does anyone have any advice on which camera would be best to use for the animation? I know there are some animation-specific hire companies in the UK who have adapted cameras and Bolexes, but from what I've seen so far it seems somewhat expensive. Sorry if these are silly questions, but I can't seem to find much information on this? I'll probably call Arri tomorrow, but I was just wondering if anyone has any experience with this. Any advice is appreciated!

Cheers!
  • 0

#2 Laurent Andrieux

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

Posted 04 June 2007 - 04:21 AM

I would suggest a Mitchell Mark II camera. Very cheap to rent, the good horse for stop motion, reverse etc. 16/S16 is not that great for this kind of work... If you can afford 35 mm... I've always done this kind of thing in 35, never 16/S16... Has anyone done ?
  • 0

#3 timHealy

timHealy
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1252 posts
  • Other
  • New York

Posted 04 June 2007 - 04:58 PM

http://www.arri.com/...anu/16sr3_e.pdf

I found this but as I recall Arri SR's are not built for single frame operation. They are built for 5-75 or 5-150 fps. I have an SRI and looked into Cinematography Electronics products to do it. They installed a single frame chip in my camera that has to be used with one of their intervalometers.

http://www.cinematog...lectronics.com/

It says the intervalometer works wiith and SRII but nothing about a SR 3.

If you give them a call, maybe they can point you in the right direction.

Tim
  • 0

#4 Kenny N Suleimanagich

Kenny N Suleimanagich
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 900 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • New York

Posted 04 June 2007 - 07:08 PM

Check out some R16 stop motion I did with a K3 a few months ago.



That seemed to work fine, I would suggest using a more simple set up.
  • 0

#5 Nathan Milford

Nathan Milford
  • Sustaining Members
  • 692 posts
  • Director
  • New York, NY

Posted 04 June 2007 - 08:24 PM

Aaton's will do single frame by hitting the test/inch button. It will give you a 1/4 second exposure.

Arri SR's will not do this.
  • 0

#6 Alessandro Machi

Alessandro Machi
  • Sustaining Members
  • 3318 posts
  • Other
  • California

Posted 04 June 2007 - 09:06 PM

Several people on this very forum called me stupid and one person even accused me of starting a spam topic when I suggested that a new Super-16 camera, one that could do single frame, time-exposure, time-lapse, and real time filmmaking, if it could be affordably made, would be a huge boon to the film market on many levels.

When I was told it could not be affordably made, I then asked well, would it be cheaper to make such a camera today than in the past. Rather than even answer that tepid question, all I got was more derision and name calling.

I'm just pointing out that people who understand that combining real time filmmaking in Super-16 with cost effective single frame and undercranked effects are smart people who could save their low budget film clients thousands of dollars by cleverly mixing in under cranked and single frame shooting on days when a large film crew is not needed. Sad to see these type of cost conscious smart people are in such a minority.
  • 0

#7 Marta Bobic

Marta Bobic
  • Basic Members
  • PipPip
  • 12 posts
  • Student
  • London

Posted 05 June 2007 - 11:17 AM

I would suggest a Mitchell Mark II camera. Very cheap to rent, the good horse for stop motion, reverse etc.

Thanks for the suggestion, Laurent. I'm looking into it, I think Joe Dunton have a couple. I'm finding it really hard to find anything cheap that has been converted to s16 though!

16/S16 is not that great for this kind of work... If you can afford 35 mm

Well, I know.... but sadly, the budget doesn't stretch that far!!
  • 0

#8 Jonathan Bowerbank

Jonathan Bowerbank
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 2815 posts
  • 1st Assistant Camera
  • San Francisco, CA

Posted 05 June 2007 - 11:48 AM

Have you considered doing the animation with a Digital SLR?

Boooo! Hissss!!! Yes, I know, but a lot of stop-motion is being done this way nowadays. "Corpse Bride" and I believe the disappointingly small amount of stop motion in "Piano Tuner of Earthquakes" was also done with a DSLR camera.
  • 0

#9 Laurent Andrieux

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

Posted 05 June 2007 - 04:51 PM

Yep, this is also a pretty good idea. Here's a film made by a young french cinematographer, Hugo Bachelet. It's been shot with a Canon EOS 10D and a TC-80 remote, that has an intervalometer function : http://www.hugobache...aterre-film.mov . It was edited and timed with FCP, zooming in and so as well.

This : http://599production...lapseLarge.html was shot with a Canon D20.
  • 0

#10 Alessandro Machi

Alessandro Machi
  • Sustaining Members
  • 3318 posts
  • Other
  • California

Posted 05 June 2007 - 07:47 PM

Have you considered doing the animation with a Digital SLR?

Boooo! Hissss!!! Yes, I know, but a lot of stop-motion is being done this way nowadays. "Corpse Bride" and I believe the disappointingly small amount of stop motion in "Piano Tuner of Earthquakes" was also done with a DSLR camera.


This just proves my point, since Super-16 is acknowledged as a cost effective option for lower budget professional film shooting, to not have any cameras that offer such a simple option (especially in todays digital age when film cameras could benefit from technology advances) as single frame and various time speed functions is sort of like having no finger in the dike, dike as in dam in case anyone misinterprets.
  • 0

#11 Marta Bobic

Marta Bobic
  • Basic Members
  • PipPip
  • 12 posts
  • Student
  • London

Posted 05 June 2007 - 07:52 PM

Have you considered doing the animation with a Digital SLR?


Well, thanks, that of course is a good suggestion and even though doing it on film is more appealing, I did consider a DSLR because it would make life SO much cheaper and easier. Now, the issue with this is that the writer managed to structure the story in such a way that most scenes will be made up of both stop-motion AND live action, and the director wants the two to be fairly seamless. Meaning, that one character is human, and the other a doll, but both won't be moving in the same shot. I'm just concerned about how these things are going to cut together, because having one shot of a doll shot on a DSLR and the reverse on 16mm might look a bit odd and jarring. This is getting more complicated by the second!! Oh and did I mention that some of these shots will be exteriors? In the daytime? In October? Aaaah.
  • 0

#12 Marta Bobic

Marta Bobic
  • Basic Members
  • PipPip
  • 12 posts
  • Student
  • London

Posted 05 June 2007 - 08:03 PM

This just proves my point, since Super-16 is acknowledged as a cost effective option for lower budget professional film shooting, to not have any cameras that offer such a simple option as single frame and various time speed functions is sort of like having no finger in the dike, dike as in dam in case anyone misinterprets.


Yeah, I know. Doesn't the 416 do single frames? But I do know what you mean. I'm certainly not hearing of a decrease in people using 16mm in the UK, and right now there just isn't a stable HD standard that's affordable. It'll all settle down soon, but the technology is changing so fast, with every manufacturer having their own preferences in standard, that using something established is more appealing than ever. If all of us could afford to shoot on a D-20, Genesis or CineAlta, we would. Or we'd shoot on 35mm. But 16mm is working fine and is widely available and really not that expensive, so it's pretty popular. Now, what to do....
  • 0

#13 Alessandro Machi

Alessandro Machi
  • Sustaining Members
  • 3318 posts
  • Other
  • California

Posted 05 June 2007 - 10:22 PM

Yeah, I know. Doesn't the 416 do single frames? But I do know what you mean. I'm certainly not hearing of a decrease in people using 16mm in the UK, and right now there just isn't a stable HD standard that's affordable. It'll all settle down soon, but the technology is changing so fast, with every manufacturer having their own preferences in standard, that using something established is more appealing than ever. If all of us could afford to shoot on a D-20, Genesis or CineAlta, we would. Or we'd shoot on 35mm. But 16mm is working fine and is widely available and really not that expensive, so it's pretty popular. Now, what to do....


Every two or three years, I'll start a topic about new film cameras. Everytime, a handful of people will just berate the topic as being either stupid or impossible. Different website, different group, same result. Yet then I'll notice how over the next year after the topic has run it's course SEVERAL, and I'm talking a group BIGGER than the handful that take glee in berating the new camera topics, will either email me or post their own topic asking about more film camera options available.

Something about the internet seems to bring out the nastiness in people when it comes to new product development or simply providing encouragment towards a new film product being made, it's really odd because it appears to be film people doing it for the most part.
  • 0

#14 Logan Schneider

Logan Schneider
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 133 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Bozeman, MT

Posted 07 June 2007 - 06:31 PM

Back to the original topic, the SR3 can at least be outfitted with a Norris intervelometer w/capping shutter. I assume this does single frame, but I've never had to do it. You do need to take off the inching nob so that you can attach the motor. The folks at Otto Nemenz said that it's very easy to do.
  • 0


CineLab

Paralinx LLC

rebotnix Technologies

Willys Widgets

Ritter Battery

The Slider

Metropolis Post

Wooden Camera

FJS International, LLC

Rig Wheels Passport

Glidecam

Broadcast Solutions Inc

Aerial Filmworks

Technodolly

Media Blackout - Custom Cables and AKS

Opal

CineTape

Gamma Ray Digital Inc

Abel Cine

Tai Audio

Visual Products

Rig Wheels Passport

Ritter Battery

Paralinx LLC

rebotnix Technologies

CineTape

Willys Widgets

Visual Products

Media Blackout - Custom Cables and AKS

Broadcast Solutions Inc

Gamma Ray Digital Inc

Technodolly

FJS International, LLC

The Slider

Tai Audio

CineLab

Glidecam

Wooden Camera

Aerial Filmworks

Abel Cine

Metropolis Post

Opal