Jump to content


Photo

2 perf


  • Please log in to reply
19 replies to this topic

#1 victor huey

victor huey
  • Basic Members
  • PipPip
  • 95 posts
  • Producer

Posted 04 September 2007 - 11:24 PM

Hi All, I Have a kinor 35H sitting at aranda in austrailla awaiting conversion to 2 perf. It has been sitting there for almost a year, because the original plan to convert with a 20% discount, fell through when my camera arrived too late. So I have been waiting for another kinor 35H owner to convert their camera along with mine and bruce will give us a 20% discount when work is done at the same time. WHich is $1000 off conversion price. SO if any of you kinor owners out there have been thinking about converting to 2 perf, here's your chance.


Victor
  • 0

#2 James Steven Beverly

James Steven Beverly
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 4199 posts
  • Director
  • El Paso, Texas

Posted 05 September 2007 - 01:01 AM

It's been sitting there a year? Dude, pay the 1000 dollars.
  • 0

#3 victor huey

victor huey
  • Basic Members
  • PipPip
  • 95 posts
  • Producer

Posted 05 September 2007 - 05:27 AM

It's been sitting there a year? Dude, pay the 1000 dollars.

hey james, thats just for the conversion, and new electronics and video tap....so a total overhaul. So if another kinor owner comes in we can save on that too. Besides, anyone who uses these rebuilt 2 perf cameras in any serious production will need a backup body. Knowing that there is another 2 perf conversion, will allow us users to support each other's productions. These cameras take a long time to convert and turnaround service doesn't exist yet. So as a community we need to support each other in our indie efforts.

Victor
  • 0

#4 James Steven Beverly

James Steven Beverly
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 4199 posts
  • Director
  • El Paso, Texas

Posted 05 September 2007 - 11:15 PM

Oh I definitely agree with supporting one another but I have the thing against 2 perf conversions anyway. I thinks by the time you run it through an optical printer to make it projectable and HAVE to go with a digital conversion for editing, how much do you really save? I'd rather go anamorphic and recans or short ends. But of coarse that's just me and you may feel TOTALLY different. After buying the Rotovision 5000, though, I think you definitely got the right guy to do the work. Bruce is a genius with these commiecams. But seriously, there's a limited market for these 2 pref conversions and you may be waiting another year for someone to want one AND find out that you want one too (not everyone who wants to do the conversion is gonna read this post) so get your camera and start shooting even if it means laying out 1000 more clams. B)
  • 0

#5 victor huey

victor huey
  • Basic Members
  • PipPip
  • 95 posts
  • Producer

Posted 06 September 2007 - 06:32 AM

Hi James, You miss the point here, 2 perf died because the the post workflow required a technisope three strip process, dye transfer prints that last forever, but the process was expensive, and the equipment sold off to china. What is reviving the 2 perf movement, is the digital age allows for 2 perf DI route, if you choose to go that route. alternatively a lower cost route, You can now make a hd video print, as spirit scanners have the capacity to do 2 perf in there software. You can post in HD, on a desktop computer, and finish to deliver an HD video print. suitable for film festivals, as most now have hd projection. If you win an award, or get interest from a distributor, then you can do the final finish via DI route. Anamorphic glass is slow, and need more light , requiring more expense at shooting stage. The cost of an anamorphic set of lens, equals the cost of conversion. So for me, as the RED cam looms, a full set up with lens package can cost almost 50K. Russian fast lomo lens are excellent and cheap..I bought the lens and tested them on a konvas body, and it has convinced me to continue the path to build a 2 perf cam.
Besides it's never the gear that counts, it's the story........so my time is spend working on my script and not wasted shooting film for the sake of it, you can shoot dv if that is your jones to shoot. But to shoot in film, for a project that requires it, i want to do it as cheaply as possible. When AATon, and Arri release their 2 perf cams, in answer to the growing HD movement, film is not dead yet. By then there will be more support as modern 2 perf sync cams come on the market. A 2 perf kinor just gets me into the game for less money.


Victor

Oh I definitely agree with supporting one another but I have the thing against 2 perf conversions anyway. I thinks by the time you run it through an optical printer to make it projectable and HAVE to go with a digital conversion for editing, how much do you really save? I'd rather go anamorphic and recans or short ends. But of coarse that's just me and you may feel TOTALLY different. After buying the Rotovision 5000, though, I think you definitely got the right guy to do the work. Bruce is a genius with these commiecams. But seriously, there's a limited market for these 2 pref conversions and you may be waiting another year for someone to want one AND find out that you want one too (not everyone who wants to do the conversion is gonna read this post) so get your camera and start shooting even if it means laying out 1000 more clams. B)


  • 0

#6 Leo Anthony Vale

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

Posted 06 September 2007 - 02:19 PM

You miss the point here, 2 perf died because the the post workflow required a technisope three strip process, dye transfer prints that last forever, but the process was expensive, and the equipment sold off to china.


I'm being picky, but Techniscope has nothing to do with the three-strip process. Though a number of three-strip cameras were converted to horizontal 8-perf in the 50s for VistaVision and Technirama.
By the time Techniscope came out, the three strip process was dead.

Non Technicolor Techniscope movies didn't use the IB printing process, but eastmancolor prints.
This includes French movies such as 'King of Hearts', Technostampa's Cromoscope and SPES's Euroscope. This also goes for the last Technicolor Techniscope movies, such as 'A Boy and his Dog used CRIs and Eastmancolor prints.

Technicolor didn't sell "the equipment", rather technicolor London built and installed NEW IB printing machines in China.

---El Pedante
  • 0

#7 James Steven Beverly

James Steven Beverly
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 4199 posts
  • Director
  • El Paso, Texas

Posted 07 September 2007 - 04:52 AM

Oh, I'm sorry Victor, I did realize you were the one guy in the world who took the time to write a good story. let me just grab my miniDV camera so I can waste some more time.shooting instead of pouring over every sylable to get my turn of phrase JUST right or PERHAPS I'm a good writer already and it doesn't take me nearly as long as it does you to get a script written, but THAT'S not what we're talking about was it. What we where talking about is production, thee implementation of all that brilliant writing of your's and to me production is all about the image. Sure, Techiscope is cheaper initially but it's also grainier and less sharp than true scope and how much does a DI run and is it going to cost for it to be captured onto true HD? I'm not talking HDV, if you're transfering to HDV, why bother shooting film at all ESPECIALLY 35mm film, I'm talking true HD, 4:4:4 and you are NOT going to edit that on your Joe Average deck-top PC, it's gonna take a hell of a lot of computing power to edit true HD which means you'll be spending a BUNCH of money on equipment and software plus what does an HD deck run so you can input that ridiculously expensive DI footage into your bazzion dollar PC. As for waisting film, anamorphic uses the entire frame of film, in fact it is the most efficient use of film there is because it squeezes twice the amount of information into the same space. If you're shooting in daylight, the stop isn't really an issue and Lomos are very good under relitively low light conditions for standard speed anamorphics. Like I said, you do it your way, I'll do it mine but don't tell me I'm missing the point, iIve thought long and hard about the advantages and disadvantages and one thing you may have missed is once your camera is coverted to 2 perf, it's a scope camera period, Oh you can maybe crop to widescreen but you've lost all the advatages of shooting academy composed for widescreen and having the freedom to adjust the image in post.

Edited by James Steven Beverly, 07 September 2007 - 04:54 AM.

  • 0

#8 A. Whitehouse

A. Whitehouse
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 267 posts
  • Director
  • Melbourne

Posted 07 September 2007 - 07:59 AM

Hi All, I Have a kinor 35H sitting at aranda in austrailla awaiting conversion to 2 perf. It has been sitting there for almost a year, because the original plan to convert with a 20% discount, fell through when my camera arrived too late. So I have been waiting for another kinor 35H owner to convert their camera along with mine and bruce will give us a 20% discount when work is done at the same time. WHich is $1000 off conversion price. SO if any of you kinor owners out there have been thinking about converting to 2 perf, here's your chance.
Victor


Hi Victor,
Where are you based? I would be interested in seeing your rig when you finally get it finished but I wasn't sure if you were in Australia yourself. I'm in Melbourne and was also interested in who you'd talked to about post work flows for 2-perf in Australia. But then you may not be based here...

Thanks,
Sasha
  • 0

#9 Will Montgomery

Will Montgomery
  • Sustaining Members
  • 2030 posts
  • Producer
  • Dallas, TX

Posted 07 September 2007 - 04:48 PM

Sure, Techiscope is cheaper initially but it's also grainier and less sharp than true scope and how much does a DI run and is it going to cost for it to be captured onto true HD?


The colorists I work with love 2-perf. They think it's a great alternative for Super 16 users to "move up." Grain and "sharpness" might not be much of a factor for some projects not being blown up for release.

Of course you are right, DI and telecine would cost the same as 4 perf, but then it costs the same for 16mm too... it's the machine and the colorist, not the format that seems to effect pricing for that.

If someone has a real budget then should go for the best quality they can afford. But with 2-perf your film and processing costs rival 16mm or close to half of 4-perf so that makes it a worthy tool in your toolkit; not the final answer in quality but a good option.
  • 0

#10 victor huey

victor huey
  • Basic Members
  • PipPip
  • 95 posts
  • Producer

Posted 07 September 2007 - 09:34 PM

I am based in New york city


quote name='A. Whitehouse' date='Sep 7 2007, 07:59 AM' post='192070']
Hi Victor,
Where are you based? I would be interested in seeing your rig when you finally get it finished but I wasn't sure if you were in Australia yourself. I'm in Melbourne and was also interested in who you'd talked to about post work flows for 2-perf in Australia. But then you may not be based here...

Thanks,
Sasha
[/quote]
  • 0

#11 victor huey

victor huey
  • Basic Members
  • PipPip
  • 95 posts
  • Producer

Posted 07 September 2007 - 09:51 PM

Ok James, i don't want to get into a flame war with you, you go your way , i go mine...we all travel our own roads anyway. I have worked in major motion pictures for many years local 52 IAS\TSE, and have worked on many big budget films with bad scripts. SO for me my first feature film , I have to a well rehersed script with everyone on the production team on the same page, carefully planned, and efficently shot...otherwise why bother....

As far as work flow, DI route is not an option at this stage, but a video hd transfer at 720p is, dump into finalcut pro which cuts it with no problem...and you can do the music and color correction too....so I will be able to deliver a hd 720p print for festival screenings, that is the route i am taking, no film out unless there is interst from a distributor.....

what i get shooting film is lattitude, i work with lighting for many of the top dp's in the biz, and film has a quality still not acheived by HD. THe AC on the job i am working on was going to work on peter jackson's new film to be shot on a red cam. after many test they decided not to shoot their next film with the red, evern though he will get two red cams, it's still to risky to shoot with basically first run cameras.

If you go the DI route you will be amazed how much grain can be taken out with today's software....in fact they used it to blow up standard 35mm to 70mm....like apollo 13...so if some one really likes the work......then they pay for the DI route......hopefully the film i make and the film you make will be good enough to find a distributor.

Victor
  • 0

#12 Gary McClurg

Gary McClurg
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 304 posts
  • Producer

Posted 07 September 2007 - 10:20 PM

As far as work flow, DI route is not an option at this stage, but a video hd transfer at 720p is, dump into finalcut pro which cuts it with no problem...and you can do the music and color correction too....so I will be able to deliver a hd 720p print for festival screenings, that is the route i am taking, no film out unless there is interst from a distributor..... Victor


Just wondering any cost difference in transferring the 2perf vs. 4perf that you know of... I believe you can transfer with the Spirt... in other words not many houses are doing it... so are they charging you more for the transfer...

Also why go 720p... why not go 1080p in FCP....
  • 0

#13 James Steven Beverly

James Steven Beverly
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 4199 posts
  • Director
  • El Paso, Texas

Posted 08 September 2007 - 03:14 AM

Listen Victor, you're not the only guy here that's worked a big budget features as a grip or worked with knowledgeable lighting people, in fact there's a 10 ton lighting and grip truck sitting at my studio right now and there's an 8 ton in Alamogordo. I don't want t get into a pissin' fight with you either, but we are STILL not talking about the script here, in fact, just the opposite, all I'M saying is that all things being equal, in fact if you're shooting the EXACT same script, a film shot in anamorphic is going to look better than a film shot in 2 perf techniscope and to ME that difference is NOT worth the savings, if there actually IS one, and/or the trouble of going to a non-projectable format like 2 perf. I did a LOT of research into 2 perf. The reason I think that is because first of all I will be editing old school, Moviolas and KEM flatbead with work prints and opticals AND I actually DO expect to get at least a limited theatrical release. I have 90% of the equipment I need to set up a small film processing lab, do mag transfers and set up an editing room. I own all my camera equipment including the anamorphics and esthetically, I just like the look of anamorphic ESPECIALLY for this next project, but now, I'M not trying to convince YOU of anything except that after a year, you should probably get your camera finished so you can start shooting but if you consider shooting for practice to get some stock footage or establishing and second unit stuff out of the way before full blown production begins, a waste of time and want to wait until your script is done what do I care, it's your camera. B)
  • 0

#14 Freya Black

Freya Black
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 4161 posts
  • Other
  • Went over the edge... Central Europe

Posted 08 September 2007 - 04:29 AM

Just wondering any cost difference in transferring the 2perf vs. 4perf that you know of... I believe you can transfer with the Spirt... in other words not many houses are doing it... so are they charging you more for the transfer...

Also why go 720p... why not go 1080p in FCP....


Theres a thread drifting around about hard drive telecine transfers in London that seems to suggest that many of the spirit machines are equipped to do 2k if they can do transfers at all, so it might even be worth going 2k and then do an offline at 1080p or something. Worth thinking about because if a DI option ever did surface, you would already have the 2k files and could do a conform. You'd also have higher res files for the future. Not sure how much extra it might cost tho, in the London thread it was implied not much more other than disk apace!

It's perhaps best to think of 2 perf in relation to S16 rather than 35mm as has been suggested.
Super16 is generally used for finishing on video, I mean virtually nobody makes S16 prints. Sometimes there is a blow up to 35 but of course it is costly. 2 perf is the same except that it might be even harder to do 35mm blowups, but then it's rare to do S16 to 35mm blowups either.

2 perf gives you a similar cost for film stock to S16. It gives you higher quality images than S16 and with a wider aspect ratio. It's really the perfect format for shooting a bunch of straight to video horror movies or a load of music videos. In fact for me it would be the perfect format in a way, as I'd love to do a bunch of low budget straight to dvd movies! :) However the entry cost is really, really high and for myself, I'd just rather save the money from conversion and spend it on film and transfer instead, as I think it would be unlikely I would have the cash to shoot enough cheap 2 perf movies fast enough to make it worth my while.

So for me it will be lomo square fronts or Academy. I'm thinking a bit of both right now.

2 perf seems like a great rental format and I'm really expecting it to see a massive re-surgance with the penelope. With the new more advanced film stocks and their lower grain, I'm expecting some incredible stuff from it. I really believe that 2 perf really is the film format of the future for low end film production. Trouble is I would like to make films now. :(

love

Freya
  • 0

#15 victor huey

victor huey
  • Basic Members
  • PipPip
  • 95 posts
  • Producer

Posted 08 September 2007 - 05:34 AM

Hi James, Like i said you have your own path I have mine.....I priced out the path going old school and the cost of making even a one light print can easily cost you a small fortune, by the time you lock picture, and strike an answer print. Another way is to transfer your negative to an HD video format 720p or 1080p etc.. or even dv cam dailes, and edit that towards a locked picture on a desktop computer. Then you can do music, color correct it using protools and FCP6 and then output an HD video ready for screening in film festivals.
Why I am shooting 2 perf instead of using th HD cam or HDV cam? i like the quality of the the excellent russian super speed glass , that I managed to buy over time and the quality of the new vision 2 stocks. Going 2 perf allows me to have an original negative in film, which allows me to edit via the hd video workflow. It gives me a way to deliver a festival ready hd print, without going through the expense of making workprints and conforming, which can be quite expensive when you add it all up. This way I still have a master negative untouched, ready to go DI route if the films does well at the festival circuit and attracts further funding. All I am saying is we are both pursuing the same goal, we are just taking different paths to it. Many of the film festivals I have been going to, Berlin, Pusan,Tribeca, are showing more and more digital projects via HD projection, some of them are winning awards and finding distribution. For a generation of new film makers who have never shot with film, they don't miss it, don't use it, or even consider working with it. The Majors have agreed to a new projection format, and there are now 10% of movie theaters that project in HD, and take prints produced on hard drives. So we are both old school because we will be working in film...we are both trying to find a way to make our fillms work in this digital age.


Listen Victor, you're not the only guy here that's worked a big budget features as a grip or worked with knowledgeable lighting people, in fact there's a 10 ton lighting and grip truck sitting at my studio right now and there's an 8 ton in Alamogordo. I don't want t get into a pissin' fight with you either, but we are STILL not talking about the script here, in fact, just the opposite, all I'M saying is that all things being equal, in fact if you're shooting the EXACT same script, a film shot in anamorphic is going to look better than a film shot in 2 perf techniscope and to ME that difference is NOT worth the savings, if there actually IS one, and/or the trouble of going to a non-projectable format like 2 perf. I did a LOT of research into 2 perf. The reason I think that is because first of all I will be editing old school, Moviolas and KEM flatbead with work prints and opticals AND I actually DO expect to get at least a limited theatrical release. I have 90% of the equipment I need to set up a small film processing lab, do mag transfers and set up an editing room. I own all my camera equipment including the anamorphics and esthetically, I just like the look of anamorphic ESPECIALLY for this next project, but now, I'M not trying to convince YOU of anything except that after a year, you should probably get your camera finished so you can start shooting but if you consider shooting for practice to get some stock footage or establishing and second unit stuff out of the way before full blown production begins, a waste of time and want to wait until your script is done what do I care, it's your camera. B)


  • 0

#16 James Steven Beverly

James Steven Beverly
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 4199 posts
  • Director
  • El Paso, Texas

Posted 08 September 2007 - 10:52 PM

Well, the only problem with going DVcam workprints is you really can't see what the film actually looks like. Something what looks great on a monitor might look soft on the big screen and there's camera movement which on a small screen is forgivable but 40 feet tall might give an audience vertigo. Dailies need to be projected otherwise you might miss some very important stuff. I plan on printing my own dailies as we have a step printer and it will basically cost stock, processing chemicals and an assistant's salary, so again for me, it makes sense. Sound mixing MAY actually be done digitally though sound acquisition will be done analog due to analog's forgiving nature and the warmth of analog sound in a natural environment.

I actually have nothing against HD. It has to fit the project though. For FX heavy Sci/Fi it's almost crazy given the generational loss to go ANY route BUT HD, A period piece, however, looks WAY too clean on HD. Digital projection will probably EVENTUALLY take over but they've got a LONG way to go before digital becomes to dominate choice for film making. Film and digital just plain LOOK different, nothing inherently wrong with either one, they're just not the same and it will take a while before digital can exactly replicate the nuances of film until then, I think we filmmakers are safe.

I also have a small set of fast spherical Lomos (35, 50 and 75). I would like to pick up a 22 mm and a few long lenses though, but everything in it's time. The one kinda dumb, but I had no choice, thing I did was sell my standard speed 35, 50 and 75 out of my set in order to buy a 35mm anamorphic which comes up for sale once in a blue moon and I needed for Blood Moon Rising. I am going to try over this next year to replace them but breaking up the matched set was dumb. "Couldn't be helped though.

I plan on saving money by storyboarding throughly, doing as much in camera editing as possible, shooting my own title cards, staying at no more than a 6 to 1 shooting ratio maybe even 4 to 1 with in camera editing on a 2 to 3 week shoot, shooting in camera transitions, doing in house mag transfers editing and processing and in general being a penny pinching son of a b*tch, I may send the negatives to a commercial film lab for the answer print and any opticals we can't do BUT if I can find an optical printer by the time we finish production, I'll even do those in house and if I get comfortable enough in the editing room I may cut the negative myself as well. The one thing I need disparately is a coding machine oh and a dual purpose 35mm projector (which I've NEVER seen come up for sale so that may be a problem) , other than that everything else is pretty much covered. BTW anyone who might know where I can find these 2 items at a decent price, please let me know. B)

Edited by James Steven Beverly, 08 September 2007 - 10:56 PM.

  • 0

#17 victor huey

victor huey
  • Basic Members
  • PipPip
  • 95 posts
  • Producer

Posted 09 September 2007 - 05:44 PM

James, if i were to do the math of the cost of printing workprints, mag stock, answer prints.....editing in old school makes no financial sense for me. DV cam dailes only , is one path during transfer, but you can also at additonal cost make an additional hd print hd at the same time. You have to pay for the extra HD tape, plus dvcam tape, but still way cheaper that workprint stock and mag stock. You can then project your dailes via hd, or watch on an large hd monitor. That is how we do it in feature film production using the panavision genisis, it is recorded on hd tape, and monnitored using a hd monitor on set. What you see is what you get.

You have bought all this lab equipment that has to be setup and maintained. if you are just processing small batches you will be wasting alot of chemicals, and will be needing to clean those rollers, and tanks, between runs. It just makes no sense with small batch runs, because you will be expending alot of energy cleaning and setting up all your lab gear...i mean you are going to be working 24/7 trying to do it all...i for one need sleep.

I am trying to find a balance by using old school film techniques in aquisition, but going the digital route in post.

I don't know what expierence with AATON's but i have never had any problems with them, as i find that any camera properly manintained will run as it was designed, poor maintainince is often the cause of problems, remeber these are mechanical machines and they break down all the time. The panivision camera we use have daily maintaince, and backup bodies in case anything goes wrong. People in the indie world often used cameras that are used and abused and prone to breaking down, maintaince is the furthest thing from their minds.

Herein lies the problem with using commiecams. These are cameras which have not been used since 1990, 17 years sitting on a shelf, and they have to be lubed and tweeked back to factory spec, and have it done again at the start of each shoot. It is standard operating procedure in most professional shoots. People who use Russian gear, are ofter working with low budgets and in exp[erienced crews, and maintaince and technical expertise to trouble shoot is sorely lacking. I am just rtying to build up a knowledge base and work with others who have decided to convert their cameras to 2 perf, and work with these rebuilt camera's as they are almost one off cameras.

The same can be said for the Red camera, as it rolls out of production, in the early stages working with first run camera's will require a rebuilding of the knowledge base, and techniques to get these camera's operational in a real world production.

So for me, I will not open a lab for my self, i will let the pro's do that...they do it 24/7, i don't. I will however work on my Mac based editing system, use the latest editing software and upgrade any produyction software that will help me deliver the most finished HD print I can deliver for the film festival circuit.

Victor

Well, the only problem with going DVcam workprints is you really can't see what the film actually looks like. Something what looks great on a monitor might look soft on the big screen and there's camera movement which on a small screen is forgivable but 40 feet tall might give an audience vertigo. Dailies need to be projected otherwise you might miss some very important stuff. I plan on printing my own dailies as we have a step printer and it will basically cost stock, processing chemicals and an assistant's salary, so again for me, it makes sense. Sound mixing MAY actually be done digitally though sound acquisition will be done analog due to analog's forgiving nature and the warmth of analog sound in a natural environment.

I actually have nothing against HD. It has to fit the project though. For FX heavy Sci/Fi it's almost crazy given the generational loss to go ANY route BUT HD, A period piece, however, looks WAY too clean on HD. Digital projection will probably EVENTUALLY take over but they've got a LONG way to go before digital becomes to dominate choice for film making. Film and digital just plain LOOK different, nothing inherently wrong with either one, they're just not the same and it will take a while before digital can exactly replicate the nuances of film until then, I think we filmmakers are safe.

I also have a small set of fast spherical Lomos (35, 50 and 75). I would like to pick up a 22 mm and a few long lenses though, but everything in it's time. The one kinda dumb, but I had no choice, thing I did was sell my standard speed 35, 50 and 75 out of my set in order to buy a 35mm anamorphic which comes up for sale once in a blue moon and I needed for Blood Moon Rising. I am going to try over this next year to replace them but breaking up the matched set was dumb. "Couldn't be helped though.

I plan on saving money by storyboarding throughly, doing as much in camera editing as possible, shooting my own title cards, staying at no more than a 6 to 1 shooting ratio maybe even 4 to 1 with in camera editing on a 2 to 3 week shoot, shooting in camera transitions, doing in house mag transfers editing and processing and in general being a penny pinching son of a b*tch, I may send the negatives to a commercial film lab for the answer print and any opticals we can't do BUT if I can find an optical printer by the time we finish production, I'll even do those in house and if I get comfortable enough in the editing room I may cut the negative myself as well. The one thing I need disparately is a coding machine oh and a dual purpose 35mm projector (which I've NEVER seen come up for sale so that may be a problem) , other than that everything else is pretty much covered. BTW anyone who might know where I can find these 2 items at a decent price, please let me know. B)


  • 0

#18 James Steven Beverly

James Steven Beverly
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 4199 posts
  • Director
  • El Paso, Texas

Posted 11 September 2007 - 04:19 AM

Good for you, you do that. :rolleyes:
  • 0

#19 victor huey

victor huey
  • Basic Members
  • PipPip
  • 95 posts
  • Producer

Posted 13 September 2007 - 04:30 AM

Hi All. there are now two and perhaps three kinor 35H owner's who have decided to do the conversion. So we are shooting for the end of October to have all these camera's arrive at aranda at the same time. 2 conversions equal 20% discount, 3 conversons 25% etc...So if you ever considered moving into the world of 2 perf now is the time.


Victor
  • 0

#20 Freya Black

Freya Black
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 4161 posts
  • Other
  • Went over the edge... Central Europe

Posted 13 September 2007 - 07:15 AM

Hi All. there are now two and perhaps three kinor 35H owner's who have decided to do the conversion. So we are shooting for the end of October to have all these camera's arrive at aranda at the same time. 2 conversions equal 20% discount, 3 conversons 25% etc...So if you ever considered moving into the world of 2 perf now is the time.
Victor


Hooray!

Looks like the extended discussion here has helped get things moving! :)
Have you thought about posting on the Konvas list too Victor?

Good Luck, and get ready to shoot that film! :)

love

Freya
  • 0


Paralinx LLC

Willys Widgets

CineLab

Wooden Camera

rebotnix Technologies

Ritter Battery

Aerial Filmworks

Broadcast Solutions Inc

FJS International, LLC

Abel Cine

Metropolis Post

Gamma Ray Digital Inc

Glidecam

Rig Wheels Passport

Media Blackout - Custom Cables and AKS

Tai Audio

Visual Products

The Slider

CineTape

Technodolly

Opal

Abel Cine

CineLab

Aerial Filmworks

Willys Widgets

Visual Products

Ritter Battery

FJS International, LLC

Technodolly

Wooden Camera

CineTape

The Slider

Tai Audio

Broadcast Solutions Inc

Rig Wheels Passport

Glidecam

rebotnix Technologies

Opal

Metropolis Post

Gamma Ray Digital Inc

Paralinx LLC

Media Blackout - Custom Cables and AKS