Jump to content


Photo

Ultra16mm footage


  • Please log in to reply
20 replies to this topic

#1 Daniel Carruthers

Daniel Carruthers
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 334 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Canada

Posted 15 April 2009 - 10:50 PM

Hi
The film co-op I work at cinevic recently got our eclair NPR converted to Ultra16mm
and I shot a test to see if everything worked.
The test is really basic,I mainly wanted to see if the new groundglass markings where accurate
and to check for vignetting on wide angle lenses
Im please to say it works great
The film was an old recan or Kodak 7205 that was sitting under a table for about 6-8 months
the can was covered in dust hahaha
But the film worked,there is a lot of scratching at the begining
it was my fault for the scratching,I got the negative back from the lab,and checked it out to see if there was even an image on the film,before we would pay to get it transferred.
The transfer was done at Cinelicious in LA transferred at pro res 422 1080p
I was really happy with the transfer.
Again the test is kind of boring, no music no editing,but people who are interested in ultra16mm should check it out
Also we got it it framed for 1.78 I noticed I can kind of see the the perforations in some shots
Im guessing if we got in framed for 1.85 you wouldnt see it?
anyways Im still happy we got the conversion done
ULTRA16MM
  • 0

#2 Rob Vogt

Rob Vogt
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 437 posts
  • Other
  • New York

Posted 15 April 2009 - 11:29 PM

Nice footage. Who did the conversion with the new groundglass markings? I was thinking about sending my ACL to Bernie next summer.
  • 0

#3 Bruce Taylor

Bruce Taylor
  • Sustaining Members
  • 482 posts
  • Other
  • Los Angeles

Posted 16 April 2009 - 12:07 AM

It really works. I wonder why it took so long for U16 to actually get off the ground? A lot of R16 cameras are going to get a new lease on life with this. We can thank Paul at Cinelicious for making the commitment to see it though on the telecine side.

Bruce Taylor
www.indi35.com
  • 0

#4 Scott Bryant

Scott Bryant
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 151 posts
  • Other
  • Nevada

Posted 16 April 2009 - 12:14 AM

I just got my NPR back from Bernie freshly converted to Ultra16 with laserbrighten. I'm currently shooting some test footage. Since Cinelicious told me they will charge me the minimum 30 minute telecine time I figured I ought to shoot some old footage I had laying around b/c it wouldn't cost that much to develop and if i'm paying for 30 minutes of time, I might as well use it. I'm excited to see how it turns out. Just from the maintenance on my camera I can say that Bernie does an excellent job at everything I've asked of him.
  • 0

#5 Scott Bryant

Scott Bryant
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 151 posts
  • Other
  • Nevada

Posted 16 April 2009 - 12:21 AM

Just watched the video Daniel. I think it looks great. I'm even more excited about seeing my tests. What lens were you using for that shoot?
  • 0

#6 Daniel Carruthers

Daniel Carruthers
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 334 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Canada

Posted 16 April 2009 - 07:49 AM

Oh I cant be leave I forgot to mention Bernie?
yes Bernie o'doherty at super16inc did the conversion,he did a great job, best decision we made going with Bernie:)

regarding the lenses I used it was mainly our 12-112 angeniuex zoom lens, the 1st out of focus shot is on this lens,as well as the slow motion footage near the end,and the end in the office.
I also used a few c-mount primes, also angeniuex, a 10mm 25mm for the frame tests,and 75mm for the close up of Krista.
I think my favorite is the zoom lens, it seems sharper than the c-mounts.

I recently shot a short film with Ultra16mm, the footage is getting developed as we speak,and Im gonna send it to cineliciuos for the transfer, Im excited to see how it will look,we shot it on Fuji eterna 250t 8653 with the angeniux zoom lens.
It might be while before I can post some footage
  • 0

#7 Kevin Powell

Kevin Powell
  • Basic Members
  • PipPip
  • 19 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Colorado

Posted 16 April 2009 - 09:34 PM

Looks great Daniel - Ultra16 Lives!

I just received my footage from Cinelicious today and posted a quickly edited piece over on my website(Link Below)... It's great that there's so much activity and discussion around U16. Bernie did my U16 mod, and marked and Laserbrighten'd the GG on my NPR as well... Top notch guy. And I second Bruce's comment - "We can thank Paul at Cinelicious for making the commitment to see it through on the telecine side."

Shooting U16 is very cool.


-KP

http://www.thebasementlab.com
  • 0

#8 Daniel Carruthers

Daniel Carruthers
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 334 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Canada

Posted 17 April 2009 - 09:27 AM

That looks great Kevin
what film did you shoot on? and what lenses?
Also where did you gt the film developed? reason I ask is my usual lab doesnt have the proper machine to develop the film, they have a sprocket driven machine,that could damage the film between the perfs
So Im probly gonna go to Alphacine in seattle for all my U16 developing


Looks great Daniel - Ultra16 Lives!

I just received my footage from Cinelicious today and posted a quickly edited piece over on my website(Link Below)... It's great that there's so much activity and discussion around U16. Bernie did my U16 mod, and marked and Laserbrighten'd the GG on my NPR as well... Top notch guy. And I second Bruce's comment - "We can thank Paul at Cinelicious for making the commitment to see it through on the telecine side."

Shooting U16 is very cool.


-KP

http://www.thebasementlab.com


  • 0

#9 Kevin Powell

Kevin Powell
  • Basic Members
  • PipPip
  • 19 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Colorado

Posted 17 April 2009 - 11:10 AM

Thanks Daniel.

I shot 400' of fresh Kodak 250D 7205 and a 100' shortend that had been sitting in my fridge for 2 years(Also 250D). My next tests are most likely going to be with a slower daylight stock and I'm very interested in trying the fuji stocks and some reversal.

I shot with several different lenses... A Canon 12-120 macro zoom, a 10mm Canon prime, a 13mm Canon prime, and a 25mm Yvar prime. The stuff in the car is with the 10mm - and I was really impressed at how well that little lens performs - I paid a hundred bucks for it! All of these lenses are in c-mount too. I'd love to add a PL mount - but I can pick up these Canon c-mount lenses very cheap, and they make very nice images. Maybe a PL down the road with a nice, expensive, set of primes... $$$

The footage by the bridge and some of the stuff on the mountain was grossly overexposed - by about 4 stops over in some of those shots... amazing testament to how far you can go with film exposure and still produce pretty images. I've shot lots of video and there's no way I would have ended up with anything usable at 4 stops over!

I shipped my exposed neg to Cinelicous and they sent it to Alpha Cine for me. Not a single scratch that I can see anywhere in the footage between the perfs. Reasonably priced as well when scheduling telecine with Cinelicious.

Ultimately, I'm very happy with the results from Cinelicious and Alpha Cine - It's def now my U16 workflow.



That looks great Kevin
what film did you shoot on? and what lenses?
Also where did you gt the film developed? reason I ask is my usual lab doesnt have the proper machine to develop the film, they have a sprocket driven machine,that could damage the film between the perfs
So Im probly gonna go to Alphacine in seattle for all my U16 developing


  • 0

#10 Jason Hinkle (RIP)

Jason Hinkle (RIP)
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 240 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Chicago, IL

Posted 18 April 2009 - 02:36 PM

wow, thanks for sharing - it's amazing how the wide frame really gives even test footage a much more cinematic quality. i've been curious about ultra-16, but a little fearful about having limited developing and transfer options.
  • 0

#11 Stephen Smith

Stephen Smith
  • Basic Members
  • PipPip
  • 73 posts
  • Student
  • UK

Posted 18 April 2009 - 03:23 PM

Both tests look really great. Think i'm happy with my super 16 npr for now, i doubt any labs in england will rush out to adapt their machines for this, which is a shame. How does the conversion cost compare to S16? i'd have thought it would be cheaper if only the gate has to be widened, unless you have a different lens mount added. Anyone know if getting the GG out of the NPR is easily done? i am tempted to send it to have the laser brighten thing done to it.
  • 0

#12 Kevin Powell

Kevin Powell
  • Basic Members
  • PipPip
  • 19 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Colorado

Posted 18 April 2009 - 04:41 PM

Seems like I've read on the boards of a couple other folks talking about developing an U16 gate for their systems - Check this thread : http://tinyurl.com/clrcne

I talked a lot with Bernie while he was working on my NPR and a little tidbit that I learned is that it's really easy to go U16 and then go S16 later down the road(at least on an NPR)... Essentially, you'll just be exposing more NEG and using the portion of it you want in Telecine... Correct GG markings would be key!

I'm not sure about why you'd want to go from S16 to U16... unless you just wanted to experiment. You already have a wide frame that's pretty much supported by every lab and telecine. If I remember the numbers correctly, the U16 mod is about a third of the cost of going S16 on an NPR... So for me, it was kind of a no-brainer to go U16 since I knew of at least one lab and one transfer facility that supported it and I didn't have thousands of dollars to spend... Bernie also mentioned to me that he's been doing more and more U16 mods - that can only be a good thing and will hopefully cause more labs and transfer facilities to consider supporting the format.

I've seen lots of negative comments about U16 on these boards... and I have a hard time understanding how anyone can argue against something that is affordable and keeps people shooting film. I was able to convert my 30 plus yr old 16mm camera to shoot a wide frame for very little money.

As for the Laserbrighten process - I decided to go for it and I'm glad I did. My viewfinder is twice as bright as it used to be and makes critical focusing much easier. Pretty sure there are four screws holding the GG in place on an NPR. I'm fairly technically inclined, but still think I'd be nervous removing my GG myself. But it may not be that hard - I haven't tried. Give Bernie a call and ask for his advice, he's a super nice guy.
  • 0

#13 Cary Lee

Cary Lee

    New

  • Basic Members
  • Pip
  • 8 posts
  • Producer
  • West Hollywood, USA

Posted 03 November 2009 - 12:38 AM

[quote name='Kevin Powell' date='Apr 18 2009, 02:41 PM' post='283120']
I've seen lots of negative comments about U16 on these boards... and I have a hard time understanding how anyone can argue against something that is affordable and keeps people shooting film. I was able to convert my 30 plus yr old 16mm camera to shoot a wide frame for very little money.

As for the Laserbrighten process - I decided to go for it and I'm glad I did. My viewfinder is twice as bright as it used to be and makes critical focusing much easier. Pretty sure there are four screws holding the GG in place on an NPR. I'm fairly technically inclined, but still think I'd be nervous removing my GG myself. But it may not be that hard - I haven't tried. Give Bernie a call and ask for his advice, he's a super nice guy.
[/quote

I too am getting my REX-4 done to U16 with the Laserbrighten. Can't wait to see it. After talking to Bernie, his told me he is busy converting Bolexs to the U16 format. I believe the negative comments are from those who already have S16 format or those people who are just too naive to admit that the U16 is a acceptable alternative to shoot film.
  • 0

#14 Ian Cooper

Ian Cooper
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 469 posts
  • Other
  • England

Posted 03 November 2009 - 05:40 AM

....I believe the negative comments are from those who already have S16 format or those people who are just too naive to admit that the U16 is a acceptable alternative to shoot film.


It might also be related to where people are located?

Whilst there do appear to be a couple of lab options able to safely process, and then Tk Ultra-16 in the US, for anyone located elsewhere in the world the options seem severely limited to say the least.

Of course I realise there's nothing stopping anyone shipping their film to the US for process & Tk, but it can be a bit of a downside when people have perhaps plenty of more local lab options in their own countries - just without U16 capabilities?
  • 0

#15 Adam Garner

Adam Garner
  • Basic Members
  • PipPip
  • 95 posts
  • Other
  • Austin, TX

Posted 10 November 2009 - 01:44 PM

The negative comments may be centered around the fact U16 isn't a standard. It's difficult to find labs to process it correctly, telecine gates aren't widely available, 35mm blow ups are probably trickier. I think finding new ways to incorporate film into the digital workflow is awesome, and essential. If I can do a 2K scan of U16 footage (shot with relatively inexpensive 40 year old camera) in a DI workflow, why not?? It brings it within reach, and that's what counts. People complain about shooting film being so expensive... if we can find ways to make it affordable why knock it?

I wouldn't call it the "cheap" solution to widescreen, but an elegant solution.
  • 0

#16 Oliver Gläser

Oliver Gläser
  • Basic Members
  • PipPip
  • 65 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Vancouver BC, Canada

Posted 21 November 2009 - 03:28 PM

Since first testing the format 7 years ago on an old Bolex H16 - M model, I was in love with it. Over the years, most of my posts have been in favour of the format, which I think has always been a winner (although if you read old posts from a few years ago, there were not a lot of people who thought so!). Anyway I am glad to see that there are so many people that have adopted this great little (cheap) format. I think it helps to open the doors to more people shooting film (which we all who love film should agree is a good thing!) by enabling people to shoot on older cameras yet compete in an HD world!

I have been shooting Ultra16mm for years. My first feature film that I used it on "Hooligans" or "Gobshite aka Hooligans" (depends on where you are), a god awful movie not really worth watching (not at all dependent on where you are! LOL ), was a great testing bed for me with the format and I was always impressed with the results. The footage from that and subsequent films was intercut with Super16mm and no (significant)difference was ever noted. At the time, to be able to transfer the format was the biggest problem.

Last year I built my own Frame-by-Frame film scanner that allows me to Scan each individual frame of film to an individual frame of an AVI file. This has allowed me to be able to continue to shoot film when others are switching to HD. I transfer all my footage to 1920x1080 4:2:2 Uncompressed, colour time it, process it, edit and done! i built the same system for Super8mm. Now finally for me, I am able to shoot in Ultra 16mm and see the format transferred to HD in a way it was always intended to be seen.
Example footage of some of my scans to HD are available on my website, under FILM SCANNING

or on vimeo (for super8mm for now only) at:
View on Vimeo

thanks for Reading

Oliver
  • 0

#17 Tom Hepburn

Tom Hepburn
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 341 posts
  • Other
  • Chicago-land

Posted 21 November 2009 - 03:32 PM

"Last year I built my own Frame-by-Frame film scanner that allows me to Scan each individual frame of film"

Hey Oliver,

I'd be interested in hearing a bit more about the above.....maybe some pictures?

Thanks,
Tom
  • 0

#18 Robert Houllahan

Robert Houllahan
  • Sustaining Members
  • 1585 posts
  • Industry Rep
  • Providence R.I.

Posted 21 November 2009 - 04:19 PM

Just to let you all know we can process and do 2K scans of U-16 at Cinelab now. Still working on telecine transfers though...

-Rob-
  • 0

#19 Oliver Gläser

Oliver Gläser
  • Basic Members
  • PipPip
  • 65 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Vancouver BC, Canada

Posted 22 November 2009 - 12:56 PM

"Last year I built my own Frame-by-Frame film scanner that allows me to Scan each individual frame of film"

Hey Oliver,

I'd be interested in hearing a bit more about the above.....maybe some pictures?

Thanks,
Tom


Hey Tom,

Check out my website to see some of the example footage. The results are constantly getting better.

I will let you know when more footage becomes available.

Thanks,
Oliver
  • 0

#20 Joshua Hill

Joshua Hill
  • Basic Members
  • PipPip
  • 11 posts
  • Director

Posted 24 December 2009 - 11:21 PM

Not to jump in late in the conversation, but:

As one of the former detractors of U16 on this forum, I think it should be pointed out that a lot of the voices against it -- including mine -- were some years ago, when the options for U16 processing/telecine were slimmer than they are now. It will probably never be a standardized format, but in comparison to several years ago, it is possible to work with the format in the United States without being married to a single lab/transfer house.

I'm actually, now, thinking of getting my "new" Eclair ACL converted to U16; partially because of the added benefit of widescreen resolution, but also because a checkup/overhaul would cost about the same as a conversion.

The acceptance of the format has grown significantly in the last few years, and it's good to see -- labs that previously didn't offer U16 support now do to varying degrees and labs that don't are certainly joining the conversation.
  • 0


Paralinx LLC

FJS International, LLC

Tai Audio

Rig Wheels Passport

Ritter Battery

Willys Widgets

Aerial Filmworks

Opal

The Slider

Gamma Ray Digital Inc

Visual Products

rebotnix Technologies

Glidecam

Technodolly

Metropolis Post

Media Blackout - Custom Cables and AKS

Abel Cine

Wooden Camera

CineLab

CineTape

Broadcast Solutions Inc

Ritter Battery

CineLab

Gamma Ray Digital Inc

FJS International, LLC

rebotnix Technologies

Opal

Rig Wheels Passport

Technodolly

Tai Audio

Aerial Filmworks

Paralinx LLC

Abel Cine

Willys Widgets

Glidecam

Broadcast Solutions Inc

Visual Products

Metropolis Post

Wooden Camera

Media Blackout - Custom Cables and AKS

The Slider

CineTape