Jump to content


Photo

Hangs Upon Nothing


  • Please log in to reply
8 replies to this topic

#1 Jeremy Rumas

Jeremy Rumas
  • Basic Members
  • PipPip
  • 95 posts
  • Other
  • USA

Posted 16 May 2010 - 03:13 PM

I want to share with you a glimpse at the 16mm surf film I'm hard at work on. It's called Hangs Upon Nothing. I've been at it off and on for a few years now. And most of what I learned was through pouring through this site. Learned a great deal from reading here and from some of the veteran members here. I have to give some thanks to the late John Pytlak who took the time to personally respond to me share knowledge.

The website is a work in progress(galleries have a few issues with Chrome browser still). The short trailer can be viewed here:

www.hangsuponnothing.com

Posted Image

I've been shooting this with a Bolex Rx 5. Of note, this camera was somewhat filled with saltwater at one point when a small boat I was on in Kiribati got swamped by a wave. I drained the water out, and a day later the camera locked up. I sprayed loads of WD-40 into along with pouring corrosion block oil into just about every opening...at the time I did not have tools to take apart the camera. The camera came back to life! And it's worked well ever since, for two years now. Within the last year I took apart the camera and cleaned it as best as I could, along with converting it to S16, which is another long story in itself.

The footage in the trailer is almost all regular 16, and transferred from my workprints at Astrolab in Chicago. I get workprints made to have a film back up of everything I shoot. I edit these workprints for the select shots, and transfer them to mini-dv for digital editing for the time being.

Hope you enjoy checking this out, and thanks to everyone here who has in some way helped me make this.

-Jeremy

the following two images are digital still from the project:

Posted Image

Edited by Jeremy Rumas, 16 May 2010 - 03:17 PM.

  • 0

#2 Jeremy Rumas

Jeremy Rumas
  • Basic Members
  • PipPip
  • 95 posts
  • Other
  • USA

Posted 16 May 2010 - 03:22 PM

here's another try at linking to a few more images

Posted Image
Posted Image

http://3.bp.blogspot...nothing.com.jpg

Attached Images

  • Hangs Upon Nothing surfer Daniel Jones art Jeremy Rumas www.hangsuponnothing.com.jpg

  • 0

#3 Jeremy Rumas

Jeremy Rumas
  • Basic Members
  • PipPip
  • 95 posts
  • Other
  • USA

Posted 16 May 2010 - 03:37 PM

....having a lot of trouble getting multiple images attached/linked to...well, here's one more at least.
Dia bodys surfing Hangs Upon Nothing www.hangsuponnothing.com.jpg

Edited by Jeremy Rumas, 16 May 2010 - 03:39 PM.

  • 0

#4 Raz Birger

Raz Birger
  • Basic Members
  • PipPip
  • 46 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Israel

Posted 28 May 2010 - 01:26 PM

Nice work Jeremy!
Your trailer is quite short, but seems beautiful judging by the wonderful shots you got there. I see you put a lot of effort into it.
The Bolex survival is amazing I wouldn't believe a camera could actually work after such an incident.

Recently I have been curious about workprints. I have only used negative for video telecine so far, but I am really anxious to get a workprint once. Do you find the workprints' quality good enough to reflect the beauty of the original negative? And how would you compare it to reversal film? Pardon for asking this very last question, but since I'm tight with budget - what are the rates of such a service? Just to get some image in my mind.

Thank you in advance and good luck with your project,
Raz Birger.

Edited by Raz Birger, 28 May 2010 - 01:29 PM.

  • 0

#5 Jeremy Rumas

Jeremy Rumas
  • Basic Members
  • PipPip
  • 95 posts
  • Other
  • USA

Posted 30 May 2010 - 12:32 PM

Nice work Jeremy!
Your trailer is quite short, but seems beautiful judging by the wonderful shots you got there. I see you put a lot of effort into it.
The Bolex survival is amazing I wouldn't believe a camera could actually work after such an incident.

Recently I have been curious about workprints. I have only used negative for video telecine so far, but I am really anxious to get a workprint once. Do you find the workprints' quality good enough to reflect the beauty of the original negative? And how would you compare it to reversal film? Pardon for asking this very last question, but since I'm tight with budget - what are the rates of such a service? Just to get some image in my mind.

Thank you in advance and good luck with your project,
Raz Birger.


Thanks Raz. Yes, that trailer is short...I'll have a long one up later in the year. I too was surprised the Bolex lived through that. I just had it serviced by Dieter at Procam, and it's running better than ever.

Transfers from a workprint can look beautiful. I usually only get SD transfers for now, but my colorist transferred a few shots of my workrpint footage to HD just to try it out. It works well for the look I am going for.

Here is a link to a screen grab from this footage. This image is downsized a bit, and Blogger seems to re-compress images too. It was from a Spirit full HD transfer, regular 16mm workprint, cropped in on to 16:9. Bolex Rx-5, Kern 150mm lens:

http://hangsuponnoth...film-frame.html

Overall, transfers from a workprint will look a little more dull and aged than a transfer from a negative. If you have handled or projected the workprint much, you'll of course get scratches and dust, too, which are visible in your transfer. The biggest difference is that there is way more visual information you can pull out of the negative in a transfer...it is amazing how much detail can be pulled out of overexposed areas of the film on the negative, as compared to a print in which you are far more limited.

Projected, my workprints have looked pretty similar to reversal film I shot in the past. It's been a while since I actually shot reversal though, so maybe someone else can chime in on that. My workprints have all been on Kodak mylar stock which is a lot more durable than the old reversal I used to shoot.

A sidenote, for SD transfers only, of my workprints, I like the results of the old tube/analog telecine(I believe it's called a Rank) more than a Spirit. Footage just seemed to look and feel a little warmer.

-Jeremy
  • 0

#6 Jeremy Rumas

Jeremy Rumas
  • Basic Members
  • PipPip
  • 95 posts
  • Other
  • USA

Posted 30 May 2010 - 12:37 PM

And about cost: workprints have cost me about the same amount as the processing of my negative. If I remember right, maybe 1 cent less per foot for workprints.
  • 0

#7 Jeremy Rumas

Jeremy Rumas
  • Basic Members
  • PipPip
  • 95 posts
  • Other
  • USA

Posted 30 May 2010 - 03:16 PM

And to be a little more clear...when projected, my workprints have looked better than any transfers of my footage, whether from transferring from the negative or transfers from the workprints. Film projected looks beautiful, and the colors are awesome. You can see way more on a workprint than you can on SD transfers too(as far as SD transfers go...I have had both PAL and NTSC transfers to mini-dv, both on Spirits, and the PAL SD footage wins by a landslide for visual information). I guess a lot of it would depend on how the lab times the coloring of your print, but I have been very happy with mine. And sometimes the colors look better than what I remember seeing in person while I shot the footage.
  • 0

#8 Raz Birger

Raz Birger
  • Basic Members
  • PipPip
  • 46 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Israel

Posted 31 May 2010 - 01:58 PM

Thank you very much Jeremy! You have answered everything to the detail.
What you were saying about the beauty of your workprints made me even more eager to try and get one!
In order to do that I will have to send my footage abroad, the only lab in my country, unfortunately, does their prints digitally and it won't look like an optical print + will cost a fortune since I would have to pay for scanning (with their Spirit 2K). Do you recommend sending it to your lab?

The HD scan of your footage looks very nice, it's an interesting look of a scanned workprint and I don't think there is any other way to achieve that kind of a special look.
I hope to see more of you project so keep us updated.

Best,
Raz.
  • 0

#9 Jeremy Rumas

Jeremy Rumas
  • Basic Members
  • PipPip
  • 95 posts
  • Other
  • USA

Posted 02 June 2010 - 08:50 PM

Raz,

I'd think there have to be some good options somewhere closer to you. Kodak's website has a list of labs worldwide and what they process and print, though it's wasn't completely up to date last time I checked. I get my workprints made at Astrolab in Chicago, USA, and I've always had a good experience with them:

http://filmworkers.c...olab/blog_posts

If you are going to go through sending your film away, I'd hope you have a projector and projection screen already. A split reel and take-up reel also. It's nice to have a table top film viewer, rewinds, editing block and editing tape too, if you want to get all old school about it.

-Jeremy
  • 0


The Slider

Media Blackout - Custom Cables and AKS

Rig Wheels Passport

Abel Cine

Metropolis Post

Willys Widgets

CineLab

Aerial Filmworks

Technodolly

Paralinx LLC

CineTape

Ritter Battery

Glidecam

Wooden Camera

rebotnix Technologies

FJS International, LLC

Opal

Visual Products

Gamma Ray Digital Inc

Tai Audio

Broadcast Solutions Inc

Metropolis Post

Opal

CineLab

Rig Wheels Passport

FJS International, LLC

Wooden Camera

Ritter Battery

Technodolly

rebotnix Technologies

Tai Audio

CineTape

Paralinx LLC

Aerial Filmworks

Visual Products

Gamma Ray Digital Inc

Media Blackout - Custom Cables and AKS

Broadcast Solutions Inc

The Slider

Willys Widgets

Abel Cine

Glidecam