Jump to content


Photo

ultra16 + super16 coversion!


  • Please log in to reply
16 replies to this topic

#1 Jakub Buczynski

Jakub Buczynski
  • Basic Members
  • PipPip
  • 18 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Warsaw, Poland

Posted 04 October 2011 - 04:51 PM

I've posted this topic in russian cameras section, but since almost nobody looks there, and I've had no response, I thought, that I will post it also here:

I just got my Krasnogorsk K-3 camera. I wanted it converted for super 16, so I disassembled camera and taken gate out if it. And when I was holding that gate, and thinking about widening it, a strange idea came into my mind. What about widening gate both sides? Like super16 + ultra 16? Or double super16. So not only widening it 2.26mm to the left, but also 2.26mm to the right. It would give me the biggest possible area for 2.35:1 from 16mm film. I've never seen anybody doing that, so is there possibilty to damage camera by doing that? I know that nobody would transfer that kind of format, but it's not a problem for me, because i'm going to make diy telecine. And on the other hand it would be still possible to transfer it like super 16 and ultra 16, since this format would cover both of them. And also there would be no need for centering lens. What do you think about that?
  • 0

#2 Chris Millar

Chris Millar
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1642 posts
  • Other

Posted 04 October 2011 - 08:08 PM

Discussion regarding this comes about every year or so...

I think the main issues that you haven't outlined are edgecode, lens coverage and some camera systems use claws that ride the film on the return stroke (scratches).

After all that discussion someone usually crops up with a link to a working example ;)
  • 0

#3 Jakub Buczynski

Jakub Buczynski
  • Basic Members
  • PipPip
  • 18 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Warsaw, Poland

Posted 05 October 2011 - 05:38 AM

That's interesting, I haven't seen any topic about this format.... Is it possible for you, to paste here link to one of this discussions?
  • 0

#4 Roberto Pirodda

Roberto Pirodda
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 111 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Italy

Posted 05 October 2011 - 10:06 AM

Hi, do you mean this ?
http://immagini.p2pf...999_U16Area.jpg
  • 0

#5 Jakub Buczynski

Jakub Buczynski
  • Basic Members
  • PipPip
  • 18 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Warsaw, Poland

Posted 05 October 2011 - 12:15 PM

Hi, do you mean this ?
http://immagini.p2pf...999_U16Area.jpg


No, that's ultra 16. I mean something like conversion to super 16 + widening gate 2.26mm to the right side, to use whole surface od film. There are black edges on your photo, and I dont want them, as I could record there and get more resolution. http://eclair16.com/...super-ultra.jpg as you can see super 16 uses maximum area to the left, but I also want to use maximum area on the right. Perforation would not be a problem for 2.35:1 aspect.
  • 0

#6 Chris Millar

Chris Millar
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1642 posts
  • Other

Posted 05 October 2011 - 07:21 PM

No, that's ultra 16. I mean something like conversion to super 16 + widening gate 2.26mm to the right side, to use whole surface od film. There are black edges on your photo, and I dont want them, as I could record there and get more resolution.



That link shows a black strip down the side of the super16 image, this is required to support the film against the gate, it will be scratched and unusable, without it the whole image would have to rub between a gate and pressure pad or you'd have to design a gateless system with a complete set of other limiting factors.

Basically, without a design around it (got one?) - your system will need these black edges

The image supplied by Roberto shows an image that extends with symmetry beyond the scope of Ultra16 - it is approaching what you're taking about - notice the edge fog getting pretty close in there ?

Also take a look here:

Posted Image



http://motion.kodak....eykode_16mm.pdf

Perhaps in this case the .pdf should be called "Kodak, Gives you the Edge That Hinders"

If you've got the time to organise un-coded stock, convert your machine (that doesn't scratch the image area) and scanner (that doesn't scratch the image area), find wide lenses that cover (there's more to 'coverage' than simply vignetting) - then whats to stop you ?

Remember, it's been done - but you and most of us when we thought of it too hadn't heard about it - which is telling. Posted Image



Someone will turn up soon with a link to the earlier discussions - try searching for hyperbole type terms with a hyphen to '16'
  • 0

#7 Nicholas Kovats

Nicholas Kovats
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 507 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Shoot film! facebook.com/UltraPan8WidescreenFilm

Posted 05 October 2011 - 07:43 PM

Jukub,

I admire your efforts to inspire discussion on extracting "native" Cinemascope aspect ratio (2.35:1) from standard 16mm film width.

Have you considered the native spherical hybrid format known as UltraPan8? i.e

Aspect ratio = 2.8:1. Standard 16mm optics provide full coverage and are optically centered. Shooting time is doubled.

Regards,

Nicholas Kovats
Toronto
  • 0

#8 Charles MacDonald

Charles MacDonald
  • Sustaining Members
  • 1157 posts
  • Other
  • Stittsville Ontario Canada

Posted 05 October 2011 - 09:31 PM

Perhaps in this case the .pdf should be called "Kodak, Gives you the Edge That Hinders"


Ultra 16, attempts to record an image so the "left Edge" just misses the makers markings. and so the image will also go on the soundtrack area (formerly the second set of perfs.) by the same amount. The height is constrained to avoid the perfs.

Super 16 uses the normal image area and all the soundtrack area. it can use the full height of the frame as it does not go nearer to the perferations than any of the conventional 16mm cameras do.

My understanding is the original poster wants to do both and use All the area that the others use. SO they would be constrained to use only part of the hight to avoid the Perfs, but could go as close to the other edge as Super16 does. The can't go more than about half way into the perf area to avoid both the film manufacturers markings as well as the possible damage from the claw in the Camera.

The "ultrapan8" format is a variant and uses JUST the area between the perfs but with a half height frame and puts two frames in the area of a conventional 16mm frame by the expedient of using film stock perforated for regular 8 but obviously not slitting it. At least my understanding is that the perforated area is not used.
  • 0

#9 Jakub Buczynski

Jakub Buczynski
  • Basic Members
  • PipPip
  • 18 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Warsaw, Poland

Posted 06 October 2011 - 03:21 AM

Ultra 16, attempts to record an image so the "left Edge" just misses the makers markings. and so the image will also go on the soundtrack area (formerly the second set of perfs.) by the same amount. The height is constrained to avoid the perfs.

Super 16 uses the normal image area and all the soundtrack area. it can use the full height of the frame as it does not go nearer to the perferations than any of the conventional 16mm cameras do.

My understanding is the original poster wants to do both and use All the area that the others use. SO they would be constrained to use only part of the hight to avoid the Perfs, but could go as close to the other edge as Super16 does. The can't go more than about half way into the perf area to avoid both the film manufacturers markings as well as the possible damage from the claw in the Camera.

The "ultrapan8" format is a variant and uses JUST the area between the perfs but with a half height frame and puts two frames in the area of a conventional 16mm frame by the expedient of using film stock perforated for regular 8 but obviously not slitting it. At least my understanding is that the perforated area is not used.


YES, that's exactly what I mean. So my question is: is it possible?
  • 0

#10 Chris Millar

Chris Millar
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1642 posts
  • Other

Posted 06 October 2011 - 04:24 AM

I'm out of this thread.

Have fun everyone ;)
  • 0

#11 Freya Black

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

Posted 06 October 2011 - 06:02 AM

No, that's ultra 16. I mean something like conversion to super 16 + widening gate 2.26mm to the right side, to use whole surface od film. There are black edges on your photo, and I dont want them, as I could record there and get more resolution. http://eclair16.com/...super-ultra.jpg as you can see super 16 uses maximum area to the left, but I also want to use maximum area on the right. Perforation would not be a problem for 2.35:1 aspect.


If you look at the picture, it isn't actually Ultra16. The Ultra16 square is mapped out but the exposed area continues to the right. Look at the picture again. I assume that it covers a cinemascope size area but have not measured it. HOWEVER this picture was shot on Kodachrome which I think omitted all the edge code and other stuff.

Theres a small bit of spacing at the 2 far edges so the film can sit flat on the gate and not cause focus problems etc.

love

Freya
  • 0

#12 Freya Black

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

Posted 06 October 2011 - 06:04 AM

YES, that's exactly what I mean. So my question is: is it possible?


Have a look at that photo again.

love

Freya
  • 0

#13 Jakub Buczynski

Jakub Buczynski
  • Basic Members
  • PipPip
  • 18 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Warsaw, Poland

Posted 06 October 2011 - 02:50 PM

If you look at the picture, it isn't actually Ultra16. The Ultra16 square is mapped out but the exposed area continues to the right. Look at the picture again. I assume that it covers a cinemascope size area but have not measured it. HOWEVER this picture was shot on Kodachrome which I think omitted all the edge code and other stuff.

Theres a small bit of spacing at the 2 far edges so the film can sit flat on the gate and not cause focus problems etc.

love

Freya

Yes, it's wider than ultra 16, but super 16 is wider to the left than ultra. And on your photo ultra goes right to the end of the left side. That's why I think, that I could get more space on left. But maybe that's just the way that marks were drawn on your picture, as there is lots of space on the right side. Anyway, can you give me info about gate used to shoot that? Thanks for help!
  • 0

#14 Freya Black

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

Posted 06 October 2011 - 03:12 PM

Hi, do you mean this ?
http://immagini.p2pf...999_U16Area.jpg



I meant this picture the one you said is ultra16. It isn't, it's clearly wider, and yes you can obviously go as far to the left as S16 will allow. I'm guessing that if Ultra doesn't it's so that they can use cheaper lenses and have everything centered still.
  • 0

#15 Freya Black

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

Posted 06 October 2011 - 03:17 PM

Maybe you could go wider on the left side like in S16 and then bring it in a little on the right side to avoid the edge code and still get a scope ratio. You would need to measure.
  • 0

#16 Jakub Buczynski

Jakub Buczynski
  • Basic Members
  • PipPip
  • 18 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Warsaw, Poland

Posted 06 October 2011 - 06:01 PM

Maybe you could go wider on the left side like in S16 and then bring it in a little on the right side to avoid the edge code and still get a scope ratio. You would need to measure.


Ok, so as I understand, I can use left side to the end of stock, and to the right side to keycode. So I think my last question for making calculations: How wide is keycode on 16mm?
  • 0

#17 Charles MacDonald

Charles MacDonald
  • Sustaining Members
  • 1157 posts
  • Other
  • Stittsville Ontario Canada

Posted 06 October 2011 - 07:01 PM

So I think my last question for making calculations: How wide is keycode on 16mm?


I am not sure that they have defined a "safe area"

The actual "key code" bar code is out between the edge of the film and the perfs, but the "Footage Numbers" seem to come at least half way down the perfs. I would guess that their is some pressure to reduce that, but given the current market I doubt that Kodak and fuji will be making any manufacturing equipment changes soon.
  • 0


Technodolly

Rig Wheels Passport

Willys Widgets

The Slider

Ritter Battery

Aerial Filmworks

FJS International, LLC

CineLab

Glidecam

Broadcast Solutions Inc

Media Blackout - Custom Cables and AKS

rebotnix Technologies

Visual Products

Wooden Camera

Metropolis Post

Tai Audio

Gamma Ray Digital Inc

Paralinx LLC

CineTape

Abel Cine

Opal

Metropolis Post

Tai Audio

Ritter Battery

FJS International, LLC

Willys Widgets

rebotnix Technologies

Opal

Aerial Filmworks

Technodolly

Abel Cine

Broadcast Solutions Inc

The Slider

Gamma Ray Digital Inc

Paralinx LLC

CineTape

Media Blackout - Custom Cables and AKS

Rig Wheels Passport

Visual Products

CineLab

Glidecam

Wooden Camera