Jump to content


Photo

Exposing Sound Negative In Camera??


  • Please log in to reply
21 replies to this topic

#1 Sundar Raghavan

Sundar Raghavan

    New

  • Basic Members
  • Pip
  • 9 posts
  • Student
  • Chennai -Tamil Nadu- India

Posted 17 February 2012 - 12:21 PM

NOTE- I Am a beginner , if my question is silly please do ignore and help me with the answer .Thank you.

Is it Possible to expose a sound negative in film camera ? does it form any image in it ??
My another question is whether the sound negative contains emulsion fully coated or it contains emulsion only on the sound-track portion??

i guess it is fully coated on emulsion side , if so can the sound negative form any image on it if exposed through camera ?

Thank You,
Sundar.
  • 0

#2 Charlie Peich

Charlie Peich
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 238 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Chicago

Posted 17 February 2012 - 01:01 PM


Is it Possible to expose a sound negative in film camera ?

Sundar.




Sundar,

Yes it's possible, but the technology is old. Go to this Yahoo Group about Auricon cameras, there's a group of die hards still doing it. You'll find manuals about optical recording with the Auricon camera and pictures of cameras and amplifiers. You may have to join the Group to access the files. Nice bunch of guys! How to use your Auricon 16mm Sound on film Recording Equipment

Good luck!

Charlie
  • 1

#3 Jock Blakley

Jock Blakley
  • Basic Members
  • PipPip
  • 73 posts
  • Other
  • Melbourne, VIC

Posted 17 February 2012 - 06:17 PM

I have a feeling that the OP might be asking about using s/neg film for pictorial purposes.

Sound negative films are coated across the whole film and so will form images if used in a picture camera (as opposed to a sound "camera", which is what they're called).

I know a few people who've used EASTMAN Panchromatic Sound Recording Film 3374/7374 for this purpose. It yields a very (and I mean very) high-contrast image, but with clever development you could probably get very interesting results. There used to be some on Vimeo but I can't find it now.
  • 0

#4 Richard Tuohy

Richard Tuohy
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 482 posts
  • Other
  • Daylesford, Australia

Posted 17 February 2012 - 07:17 PM

Yes, jock is right, the Kodak 3374 makes beautiful images. It is high contrast and extremely fine grained. It is a panchromatic stock (ie sensitive to the entire colour spectrum of light) like normal camera negative film (so you can't use a safe light when processing it). Rate it as 40 asa (quite fast for a sound neg).
Kodak also make another sound neg - 3378. This is a slower speed stock (I've never shot it so I don't have an asa for you, but quite a bit slower). Unlike the 3374, its not panchromatic - just blue sensitive.
Agfa also still make a very nice sound negative called ST8. You can shoot it at 25 asa I believe and it is a blue sensitive stock.
ORWO (the german film company) also make a panchro and a blue sound neg if I remember correctly.
These all work fine as camera stocks in 16mm. I know many people for whom sound neg is their favourite camera stock. Note that it is usually pollyester base, rather than acetate.
In 35mm, however, I am not sure whether there isn't frame number information printed in the picture area. I say this because I saw a 35mm film in the Rotterdam film festival a couple of weeks ago that had a sound neg look and there were frame numbers etc printed in the middle of the picture area. In point of fact, I haven't shot any sound neg in 35mm. Others on this forum will definitely be able to inform us whether 35mm sound neg normally has this 'edge number' information printed in the picture area in this way.
  • 1

#5 Charles MacDonald

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

Posted 18 February 2012 - 12:28 AM

As far as the Auricon cameras they actually record sound on the regular stock, they were intended for TV news in the day. But I also imagine that the inquiry is about using the sound stock to record pictures.

I also wonder where the "edge" print is on 35mm sound negative these days, the digital track info is on the edges, and between the perfs - and the anlog track is still on the edge, - the picture area may be the only "safe" place to put the makers information.
  • 0

#6 Jock Blakley

Jock Blakley
  • Basic Members
  • PipPip
  • 73 posts
  • Other
  • Melbourne, VIC

Posted 18 February 2012 - 01:29 AM

It was Richard who put me on to 3374 in the first place!

Edgecoding is a valid point though. Kodak 16mm s/neg film still has it outboard of the perfs and so not in anybody's way. I know (for 3374) it reads "EASTMAN 374 13 12 11 10 09" with the two-digit strings being the year it was made - so 2009 in my example - but I don't recall if they included footage numbers. Can't really see a need for it, actually, considering that films are cut to the KEYKODE on the picture stock and then the soundtrack is cut on tape before a one-pass strike of the s/neg.

The last 35mm s/neg I handled was one struck in 1986 with the usual "EASTMAN S'AFETY FILM" down the side, but it definitely has no footage numbers.

It is a valid point about where it's meant to go on digital-track prints though - really the only areas left are the picture area and the area between the non-track-side perfs.

Certainly the solution to that problem on 35mm release prints was to stop edge-coding for a time, but then when SDDS switched over to cyan printing (so the soundtrack is formed only from cyan dye rather than silver) the edge coding moved back into the usual place but in magenta so that the red LED readers could ignore it.
  • 0

#7 Freya Black

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

Posted 18 February 2012 - 11:32 AM


In 35mm, however, I am not sure whether there isn't frame number information printed in the picture area. I say this because I saw a 35mm film in the Rotterdam film festival a couple of weeks ago that had a sound neg look and there were frame numbers etc printed in the middle of the picture area. In point of fact, I haven't shot any sound neg in 35mm. Others on this forum will definitely be able to inform us whether 35mm sound neg normally has this 'edge number' information printed in the picture area in this way.


I think I have seen the film you refer to, or a similar one at least, and it's not edge number information but just the number of the stock printed in the centre. Popular opinion being that it was done to stop you filming on it. It is of course a Kodak thing.

love

Freya
  • 0

#8 Sundar Raghavan

Sundar Raghavan

    New

  • Basic Members
  • Pip
  • 9 posts
  • Student
  • Chennai -Tamil Nadu- India

Posted 18 February 2012 - 11:52 AM

Thank you charlie :) :).. have joined that group , got some useful informations and posted my doubts too ..

Thanks,
Sundar.
  • 0

#9 Sundar Raghavan

Sundar Raghavan

    New

  • Basic Members
  • Pip
  • 9 posts
  • Student
  • Chennai -Tamil Nadu- India

Posted 18 February 2012 - 12:22 PM

Thank you all for sharing your knowledge.. but the thing is film stocks mentioned above are 16mm .. Do anyone have idea about doing the same thing in 35mm Sound Negative film with latest 35mm film camera or someone had tried it earlier in 35mm?? wats the result?

Thanks,
Sundar.

Email me
  • 0

#10 John Woods

John Woods
  • Basic Members
  • PipPip
  • 48 posts
  • Electrician

Posted 18 February 2012 - 04:41 PM

You might want to try contacting John Price: http://www.filmdiary.org/

He makes experimental films and is a master at using non-camera stocks, hand processing and optical printing. He's got quite a bit of 35mm work (though much of it originates on 16mm or Super 8). Many of his films are on his website available to watch. He lists what stocks he used for each film at each stage of the film.

Provided you have enough light, you can get an image from any lab stock used in camera. However don't expect anything like a 'normal' look.
  • 0

#11 Dirk DeJonghe

Dirk DeJonghe
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 605 posts
  • Industry Rep
  • Kortrijk,Belgium

Posted 19 February 2012 - 03:09 AM

One customer did some shooting recently on ST8 (Agfa sound negative stock) in 35mm. It does not have any manufacturer printing in the picture area. The results are..interesting and very graphical. It was processed in B&W negative developer to bring the contrast down. Don't expect a normal image but there are still grey tones, the latitude is minimal and the base is grey-blueish so no pure whites.

On the other hand, several award-winning films have been printed from color negative onto ST8 and this gives very interesting results. One of them we did was a blow-up from S16 color to B&W ST8 (Le nain rouge /The red dwarf). It won the European Cinematography Award and was even released in the US (small scale release).
  • 0

#12 Rex Orwell

Rex Orwell
  • Basic Members
  • PipPip
  • 91 posts
  • Student

Posted 19 February 2012 - 05:25 AM

You might want to try contacting John Price: http://www.filmdiary.org/

He makes experimental films


I really like the look of this guys film but after 20-odd minutes of searching around online looking for somewhere hosting files I can download I give up.

Seems such a shame that people don't utilise the ability to have thousands of people view their work, instead of only dozens at screenings.
  • 0

#13 John Woods

John Woods
  • Basic Members
  • PipPip
  • 48 posts
  • Electrician

Posted 19 February 2012 - 04:33 PM

I really like the look of this guys film but after 20-odd minutes of searching around online looking for somewhere hosting files I can download I give up.


What do you mean? Nearly all of his films are available to view as a Quicktime file on his website. Which after loading you can click 'save as' if you really need a private copy.

How much more accessible do you need it to be? Why don't you e-mail him and say you like his work and would like to buy a DVD instead of whining that you can't steal his work instantly on the Pirate Bay.
  • 0

#14 viswa nath

viswa nath

    New

  • Basic Members
  • Pip
  • 1 posts
  • Student

Posted 26 February 2012 - 01:22 AM

NOTE- I Am a beginner , if my question is silly please do ignore and help me with the answer .Thank you.

Is it Possible to expose a sound negative in film camera ? does it form any image in it ??
My another question is whether the sound negative contains emulsion fully coated or it contains emulsion only on the sound-track portion??

i guess it is fully coated on emulsion side , if so can the sound negative form any image on it if exposed through camera ?

Thank You,
Sundar.


  • 0

#15 Ben McMurry

Ben McMurry

    New

  • Basic Members
  • Pip
  • 8 posts
  • Industry Rep
  • Rockville, MD

Posted 12 February 2015 - 03:17 PM

I shot some 3378 last summer and have a good bit of stock.  The traditional result, as has been pointed out already, is an extremely high contrast B&W image.  This is with D-97 B&W positive processing.  You can get it processed in negative chemicals and get much closer to a normal contrast range.  I can't remember exactly how I rated the film for this, but I can check back through my tests.

 

One thing to consider is that 3378 is thinner than normal camera stocks.  You can feel the difference when handling it.  Some camera models might have trouble keeping it flat and stable, depending on how the pressure plate system works.  I had no problems with it on a Scoopic.  

 

If anyone's still interested in soundtrack as a camera stock, I can shoot some and post the results online.   


  • 0

#16 Charles Cadkin

Charles Cadkin
  • Basic Members
  • PipPip
  • 13 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Ithaca, NY

Posted 28 March 2017 - 03:45 PM

I shot some 3378 last summer and have a good bit of stock.  The traditional result, as has been pointed out already, is an extremely high contrast B&W image.  This is with D-97 B&W positive processing.  You can get it processed in negative chemicals and get much closer to a normal contrast range.  I can't remember exactly how I rated the film for this, but I can check back through my tests.

 

One thing to consider is that 3378 is thinner than normal camera stocks.  You can feel the difference when handling it.  Some camera models might have trouble keeping it flat and stable, depending on how the pressure plate system works.  I had no problems with it on a Scoopic.  

 

If anyone's still interested in soundtrack as a camera stock, I can shoot some and post the results online.   

Would you mind posting some samples of 3378? Stills or video. I'm looking for some professionally scanned footage of hi con. It's hard to find proper samples online. I've hand processed and shot the film with a digital camera before, but can't recall seeing very many high quality scans.

 

I'm looking to shoot some 3378 on an aaton xtr. Do you anticipate I would have any trouble with it jamming the camera or any other problems? My only experience with the film previously has been with a bolex.


Edited by Charles Cadkin, 28 March 2017 - 03:46 PM.

  • 0

#17 Michael Carter

Michael Carter
  • Basic Members
  • PipPip
  • 57 posts
  • Other
  • Pittsburgh

Posted 29 March 2017 - 10:18 AM

I used to own an Auricon Pro 600 16mm optical sound on film camera and shot tri x in it.
I used to shoot high contrast copy film 7363 perforated to regular 8mm. That should be similar to sound track film.
Here are links to my videos about them
https://m.youtube.co...h?v=yEF11bU3Og4 7363 8mm
https://m.youtube.co...h?v=6AwC5V1ySkY Auricon
  • 1

#18 Charles Cadkin

Charles Cadkin
  • Basic Members
  • PipPip
  • 13 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Ithaca, NY

Posted 29 March 2017 - 02:59 PM

I used to own an Auricon Pro 600 16mm optical sound on film camera and shot tri x in it.
I used to shoot high contrast copy film 7363 perforated to regular 8mm. That should be similar to sound track film.
Here are links to my videos about them
https://m.youtube.co...h?v=yEF11bU3Og4 7363 8mm
https://m.youtube.co...h?v=6AwC5V1ySkY Auricon

Perfect, that's just what I was looking for. Thank you!


  • 0

#19 Adam Frisch FSF

Adam Frisch FSF
  • Sustaining Members
  • 2009 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Los Angeles, USA

Posted 31 March 2017 - 04:08 AM

We did tests on it almost 20 years ago. B/W sound stock negative. It has no rem-jet backing, it was very contrasty, and the effective ISO was around 25! But it worked.


  • 0

#20 Charles Cadkin

Charles Cadkin
  • Basic Members
  • PipPip
  • 13 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Ithaca, NY

Posted 03 April 2017 - 06:00 PM

Any idea where to get 400' lengths of 3378 or similar hi con film? Kodak sells in a minimum of 2000' and I no longer have the resources to spool down that much film.


  • 0


Gamma Ray Digital Inc

Technodolly

Glidecam

Ritter Battery

Broadcast Solutions Inc

Abel Cine

Tai Audio

Visual Products

CineTape

Aerial Filmworks

rebotnix Technologies

Metropolis Post

Rig Wheels Passport

FJS International, LLC

Paralinx LLC

The Slider

Media Blackout - Custom Cables and AKS

CineLab

Wooden Camera

Willys Widgets

Opal

CineTape

Rig Wheels Passport

rebotnix Technologies

Glidecam

FJS International, LLC

Ritter Battery

Media Blackout - Custom Cables and AKS

Opal

Metropolis Post

Wooden Camera

Technodolly

Visual Products

The Slider

Gamma Ray Digital Inc

Broadcast Solutions Inc

Abel Cine

Tai Audio

Paralinx LLC

Willys Widgets

Aerial Filmworks

CineLab