ECLAIR 16mm footage????
- Thread starter abalex
- Start date
Barry_Green
Moderator
Eclairs have been used for lots of projects; the Eclair NPR was kind of like the HVX of its day -- revolutionary for making filming easier, more affordable, and more accessible than before; it offered quick-change magazines, fairly quiet operation, and multiple lens mounts built-in, at a price point that a lot of independent owner-operators could afford. The ACL was a smaller/lighter revision of it.
When you're talking about film cameras though, the difference in the look of footage isn't nearly so much due to the camera, as it is to the lens. A film camera is pretty much a hole that gets covered up or not, and a set of sprockets. That's about it (yes that's a gross oversimplification, but it's still reasonably accurate). There are lots of features available on better cameras, but the basic imaging stays the same: sprockets transport the film into position, then the shutter reveals the frame. As long as the sprockets have good registration and the shutter works basically the same, then image quality is going to be about the same, depending on the lens used.
Bell & Howell Eyemos (35mm world-war-I vintage news cameras) are used in Hollywood all the time for insert & crash cameras. Most of the Hollywood ones have been retrofitted to use Nikon lenses so they can have decent glass.
Again, the main differentiation between film cameras isn't the image they produce, it's the sound level, the features, the motor speeds, the magazine/threading process, the weight, the available lens mounts, the shutter adjustability, things like that. Use the same film stock, and the same glass, and nobody will know what footage came from one camera and what came from another, generally speaking.
When you're talking about film cameras though, the difference in the look of footage isn't nearly so much due to the camera, as it is to the lens. A film camera is pretty much a hole that gets covered up or not, and a set of sprockets. That's about it (yes that's a gross oversimplification, but it's still reasonably accurate). There are lots of features available on better cameras, but the basic imaging stays the same: sprockets transport the film into position, then the shutter reveals the frame. As long as the sprockets have good registration and the shutter works basically the same, then image quality is going to be about the same, depending on the lens used.
Bell & Howell Eyemos (35mm world-war-I vintage news cameras) are used in Hollywood all the time for insert & crash cameras. Most of the Hollywood ones have been retrofitted to use Nikon lenses so they can have decent glass.
Again, the main differentiation between film cameras isn't the image they produce, it's the sound level, the features, the motor speeds, the magazine/threading process, the weight, the available lens mounts, the shutter adjustability, things like that. Use the same film stock, and the same glass, and nobody will know what footage came from one camera and what came from another, generally speaking.
"the moneytree" 1992 - was shot on it and blown-up to 35mm ...
10-100 T2 ziess and ziess primes were used ...
i believe it as a sound level of 28-29db ? .. while the Aaton is around 19-20db ( every 3db is double sound level)
so you do need to barney it and at times put sound blankets on it for interior shots ....
10-100 T2 ziess and ziess primes were used ...
i believe it as a sound level of 28-29db ? .. while the Aaton is around 19-20db ( every 3db is double sound level)
so you do need to barney it and at times put sound blankets on it for interior shots ....
As Barry mentioned before, when it comes to film cameras, the quality of the image is not only determined by the camera but more importantly by the lenses you're using (and also how you transfer it to video).
For example, these short-movies below were shot on an Eclair ACL but he used high quality optar illuminas lenses and got them transferred on the Spirit datacine. Check out the results (at the bottom of the page).
http://www.sampofilms.com/films.php
It's pretty good but mostly because of the lenses he used and the workflow he chose.
For example, these short-movies below were shot on an Eclair ACL but he used high quality optar illuminas lenses and got them transferred on the Spirit datacine. Check out the results (at the bottom of the page).
http://www.sampofilms.com/films.php
It's pretty good but mostly because of the lenses he used and the workflow he chose.
Last edited:
Bill__Turner
Well-known member
Barry,
Great post, I am constantly impressed by both the depth of your knowledge and the patience with which you share it. A model for us all.
Bill Turner
Schneider Optics
Century Division
Great post, I am constantly impressed by both the depth of your knowledge and the patience with which you share it. A model for us all.
Bill Turner
Schneider Optics
Century Division
I have an eclair NPR and wouldn't sell it for any price. It produces just as sharp and stable and image as arri SR's and aaton's. Quality is based on what stock and glass you use. With c-mount adapters you can use nearly any lens you could ever want.
If you know a film has been shot on 16mm, you can achieve the look on an Eclair.
If you are looking to buy, try to arrange to test if possible. Most are over 30 years old now and can be beat to hell, but if you are lucky enough to find a clean well maintained one it will never treat you wrong.
If you know a film has been shot on 16mm, you can achieve the look on an Eclair.
If you are looking to buy, try to arrange to test if possible. Most are over 30 years old now and can be beat to hell, but if you are lucky enough to find a clean well maintained one it will never treat you wrong.
yes you can match using same type lens.. IMO stay with zeiss. there are many bolex switar fans BUT IMO they have less contrast and less resolution.
if you are using ziess lens make sure you test out the lens mount adaptor on both camera's before your shoot.
the feet/meter marking will be off on a reflex bolex = so you'll be focusing by eye not feet markings on lens. there are a few lens that are special made for the bolex reflex tha have accurate feet markings but then they would be off on any other camera. also remember that the bolex can take behind the lens filters and that will change the focus slightly.
here's opening few minutes of the money tree - 90% of shots are with bolex using ziess lens with H&H 1/2 - 2 low cons ... link is only good for 48hrs
http://briefcase.yahoo.com/bc/bonato@pacbell.net/lst?.dir=/moneytree&.view=l
if you are using ziess lens make sure you test out the lens mount adaptor on both camera's before your shoot.
the feet/meter marking will be off on a reflex bolex = so you'll be focusing by eye not feet markings on lens. there are a few lens that are special made for the bolex reflex tha have accurate feet markings but then they would be off on any other camera. also remember that the bolex can take behind the lens filters and that will change the focus slightly.
here's opening few minutes of the money tree - 90% of shots are with bolex using ziess lens with H&H 1/2 - 2 low cons ... link is only good for 48hrs
http://briefcase.yahoo.com/bc/bonato@pacbell.net/lst?.dir=/moneytree&.view=l
Illya Friedman
Well-known member
Barry_Green said:
You can also add film stock to the mix. I shot B camera on a feature about 8 years ago. A cam was an NPR, B cam was a CP-16R. Same lens, same stock, the two cameras intercut perfectly. Despite being well shot, the movie is horrible so I won't encourage anyone to see it.
I.
Barry_Green
Moderator
There are definitely better cameras, but again, not necessarily in image, just in noise level and features. As donatello points out, the Arri SR2 and SR3 and the Aaton lineup are quieter than the NPR.
NPR's also have to be properly maintained. Consider that any NPR you'd be using would be 30 years old or so... a lot can go wrong in 30 years! If it hasn't been meticulously maintained it may not do such a good job.
And yes, Illya Friedman is absolutely correct -- film stock choice will do more to differentiate the look of your project than camera choice would! Choice of film stock has a lot to do with how the image looks, which is why there are so many film stocks to choose from.
NPR's also have to be properly maintained. Consider that any NPR you'd be using would be 30 years old or so... a lot can go wrong in 30 years! If it hasn't been meticulously maintained it may not do such a good job.
And yes, Illya Friedman is absolutely correct -- film stock choice will do more to differentiate the look of your project than camera choice would! Choice of film stock has a lot to do with how the image looks, which is why there are so many film stocks to choose from.