Group statistics

Members:
199
Discussions:
122
Photos:
13

Latest photos

  • Uploaded by
    David A. Goldfarb
  • Uploaded by
    David A. Goldfarb
  • Uploaded by
    2F/2F
  • Uploaded by
    2F/2F
  • Uploaded by
    2F/2F

ACUG--Analogue Cine User Group

Group information Group discussions Group photos Group members

Good evening, gentlemen

mohmad khatab

mohmad khatab

#1
Good evening, gentlemen
I am an analog photographer ..
But I'm preparing photochemistry from scratch for myself and my colleagues,
Yesterday a young male came to me and said that he works in the field of producing independent Egyptian cinema. And that they are preparing to prepare for filming a short film somewhat ,, it will not exceed an hour, and they want this film to be shot in analog.
Egypt does not have any laboratories that can develop this film.
- He asked me for help on this.
- Actually I do not have experience in this field, but I have already prepared the process formula (ECN2) and developed a Cinestel roll and the results were good,
But developing an hour-long documentary will need special equipment. I have neither a development tank nor any equipment.
Can anyone help me by clarifying the equipment and tools that must be available in order to complete this project?
Film producers asked me to prepare a study on the projected costs of developing this film.
God bless you
 
Agulliver

Agulliver

#2
What format will the film be shot on? Bear in mind that if the final edit lasts around an hour, much more film will have been shot. I would strongly recommend using a laboratory rather than attempting to process this volume of film by hand.
 
mohmad khatab

mohmad khatab

#3
Agulliver said:
What format will the film be shot on? Bear in mind that if the final edit lasts around an hour, much more film will have been shot. I would strongly recommend using a laboratory rather than attempting to process this volume of film by hand.
Click to expand...
35 mm
 
mohmad khatab

mohmad khatab

#4
Agulliver said:
What format will the film be shot on? Bear in mind that if the final edit lasts around an hour, much more film will have been shot. I would strongly recommend using a laboratory rather than attempting to process this volume of film by hand.
Click to expand...
Your view frustrated me ,,
.
What's wrong with you man?
This is a separate budget (somewhat),
I will volunteer to provide free acidification service, as well as a contribution to the production of this film.
Why do you say this frustrating speech. Damn you, you are an evil man.
 
mohmad khatab

mohmad khatab

#6
Agulliver said:
I'm an evil man ? Pleas explain.
Click to expand...
I was expecting your practical and artistic support and encouragement for me to succeed in this project, but instead you preferred to broadcast frustration in myself and told me (you should develop this film by a professional lab).
This is a very frustrating message.
why did you do that ?
 

btaylor

#7
So the final film will be about an hour. At 90 feet per minute (35mm film at 24 frames/second) that is 5400 feet of film for a final print. 10 to 1 shooting ratio is a minimal amount of film to shoot for a final edit, that’s 54,000 feet. That’s just the camera original negative. What do you do after that? Scan it to digital or make work prints? I just don’t see how this could be done without professional motion picture lab equipment and qualified staff. I don’t see starting a motion picture lab as being practical for one picture.
 
mohmad khatab

mohmad khatab

#8
btaylor said:
So the final film will be about an hour. At 90 feet per minute (35mm film at 24 frames/second) that is 5400 feet of film for a final print. 10 to 1 shooting ratio is a minimal amount of film to shoot for a final edit, that’s 54,000 feet. That’s just the camera original negative. What do you do after that? Scan it to digital or make work prints? I just don’t see how this could be done without professional motion picture lab equipment and qualified staff. I don’t see starting a motion picture lab as being practical for one picture.
Click to expand...
Eligible employees in Egypt died, were killed, or were arrested.
Professional equipment is owned by the laboratories of the State Cinema Company and is written on it (Do not touch).
What do you do if you were my place .
The filmmakers have a limited budget, and they want to produce this film with the least possible means.
So I am here to inquire about:
What are the equipment and tools that can help accomplish this project with minimal costs (it's OK if it takes a lot of effort) and how can it be obtained?
 
fdonadio

fdonadio

#9
Mohmad,

Then, I fear for your life. Are you really sure you want to get into something that might be that dangerous?

Well, if you do, it won't be easy. I mean, it is possible, especially with the resources available today, at least from a technical standpoint. But I guess there would be a great deal of trial and error to get there.

It's very important that cine film is developed in a well-controlled environment. So, developing small lengths and splicing them together is not a good way to work, even if you ignore the fact that it's very labor-intensive. Each developed "segment" would have different characteristics (color, grain, density, etc.) and it would be a nightmare for the colourist to make them all look the same in post-production.

I would advise you to build a processing machine. But there are no detailed plans on how to make one, only a simplified "diagram" of what a machine like this would look like. Take a look at this document: https://www.kodak.com/uploadedfiles/motion/h2407.pdf, it explains everything about the process. You would need a room clean enough and dark to build the machine in. Suitable tanks can be sourced. Rollers could be 3D-printed, but you would need to design the racks and the film transport apparatus. Film speed has to be constant and the rack/tank sizes calculated so that the film stays in each bath for the correct time. You will need temperature control, circulation, filtration and replenishment systems for every bath — if I was to invest money, time and effort to build such a machine, I would go for a an automatic replenishment system. Pay a lot of attention to the remjet removal step and the "squeegees" between tanks — I would go for the "air-squeegee" system, but the air has to be very clean (free of humidity and oil) and must be kept in the same temperature as the baths.

There are some companies still manufacturing these machines, but they cost hundreds of thousands of dollars. I have no idea how much it would cost for you to make one and if the guys behind this project would be willing to pay for it.

Remember: all of this is just to develop the negatives that come from the camera. If the editing process will be completely analog (or a hybrid one), "intermediates" would be needed. These have to be exposed in a controlled environment and processed in ECP-2 chemistry, which is a different process and may require another different machine (I'm not sure). If the editing process is digital, all you will need is to digitise the camera negatives and then archive the originals.

I am sure my practical side forgot some serious detail in the suggestions above.

Good luck!
Flavio
 

btaylor

#10
Two solutions: shoot digital (most logical, cost effective, all the editing and grading can be done on a laptop). Send the film out of the country. At one time sending film to India for processing and digitizing for editing and distribution was very economical. Don't know if that is still the case.
Building a precision processing machine from scratch with minimal resources seems quite nearly impossible- or it would take many years to complete and test. There was a time (10-15 years ago) when processing machines were being scrapped - you could have the equipment if you hauled it away. I don't know if that is still happening anywhere in the world. But that's just to process the film, then you need to print it (on a printer!) or digitize it. I knew a very clever guy who built his own scanner out of an old Mitchell camera- I think it took more than one shutter life in a Canon 5D to get through the film he was making. impractical.
 
mohmad khatab

mohmad khatab

#11
fdonadio said:
Mohmad,

Then, I fear for your life. Are you really sure you want to get into something that might be that dangerous?

Well, if you do, it won't be easy. I mean, it is possible, especially with the resources available today, at least from a technical standpoint. But I guess there would be a great deal of trial and error to get there.

It's very important that cine film is developed in a well-controlled environment. So, developing small lengths and splicing them together is not a good way to work, even if you ignore the fact that it's very labor-intensive. Each developed "segment" would have different characteristics (color, grain, density, etc.) and it would be a nightmare for the colourist to make them all look the same in post-production.

I would advise you to build a processing machine. But there are no detailed plans on how to make one, only a simplified "diagram" of what a machine like this would look like. Take a look at this document: https://www.kodak.com/uploadedfiles/motion/h2407.pdf, it explains everything about the process. You would need a room clean enough and dark to build the machine in. Suitable tanks can be sourced. Rollers could be 3D-printed, but you would need to design the racks and the film transport apparatus. Film speed has to be constant and the rack/tank sizes calculated so that the film stays in each bath for the correct time. You will need temperature control, circulation, filtration and replenishment systems for every bath — if I was to invest money, time and effort to build such a machine, I would go for a an automatic replenishment system. Pay a lot of attention to the remjet removal step and the "squeegees" between tanks — I would go for the "air-squeegee" system, but the air has to be very clean (free of humidity and oil) and must be kept in the same temperature as the baths.

There are some companies still manufacturing these machines, but they cost hundreds of thousands of dollars. I have no idea how much it would cost for you to make one and if the guys behind this project would be willing to pay for it.

Remember: all of this is just to develop the negatives that come from the camera. If the editing process will be completely analog (or a hybrid one), "intermediates" would be needed. These have to be exposed in a controlled environment and processed in ECP-2 chemistry, which is a different process and may require another different machine (I'm not sure). If the editing process is digital, all you will need is to digitise the camera negatives and then archive the originals.

I am sure my practical side forgot some serious detail in the suggestions above.

Good luck!
Flavio
Click to expand...
We had a professional Mozambican soccer player called "Flavio", who played for the Egyptian club (Al-Ahly).
He was a somewhat odd player and never smiled. He played an entire season without scoring any goal, only one goal, when the ball hit the back of his head (without intending and entering his goal) ..
- But the Portuguese coach was very convinced of him.
In the second season, he became a player that attracts attention day after day, and later became the first scorer for the team, and he led the team to win the African Champions League and achieve third place in the Club World Cup.
I thank you very much for your wonderful intervention. Now I am completely convinced of your point of view and I think it is very logical.
God bless you .
- No, I do not think that those in charge of this project have a budget that allows building such a machine. I never think so.
Perhaps we can search for a used machine or something like that. Think about it with alternatives, respected friends. May God bless you.
 
mohmad khatab

mohmad khatab

#12
btaylor said:
Two solutions: shoot digital (most logical, cost effective, all the editing and grading can be done on a laptop). Send the film out of the country. At one time sending film to India for processing and digitizing for editing and distribution was very economical. Don't know if that is still the case.
Building a precision processing machine from scratch with minimal resources seems quite nearly impossible- or it would take many years to complete and test. There was a time (10-15 years ago) when processing machines were being scrapped - you could have the equipment if you hauled it away. I don't know if that is still happening anywhere in the world. But that's just to process the film, then you need to print it (on a printer!) or digitize it. I knew a very clever guy who built his own scanner out of an old Mitchell camera- I think it took more than one shutter life in a Canon 5D to get through the film he was making. impractical.
Click to expand...
Producing an analog movie is the goal, in order to participate in the Cairo International Film Festival. No digital film is allowed to participate in the official competition.
 

btaylor

#13
Interesting- so the requirement is that the original is shot analogue, what format do they accept at the festival- a 35mm projection print or a computer file?
 

Dan Fromm

#15
mohmad khatab said:
The minimum permissible size is 35 mm
Click to expand...
Are you sure about that? I ask because https://www.ciff.org.eg/regulations/ says nothing about film format. It specifies that "Two (2) screening copies one DCP and one Blu- Ray." have to be delivered to CIFF HQ by October 20, 2020.

It isn't obvious that CIFF must have film, as opposed to video. And you and your colleagues have very little time in which to produce a >= 60 minute film. Do you intend to enter this year's competition?
 
mohmad khatab

mohmad khatab

#16
[QUOTE = "Dan Fromm, discMessage: 16766, member: 5834"] Are you sure about that? I ask because https://www.ciff.org.eg/regulations/ says nothing about film format. It specifies that "Two (2) screening copies one DCP and one Blu-Ray." have to be delivered to CIFF HQ by October 20, 2020.

It is not clear that CIFF must have film, as opposed to video. And you and your colleagues have very little time in which to produce a> = 60 minute film. Do you intend to enter this year competition? [/ QUOTE]
Yes, you are right. He will not be in this year competition.
Almost this year it was over and it was no longer possible.
There is only one hope left. If it is decided that the film is black and white, then perhaps it is possible. why not.
- colleague (Adrian) has told me that there is a British (black and white) movie produced last year using a manual LOMO tank.
 

btaylor

#17
Seeing 35mm film through from camera original negative to a final 35mm projection print requires an army of highly skilled technicians and a factory full of very expensive machinery. Even the movie studios gave up that part of the game and subbed it out to Technicolor, Deluxe, etc. If you must work in 35mm film send it out to the experts and get the job done right. You will find it will also be less expensive as the work is performed on an industrial scale. Best of luck to you and your analog friends, real film is wonderful!
 

btaylor

#18
mohmad khatab said:
- colleague (Adrian) has told me that there is a British (black and white) movie produced last year using a manual LOMO tank.
Click to expand...
Very cool! Shot in 16mm on a Bolex (which is not “hand cranked” it uses a clock spring). Yes, very tediously one could develop B&W 100ft rolls in a Lomo tank- then I suppose scan it to edit and produce a final digital or analog (printed from digital files) print. I suppose you could work with B&W film- and 16mm 100ft loads would be a much better choice because of the volume- again, 35mm runs at 90 feet per second, and at a 10:1 shooting ratio for a 60 minute film that’s 54,000 feet!
 
tomkatf

tomkatf

#21
btaylor said:
Very cool! Shot in 16mm on a Bolex (which is not “hand cranked” it uses a clock spring). Yes, very tediously one could develop B&W 100ft rolls in a Lomo tank- then I suppose scan it to edit and produce a final digital or analog (printed from digital files) print. I suppose you could work with B&W film- and 16mm 100ft loads would be a much better choice because of the volume- again, 35mm runs at 90 feet per second, and at a 10:1 shooting ratio for a 60 minute film that’s 54,000 feet!
Click to expand...
35mm runs at 90 feet per minute... otherwise a 400ft roll would last about 4 1/2 seconds...
 

btaylor

#22
Geez, yea of course, excuse the typo! We're not talking about high speed cameras here...
It's still 5,400 ft for a one hour film, or 54,000 ft at a 10:1 shooting ratio.
 
TheFlyingCamera

TheFlyingCamera

#23
You might consider shooting it in 8mm - it has its quirks, but the original version of The Mariachi was shot by Robert Rodriguez entirely on 8mm with spring driven motors, so every scene/shot has to be framed around the length of an 8mm cartridge. It is possible to make it work, but not easy. And in most cases, 8mm no longer can record sound, so you'd have to shoot the film and record the sound separately, then sync it in post-production. But it would solve the problem of home processing of the film.
 

btaylor

#24
TheFlyingCamera said:
You might consider shooting it in 8mm - it has its quirks, but the original version of The Mariachi was shot by Robert Rodriguez entirely on 8mm with spring driven motors, so every scene/shot has to be framed around the length of an 8mm cartridge. It is possible to make it work, but not easy. And in most cases, 8mm no longer can record sound, so you'd have to shoot the film and record the sound separately, then sync it in post-production. But it would solve the problem of home processing of the film.
Click to expand...
From what I read it was 16mm- shot on an Arri 16s which uses an electric motor (my foggy memory thought it was a Bolex 16mm, which does have a spring wound motor. I never read his book Rebel Without a Crew). 100 foot rolls- IIRC that’s 2 minutes 40 seconds @ 24fps.
I don’t recall any S8 features making their way to a theatrical release, but I may be wrong- I think 8mm or S8 blown up to a 40ft screen wouldn’t look that great. I could get carefully shot S8 K40 to look almost as good as 16mm- carefully shot 16mm or S16 (better!) can look good in a theater. Post synchronized sound works- the French and Italians were great at it- they shot most exteriors MOS (mit out sound, as the story goes).
Many years ago there was a guy who ran a S8 post production facility- I was working on a project with a friend- and there was a guy cutting a S8 feature at the same time. Boy, it was rough looking, but the look fit the story and it was a powerful film.
 
Photrio.com contains affiliate links to products. We may receive a commission for purchases made through these links.
To read our full affiliate disclosure statement please click Here.

PHOTRIO PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:
Ilford ADOX Freestyle Photographic Stearman Press Weldon Color Lab Blue Moon Camera & Machine
Top Bottom