Film-Tech Cinema Systems
Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE


  
my profile | my password | search | faq & rules | forum home
  next oldest topic   next newest topic
» Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE   » Operations   » Film Handlers' Forum   » Lens sizes

   
Author Topic: Lens sizes
Sam Hunter
Jedi Master Film Handler

Posts: 779
From: West Monroe, LA, USA
Registered: Jan 2002


 - posted 10-02-2002 10:26 AM      Profile for Sam Hunter   Email Sam Hunter   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
I am trying to figure out the correct focal length for a couple of lenses for my setup and I am not sure I have it right.
My throw will be 18', my screen is a 6' X 6' and i have a B-L Cinemascope lense attachment. I want a lense just for flat and another to attach to the scope lens. I used the lens Calc program on the site here but Iceco tells me I am wrong.
I came up with a 70mm lens for Flat and a 124mm lens for scope.
Granted I am not sure that all Scope marked film are the same but I gotta start somewhere.
Anyway could somebody help me out here as I am a complete novice at this.
Thanks!

------------------
Samual Hunter Sr.

KC5ZSL

 |  IP: Logged

Aaron Sisemore
Flaming Ribs beat Reeses Peanut Butter Cups any day!

Posts: 3061
From: Rockwall TX USA
Registered: Sep 1999


 - posted 10-02-2002 11:10 AM      Profile for Aaron Sisemore   Email Aaron Sisemore   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
First off, I am going to assume that you are going to properly mask down that 6x6 (square) screen to get a proper aspect ratio for both flat and scope (common width). To not do so would be inviting ridiculous image cropping.

With a common width assumption in mind, I get the following numbers for a 18' throw:

1.85:1 Flat: 63mm (60 would be your closest next size) for a 6'x3'3" picture.

2.39:1 Scope: 125mm for a 6'x2'7" picture. You may also have to modify the B&L anamorphic to get it to focus at 18 feet.

Also, IMO, I would avoid ICECO like the plague.

-Aaron


 |  IP: Logged

Jeff Taylor
Jedi Master Film Handler

Posts: 601
From: Chatham, NJ/East Hampton, NY
Registered: Apr 2000


 - posted 10-02-2002 12:18 PM      Profile for Jeff Taylor   Email Jeff Taylor   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
Aaron: Steve Krams speaks well of you, too :-)

 |  IP: Logged

Manny Knowles
"What are these things and WHY are they BLUE???"

Posts: 4247
From: Bloomington, IN, USA
Registered: Feb 2002


 - posted 10-02-2002 03:22 PM      Profile for Manny Knowles   Email Manny Knowles   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
If you are buying old technology or any other used stuff, you have to be picky no matter who you are buying from.

FWIW, I have had a number of good experiences with ICECO on four installations and several upgrade projects. In those instances where something was not to my satisfaction, I found them to be eager to make things right.

My intention here is not to disagree with Aaron. He has helped me out on this website by providing really useful information a number of times. I respect Aaron.

The folks at ICECO have become friends of mine over the years and I would not feel right if I let a negative comment sit out there alone when I know I have had a different experience. I just felt I had to weigh in from my own perspective.

~Manny (fighting for truth, justice and the American way).



 |  IP: Logged

Aaron Sisemore
Flaming Ribs beat Reeses Peanut Butter Cups any day!

Posts: 3061
From: Rockwall TX USA
Registered: Sep 1999


 - posted 10-02-2002 04:02 PM      Profile for Aaron Sisemore   Email Aaron Sisemore   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
Of late, I have had more bad experiences than good dealing with ICECO.

If they could deliver on my needs and not beat around the bush and procrastinate (case in point: a pair of Norelco DP75 70mm spindles that I have been needing for a client since frigging LAST YEAR, they originally claimed to have some in stock, and I still have neither answers nor spindles, they keep saying that they will 'check the warehouse', yada yada...) then I would be happy as all get-go with them. They have delivered on getting us lenses in a pinch in the past. I was very satisfied, and thats one of the reasons I went to ICECO looking for these spindles.

Until I see better service from ICECO, I cannot recommend them to anyone.

-Aaron

PS: Shortly after posting the above commentary, I decided to give ICECO one final try re: the DP75 spindles. I spoke to Dara, who will check the warehouses one final time, and she says she will call me back with a 'yes' or 'no' answer, which I will accept, and at that time I will withdraw any negative opinions I have with the company.

-AS


 |  IP: Logged

Richard Fowler
Film God

Posts: 2392
From: Ft. Lauderdale, FL, USA
Registered: Jun 2001


 - posted 10-02-2002 05:02 PM      Profile for Richard Fowler   Email Richard Fowler   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
When ICECO says they will check the warehouse it could mean one of three covering more than two city blocks plus various storage trailers. Steve is a friendly competitor but we have different niches of customers so we rarely compete...but we have the same grief with certain vendors
Richard Fowler
TVP-Theatre & Video Products Inc. www.tvpmiami.com

 |  IP: Logged

Steve Kraus
Film God

Posts: 4094
From: Chicago, IL, USA
Registered: May 2000


 - posted 10-02-2002 05:15 PM      Profile for Steve Kraus     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
I think that's where I got the 35mm magazine spindles for a JJ I used to own. And a flywheel for the penthouse. I don't recall any problems with the transaction.

 |  IP: Logged

Sam Hunter
Jedi Master Film Handler

Posts: 779
From: West Monroe, LA, USA
Registered: Jan 2002


 - posted 10-02-2002 10:59 PM      Profile for Sam Hunter   Email Sam Hunter   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
Aaron, what modification are you refering too?
Also, I was thinking flat was 1.37:1 and scope was 2.35:1 ratio.
Let me try this tact, If I have a film or trailer marked "FLAT" or "SCOPE" then is this a fixed standard nowadays?
So much to learn, gee whiz.....

------------------
Samual Hunter Sr.

KC5ZSL

 |  IP: Logged

Aaron Sisemore
Flaming Ribs beat Reeses Peanut Butter Cups any day!

Posts: 3061
From: Rockwall TX USA
Registered: Sep 1999


 - posted 10-03-2002 12:20 AM      Profile for Aaron Sisemore   Email Aaron Sisemore   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
The front of the lens has to be disassembled and a small section cut off of it. There might be a site that gives more detail (possibly in the manuals section here even) on exactly what has to be done.

'Flat' these days implies an aspect of 1.85:1. Usually the other non-anamorphic 35mm rations are identified by their ratio (1.66, 1.75, 1.37) rather than generically as 'Flat'

Virtually all non-anamorphic films (unless specified otherwise) are intended to be projected at 1.85:1 aspect. Many are also hard-matted at their respective aspect which would result in 'letterbox' effect if projected at 1.37:1

-Aaron


 |  IP: Logged

Frank Angel
Film God

Posts: 5305
From: Brooklyn NY USA
Registered: Dec 1999


 - posted 10-03-2002 03:01 AM      Profile for Frank Angel   Author's Homepage   Email Frank Angel   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
I am in the same boat with Manny -- Steve Krames and Dara and their tech guy Fernando have done very good by me over the years and have come up with odds and ends that no one else could -- ICESCO is a great resourse for used equipment of any imaginable make or model. I too feel they are upstanding in their business dealings and I just needed to put that on the table as my experience with them. They have outfitted three projects that I worked on and the clients as well as myself couldn't have been happier. I find them very personable as well.

Again, I am not contradicting Aaron. just that my experiences have all been positive, and that should be out on the table as well as any negative.

And Sam, you only have to worry about 1.66 and 1.37 if you are running older prints....almost anything prior to 1950 will be standard Academy (1.37). But you can't assume a current flat release necessarily will be 1.85 -- if you run foreign films, you will find that Europe still holds on tight to 1.66 and plenty of films come in marked 1.66. Then again, they don't even have to be foreign films -- I just ran the premiere of SKINS, and it was 1.66 -- stated so right there in the leaders (not hand-written, but in the emulsion scribble).

This wasn't hard matted but actually a full-frame print, so I imagine it was composed with its later video life in mind. Going 1.66 was a compromise for the theatres so as not to make it look to clostraphobic cropped to 1.85, as many will most likely play it anyway.

Frank

 |  IP: Logged

Sam Hunter
Jedi Master Film Handler

Posts: 779
From: West Monroe, LA, USA
Registered: Jan 2002


 - posted 10-03-2002 11:44 AM      Profile for Sam Hunter   Email Sam Hunter   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
Aaron, there is only one way to change the focal length of these lense and that was easily accomplished, now whether or not it will focus sharply at that short a distance is another thing. Anyway I will be checking with Iceco anyway as I have had good dealings with them so far.
Thanks so for the info guys.

P.S. Aaron, what kind of brew are you holding in your pic?

------------------
Samual Hunter Sr.

KC5ZSL

 |  IP: Logged

Aaron Sisemore
Flaming Ribs beat Reeses Peanut Butter Cups any day!

Posts: 3061
From: Rockwall TX USA
Registered: Sep 1999


 - posted 10-03-2002 12:09 PM      Profile for Aaron Sisemore   Email Aaron Sisemore   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
It isn't really an issue of 'focal length' per se, but a problem with the ability of the astigmatism 'distance ring' adjustment on B&L anamorphics to go far back enough to allow the lens to focus at extremely short throws. Cutting out that section of the lens housing allows the element to go back far enough to accomplish this.

The beer in question is Star Trek Romulan Ale.

-Aaron

 |  IP: Logged

Sam Hunter
Jedi Master Film Handler

Posts: 779
From: West Monroe, LA, USA
Registered: Jan 2002


 - posted 10-03-2002 12:14 PM      Profile for Sam Hunter   Email Sam Hunter   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
That is the coolest "drink" I have seen in a while
Hows it taste? Where did you get it?

Anyway I removed 1/4" from the collar and sleeve and lengthened the rail slots and now I get some range on it now.

------------------
Samual Hunter Sr.

KC5ZSL

 |  IP: Logged

Aaron Sisemore
Flaming Ribs beat Reeses Peanut Butter Cups any day!

Posts: 3061
From: Rockwall TX USA
Registered: Sep 1999


 - posted 10-03-2002 08:10 PM      Profile for Aaron Sisemore   Email Aaron Sisemore   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
Glad you got that lens to work out.

As for the Romulan Ale:

It doesn't taste too bad, it is a mildly hoppy pale ale with a twist: it's dyed blue (for authenticity to the 'Romulan Ale' on Star Trek).

It's made in El Salvador for Viacom Licensing Corp.

and the only place (besides Ebay) I have ever seen it for sale has been the 'Star Trek Experience' at the Las Vegas Hilton (where the pic of me was taken). They also have it and several other 'Star Trek inspired' brews on tap there.

-Aaron



 |  IP: Logged

Pete Lawrence
Expert Film Handler

Posts: 192
From: Middleburg, PA
Registered: Aug 1999


 - posted 10-03-2002 08:44 PM      Profile for Pete Lawrence   Email Pete Lawrence   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
Romulan Ale can be purchased on line and shipped to most states.
$9.95 per six-pack, $39.50 per case http://startrekexp.com/shop/index_moogie.html
If you prefer Klingon Blood Wine they also have that and several other selections too.

 |  IP: Logged



All times are Central (GMT -6:00)  
   Close Topic    Move Topic    Delete Topic    next oldest topic   next newest topic
 - Printer-friendly view of this topic
Hop To:



Powered by Infopop Corporation
UBB.classicTM 6.3.1.2

The Film-Tech Forums are designed for various members related to the cinema industry to express their opinions, viewpoints and testimonials on various products, services and events based upon speculation, personal knowledge and factual information through use, therefore all views represented here allow no liability upon the publishers of this web site and the owners of said views assume no liability for any ill will resulting from these postings. The posts made here are for educational as well as entertainment purposes and as such anyone viewing this portion of the website must accept these views as statements of the author of that opinion and agrees to release the authors from any and all liability.

© 1999-2020 Film-Tech Cinema Systems, LLC. All rights reserved.