anyone know their 16mm Bolex cameras?

emraphoto

emraphoto

Veteran
Local time
5:58 AM
Joined
Oct 20, 2005
Messages
3,773
looking for a bolex camera guru. interested in picking one up for a little side project and need a primer and info on what to buy to fit my needs.

i would be very, very appreciative. feel free to drop me a line!

john
 
hmm, i actually need to find one that will accept 400' magazines.

could you keep you ear to the ground down that way for me fred? i would be much obliged.

any suggestions on where to service them or find them perhaps "reconditioned" and ready to rumble?

PS i am also on the hunt for a mamiya 7 (or 7II) with a 65 should you stumble upon one.
 
Hi
My late father had several Bolex cameras, he was a film maker producing mainly sales type films for UK companies. The Bolex he had with the 400' mag was a late 60's H16 this also had the mounting points for an electric motor which made it into a good useable Cine camera.

I would avoid the earlier non reflex types but generally I remeber them being incredibly robust and reliable.
I know its the wrong side of the pond but in the UK sendean cameras in Soho still sell and repair the odd camera

http://www.sendeancameras.co.uk/sendeancameras-bolexh1616mm.htm

They are a good basic cine camera much lighter and better handling than the Arri. If you want to go hand held a Bolex is probably a better bet .

Chris
 
thanx a lot folks! i totally forgot about leo's!

handheld would be the route but i will take a look at the other manufacturers fred. i have more questions but must head out for a few hours. i will run some more by you guys when i get back!

sometimes i love this place.
 
I guess my experience has been with the Arri BL which as you say takes a strong shoulder. I still remain a fan of the Bolex though .. they lastest my Dad most of his profession career. He was still shooting and making films with his in 1997 and then transfering to Digibeta . The results were up to the image quality of Beta SP of the time and he had several large uk companys amoung his clients.

I assume if your going to the extent of 16mm shooting then you would have seperate sound presumably 1/4" so you dont need to overload the camera mics etc

I'm with you on the animation front though. My first ever animated film was shot on Dads Bolex and when I finally bought one I did a few Pixilated films. Shot live action but single frame...great fun indeed.

Chris
 
I owned a Bolex H16 Rex with the 400ft mags, sync motor and set of primes and 12-120 back in the 70's. Also used a couple of other variations. I sold the Rex when I went to work for an ad agency that had two Arri S cameras, 35IIc and the Bolex pro electronic camera. I also used an Arri BL for many years.

I would look and carefully test any camera. Many of the Bolex cameras have been run through the mill. I don't remember the Bolex having pin registration and have seen a number with worn pull down claws. I can tell you from experience the camera is awkward with the 400ft mag and a real pain with sync sound. IMO the best deal is an Arri S with 400ft mag and sync or wild motor. Remember with any of these you need battery packs. Also the Arri has rock solid pin registration. I also love the BL and have good experiences with all but on 16m that I rented. This particular camera had a bad registration problem.

I've also used the Eclair NPR and never liked the way the mags work. Any wear in the mag causes noise and problems keping them threaded correctly.

When looking at any of these cameras I would run a 100ft roll through it before committing to buy.

Really the only 400 ft cameras hand holdable are the Arri SR and Eclair NPR.

I used to deal with Victor Duncan but understand they are out of business and Helix in Chicago. I've rented complete setups from both and had excellent experiences. I think there are dealers in both Atlanta and Nashville. I can't provide names as I haven't done any film in a few gears and have a friend that will rent his BL to me if I want to shoot 16.
 
I shot some films with a Bolex H16. It's a fun little camera but can be a real pain in the ass. Sound sync is difficult to say the least, unless you have a sound person and real sound equipment (as opposed to trying to record the sound on film) and are intending on telecining your footage for the editing.

It was fun for what I had to use it for and when I used it, but after using the Red camera and even some of the nicer Panasonics, I would never go back to a bolex.

Interestingly enough, I look up and see x-ray is in knoxville, where UT's 'film' department still uses Bolexes :D
 
Sound in the 16mm world exists in two ways, optical or mag stripe, on the film itself, and as a synced external tape, usually recorded in 1/4 inch, but you can crystal-sync other formats. The camera puts an optical marker on the film, and an audio marker on the tape, to time code.

The most practical camera for creating sound directly on film is the long discontinued Canon Scopic (6mm film is sold with and without a magnetic stripe). Normally however you take your original film and audio tape and have a work print made, with a mag track, and you put your originals away for later. You then edit using your work prints with an audio track.

When finished you take your original print and have it "conformed" to the work print. Remember film is not digital, each time you make a print you are a generation away from the original. The final product usually uses an optical track, not a magnetic stripe.

As an alternative you can take your film and make a work video, and edit that, and again conform the original.

Or as a second alternative you can make video from the original film and audio, and that becomes your final product.

If this all sounds tedious and complicated, that is because it is. Before the advent of digital video, even video was treated this way, you made copies, edited them, producing and EDL (edit decision list) and then went back and conformed the original. With analog video, like film, each copy was lower quality than the original.

Digital video has ended this worry about the original, since each copy is exactly the same as the original.

In the real world of analog film when you went to the theater you were [are] seeing the forth generation. Original>>mastercut>>master-prints>>distribution prints.

16mm film is sold with and without a magnetic stripe, double or single perforation. You can shoot standard and super 16.
Click to expand...


I have not come across the mag stripe stock in 16mm in use. I imagine it could be limiting in use as you would be stuck with whatever the sound was when shooting and if the mic is on the camera possibly some camera noise.
In the UK film industry the crystal sync method was pretty much the industry standard until as late as the early 1990's when film finally gave way after a long fight to Tape. When I got into Film Editing in the late 1980s the Steinbeck editing machine was king and most TV non studio stuff was shot on 16 or super16. The process we used was pretty much as you described with Cutting copy prints and seperate 16mm mag tracks although the Mag tracks were the final sound after they had been mixed in a Sound Dubbing theatre to produce a single track. We only rarely went back to the 1/4"s usually when we'd ripped up the mag track on the editing machine. We used neg film and made a cutting copy from the Rushes prints from the lab joined with mylar tape. When we'd finished the print was sent to specialist Neg cutter who would match the cuts we'd made using the negative so a print could be made.
Many of the editors I worked with at time remember the even scarrier days of editing reversal. During the 1970's and before, many News items and quick turn around documentaries were shot on reversal film which was then edited directly. This took real skill and nerve as not only was the film you were cutting the master but once cut and joined with a wet joiner a change in the edit point would result in 'lost' frames as the join required an overlap.
Thankfully with the advent of digital non linear editing systems I no longer have to wear gloves when editing though I do miss the fun of the film days . Looking back it sounds like a long winded way of doing things but at the time you had a great sense of achievement when finishing a film and viewing your final 'answer' print with the final mix. The final release print was only ever run on the telecine machine
Whats all this got to do with the Bolex camera ??? er not much sorry. I diverged a bit there.

Chris
 
Last edited:
Mephiloco said:
I shot some films with a Bolex H16. It's a fun little camera but can be a real pain in the ass. Sound sync is difficult to say the least, unless you have a sound person and real sound equipment (as opposed to trying to record the sound on film) and are intending on telecining your footage for the editing.

It was fun for what I had to use it for and when I used it, but after using the Red camera and even some of the nicer Panasonics, I would never go back to a bolex.

Interestingly enough, I look up and see x-ray is in knoxville, where UT's 'film' department still uses Bolexes :D
Click to expand...

i have the focus narrowed to the h16. i think i might be sacrificing the 400 ft mags though. sound will be recorded with an edirol field recorder.
 
Fred

That sounds like a nightmare to cut. I do remember an old Editor friend having a theory that the now common practice of the sound leading the cut- that is the dialogue line beginning out of vision before cutting to the person talking originated from the days when all they had was a sound track common to picture. In those days ( 1950's ???) it was Comopt - an optical track on the edge of the film. You had no choice but to prelead the sound though now it makes for an easier cut on the eye.

Chris
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom