There is double perf 16mm, and Double 8mm which is double perf 16  
with an extra set of sprocket holes such that if split it becomes  
Reg. 8mm.
Yes Double 8mm could be shot in a 16mm camera or in a Reg.8 mm camera.
Then it could be spit or not split, yielding several possible  
"special effects":


1. shot in Reg. 8 camera, not split= frame quarters seen, one side  
upside down unless anticipated in shooting.
2. shot in 16mm, then split = flicker effect, alternate frame  
quadrants.  See example below.
3. shot in 16mm camera, projected one sprocket displaced= half screen  
effect, horizontal split, top and bottom of frame.
4. shot in 16mm camera, double exposed in 8mm camera, then split. Any  
number of possible variations or possible multiple exposures with   
this kind of thinking.
5. who knows what you might come up with.


Here is a film that was  double 8mm film stock shot in a 16mm camera,  
meant to be used simply as 16mm, but I accidentally slit  it, so  
there ended up two rolls (the two halves) of Reg. 8
with the flicker effect of alternating quadrants, then, after  
telecine,  I juxtaposed the two halves side by side in "chronological  
shooting order"  in fcp, yielding this double screen effect with the  
rather mysterious
connections between the two halves. Note that one half of the split  
double 8mm had to be telecined as A-wind, the other half B-wind in  
order for this to properly work out.

http://www.youtube.com/watch? 
v=l4cNZLv5o9M&list=UUhNv2f1M4EKeyTB68E_n5dg&index=8&feature=plcp

Myron Ort







On Jan 23, 2012, at 4:03 PM, Steven Gladstone wrote:

> On 1/23/12 6:21 PM, Myron Ort wrote:
>> double perf versus double 8mm
>
> I always thought you could shoot double 8mm in 16mm, and when it was
> processed you would just have an extra set of unused perfs (might be a
> problem with frame lines if you were off by a perf.) I never tried it,
> so I might be wrong, but I thought the perfs were the same size.
>
> On another note. I have a Redlake Hycam, and would really be happy if
> someone wanted to come take it off my hands. While I'd prefer a  
> 501C for
> tax purposes, in the end I'd like it to go to a good home that  
> would use it.
>
> I'm located in Brooklyn, N.Y.
>
>
> -- 
> Steven Gladstone
> New York Based Cinematographer
> Gladstone films
> Blog - http://indiekicker.reelgrok.com/
> http://www.blakehousemovie.com
> http://www.gladstonefilms.com
> 917-886-5858
> _______________________________________________
> FrameWorks mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://mailman-mail5.webfaction.com/listinfo/frameworks
>

_______________________________________________
FrameWorks mailing list
[email protected]
https://mailman-mail5.webfaction.com/listinfo/frameworks

Reply via email to