16mm Film Camera

[Zareen Zapata]

Therewas a point several years back when digital overtook film in terms of popularity, even on most large scale projects. There were of course still some die hard celluloid lovers that refused to shoot on anything but film, but that number was dwindling. It was unclear what would happen with film, or if it would even survive at all.

Cameras like the K3 (Krasnogorsk 3) or Bolex H-16 can be found relatively inexpensively on eBay, and are capable of delivering beautiful results. Naturally they are popular with budget conscious filmmakers.

For me, it was the perfect option, as I had planned to shoot my 16mm film project in 1.33 aspect ratio (4:3), so I was happy not to spend extra money right now for the wider gate of Super 16mm. If I want to upgrade it down the road for a future project (which I plan to), I can always bring it into the shop to be converted.

For many true micro-budget films, that figure is their entire budget, or at least close to it. A film with a $50K + budget might be able to work with those numbers, but on the ultra DIY end, the only way to make shooting film possible is to utilize a much lower shooting ratio.

When shooting digitally, you often just keep shooting because you can, and if anything it can be a hindrance to the production as time is wasted. Film creates the opposite problem as the scarcity forces tough decisions on the director and DP, but at the same time it leads to more instinctual decision making.

There are practical advantages too. For instance, shooting a low ratio means your edit time will be massively cut down. Less time and money is needed for post-production, including color grading as the film scans will likely be far closer to a final look than a digital negative might be.

But most importantly is that beautiful 16mm image that simply can not be replicated digitally. Picking up your DSLR will always be the easier option, and for some projects it may be the better way to go. But for those films that do call for that unmistakable 16mm look, the extra blood sweat and tears that go into the process are well worth it.

Noam Kroll is an award-winning Los Angeles based filmmaker, and the founder of the boutique production house, Creative Rebellion. His work can be seen at international film festivals, on network television, and in various publications across the globe. Follow Noam on Twitter, Instagram and Facebook for more content like this!

Explore the pinnacle of medical education at Osh University, standing proudly among top-tier medicine universities . With a commitment to excellence, Osh provides a transformative experience that molds aspiring medical professionals into leaders of tomorrow.

Jewelgalore presents a mesmerizing collection of Kundan jewellery . Explore our range of elegantly crafted pieces, each showcasing the timeless beauty and intricate craftsmanship of this traditional art.

Just had a question regarding the loading of super 16mm on an Arri SR type camera. I have seen tutorials on bolex cams where they say you dont require to load the film in complete darkness. Is this the case with loading a 400ft roll on an arri sr? You would likely need a dark bag to load the film into the magazine correct?

I prefer to shoot still photography on film, develop myself at home, and make prints instead of using a digital camera. Perhaps you can imitate the look, but you cannot reproduce the experiences or the mentality tied to shooting on film. You also avoid the occasional heartbreak associated with shooting film, but that is another matter. Shooting on film is expensive (I am still scraping together what I need to try 16mm ), but I make the adjustments to get it to work.

I am planning to shoot a short film up here in Canada in June. I am planning the final edit of the film to be 22 minutes in length. The camera I will be using is an ARII 16 SR3 . At 24fps how many feet of film will I need. I am thinking 1200 feet. Is this correct ?

Sorry for the late response. Each 400ft roll will give you 11 minutes of runtime at 24fps. You want to account for a shooting ratio of at least 3:1 or 4:1, meaning you would buy 3x or 4x the film you need, for more takes and coverage. At a 4:1 ratio, you would need 88 minutes worth of film, or 8 400ft rolls.

Dear sir I find your article extremely interesting and informative.for a number of years now I have been collecting classic feature films on 16mm ( like the Maltese Falcon for example) and am now looking to upgrade this wonderful experience into actually making films on 16mm. I have a xenon lamp 16mm projector that gives the correct silver hue to projected black and white film as opposed to a sepia look created by the ordinary 250w halogen lamp

Thanks for this article it has been so very helpful. I am producing my first low-budget feature (on film) and was so nervous about the costs but now I feel more calm and confident we can do it! Can I ask you what lab you used to base the cost for film processing/scanning/stock for the feature?

Hey Noam, thanks for writing this (and all your other blog posts/podcast episodes). I recently discovered you and also recently finished Rebel w/o A Crew. I really love what you do and thank you for putting out all this excellent content for free! I look forward to watching Shadows on the Road on Amazon and seeing your new film!

Cheers,

Ezra

This is an incredibly illuminating piece. Thank you so much for writing it. I am shooting two shorts next year and was trying to see costs associated with shooting on film for one of the films. This article has helped enormously. Best wishes!

I have been looking for a nice and cheap 16mm camera to start with. I don't mind if I have to do some work on it to get it running, as long as it's do-able. the requirements are that it needs to be capable of getting footage that looks good by todays standards, should be between 100-600$ lower the better, (I have to be able to pay for film after buying it). If it doesn't have a motor is it all that hard to make one? will it look like super 8 If shoot with it? Is there any thing I should know? What other cameras should I be looking for?

This is what I'm looking for, in the sense of quality. I'd get a Krasnogorsk 3 if i'd wern"t for being a wind up and only taking 100' of film. I need to blimp what ever I get unless it's self blimped.

P.S. I also consderd a canon scoopic. also how do you control and focus a camera thats blimped, expshilly if it's a home made one? Do I really need a sync motor? Also sorry for being so long with the question.

I don't need a quiet camera Because I'll make it quite by putting it in a blimp. If I can quickly change mags or film, then I don't care about the size that much, though I'd like to do some long takes.

Yea, plus the Krasnogorsk's aren't very good cameras. They aren't really well made and the movement isn't anywhere near the quality necessary for decent registration. I recently got the opportunity to use one and was very dismayed.

Nobody makes a quick loading 100ft camera. 100ft delivery is always on daylight spools (outside of some rare examples). Some other cameras like the A Minima, used 200ft daylight spools, but anything over 200ft are going to be 400ft loads. Not a big deal to buy some daylight spools on ebay and breakdown a 400ft load. Much more of a big deal to load the camera properly between takes. The Bolex cameras do try to make it easy, but if you're in the middle of something, it's going to be challenging.

Now... before someone asks it, I will go a head and ask the $10,000 question... if you can't afford a good camera, what makes you so certain you can afford the stock, processing and transfer? Not to push you away from shooting film, but it's awfully expensive. Heck, I have a beautiful kit and the only reason I'm not using every day is due to film cost.

Seconding Tyler's thoughts about money. I would suggest working up a full budget on paper before you go ahead with any purchases. Don't forget the cost of lenses too- they can be even pricier than the camera.

Also keep in mind that quietness is not the only feature a camera needs in order to be suitable for shooting sync sound. The camera's speed also has to be precisely controlled (this is called 'crystal-sync'), or else you'll have a massive headache trying to sync up dialog to picture when you're editing.

For your budget, the Bolex may indeed be the best choice. Like Bryan said, the one in your video is not representative of a Bolex in good repair. But neither the Bolex, nor any other wind-up camera, will do sync sound. It's both too loud and its speed changes substantially as the spring winds down.

If you're so inclined, and have access to some machining equipment, you could motorize the Bolex. All Bolexes have an 8:1 drive shaft, which exposes 8 frames of film per rotation of the shaft. My approach would be to attach a stepper motor to that shaft, and use a microcontroller to drive the motor at 180 RPM (3 rotations a second, for 24 fps). The crystals on most microcontroller boards will be accurate enough to record sync sound too, if you can blimp the camera well enough.

The camera you're that'd truly fit your needs (but not your budget) would be more along the lines of one of the models designed for sync sound. Most of the cameras in this category will take 400' loads, in magazines, and naturally won't require any extra work to motorize or blimp. I'll defer to other people's expertise here, but something like the Eclair ACL might be very suitable. I think you could get a kit with a few magazines and a zoom lens for less than $2000. If you decide to go that route, do work up a budget though. Cameras, lenses, stock, processing, printing/transfer... all these things add up quickly.

I agree with everyone else that you are not being very realistic with regard to budget. I have an Arriflex 16 S/B but even that camera is too loud for sound-shooting. Also, the one you listed for $499 appears to have a variable-speed motor which means that even if you initially set the motor to a certain speed, the camera will eventually drop to a different one, leading to a changed in exposure. This means it needs to be constantly watched & adjusted. So instead of watching the frame in the viewfinder, you wind up having to watch the tachometer. It can be dealt with, but it's something you shouldn't have to worry about. Plus, I wouldn't purchase any equipment off of ebay that's being advertised as "untested."

3a8082e126