Re: Film is not dead! 35 Foot Camera uses film the size of a person

[PhotoRoy6]

35 Foot Camera uses film the size of a person

 

http://www.hlntv.com/article/2012/02...hy?hpt=hp_bn13

 

roy

 

[Telesca Photography]

The link doesn't work!

On 3/25/12 8:57 PM, PhotoRoy6@... wrote:

35 Foot Camera uses film the size of a person

 

http://www.hlntv.com/article/2012/02...hy?hpt=hp_bn13

 

roy

 

[wpettit]

Some parts of this message have been removed. Learn more about Nabble's security policy.

try:  http://www.hlntv.com/search/content/35%20foot%20camera

-----Original Message-----
From: Chris Telesca
Sent: Mar 26, 2012 12:51 AM
To: List for Photo/Imaging Educators - Professionals - Students
Subject: Re: Film is not dead! 35 Foot Camera uses film the size of a person

The link doesn't work!

On 3/25/12 8:57 PM, PhotoRoy6@... wrote:

35 Foot Camera uses film the size of a person

 

http://www.hlntv.com/article/2012/02...hy?hpt=hp_bn13

 

roy

 

[PhotoRoy6]

The bb I got it off doesn't show the whole link. That is what the three dots indicate.

So the full link is

 

http://www.hlntv.com/article/2012/02/15/35-foot-camera-dennis-manarchy?hpt=hp_bn13

 

roy

 

 

 

In a message dated 3/26/2012 12:55:31 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time, telephotonc@... writes:

The link doesn't work!

On 3/25/12 8:57 PM, PhotoRoy6@... wrote:

35 Foot Camera uses film the size of a person

 

http://www.hlntv.com/article/2012/02...hy?hpt=hp_bn13

 

roy

 

 

[karl shah-jenner]

Roy:
> The bb I got it off doesn't show the whole link. That is what the three
> dots indicate.
> So the full link is
>
> _http://www.hlntv.com/article/2012/02/15/35-foot-camera-dennis-manarchy?hpt=
> hp_bn13_
> (http://www.hlntv.com/article/2012/02/15/35-foot-camera-dennis-manarchy?hpt=hp_bn13)
>
> roy


too early in the morning for me to crunch this but as impressed with the
camera as I will be, I'm going to be even more impressed by the lens this
guy is going to need!

some thoughts..

let's see - he's proposing 1/1000 of a second to avoid movement  -  and the
rig is portable so I'm assuming he plans on using it in semi-lit /outdoor
settings (hopefully without incinerating the subject) ..   the 3+ stops
he'll gain over daylight is going to require a fair thump of light


I'd guess if his proposed shutter speed is 1/1000 of a second I'm also going
to be highly impressed by the shutter!


It's suggested in the article and accompanying images that he'll effectively
be producing  something like 9:1 (or greater) macro shots of faces - that's
going to cause a serious reduction in light and require on heck of a fast
lens!  (and subsequent reduction in DoF)

to be honest I'd think the risk of fouling a shot being so expensive he'd be
better going the other way and allowing for much longer exposures, that way
a minor facial flicker or a blink might be a fraction of the full duration
of the exposure and would be a mere ghost in the image

[Roger Eichhorn]

Could be a focal plane shutter just behind the lens, or would this raise other problems?  In his computer images the lens appears to be about 2 ft in diameter.  Can one purchase negative film the size he's suggesting?  And handling it?  Wow!

Roger

Sent from my iPad

On Mar 26, 2012, at 7:55 PM, Karl Shah-Jenner <shahjen@...> wrote:

> Roy:
>> The bb I got it off doesn't show the whole link. That is what the three
>> dots indicate.
>> So the full link is
>>
>> _http://www.hlntv.com/article/2012/02/15/35-foot-camera-dennis-manarchy?hpt=
>> hp_bn13_
>> (http://www.hlntv.com/article/2012/02/15/35-foot-camera-dennis-manarchy?hpt=hp_bn13)
>>
>> roy
>
>
> too early in the morning for me to crunch this but as impressed with the camera as I will be, I'm going to be even more impressed by the lens this guy is going to need!
>
> some thoughts..
>
> let's see - he's proposing 1/1000 of a second to avoid movement  -  and the rig is portable so I'm assuming he plans on using it in semi-lit /outdoor settings (hopefully without incinerating the subject) ..   the 3+ stops he'll gain over daylight is going to require a fair thump of light
>
>
> I'd guess if his proposed shutter speed is 1/1000 of a second I'm also going to be highly impressed by the shutter!
>
>
> It's suggested in the article and accompanying images that he'll effectively be producing  something like 9:1 (or greater) macro shots of faces - that's going to cause a serious reduction in light and require on heck of a fast lens!  (and subsequent reduction in DoF)
>
> to be honest I'd think the risk of fouling a shot being so expensive he'd be better going the other way and allowing for much longer exposures, that way a minor facial flicker or a blink might be a fraction of the full duration of the exposure and would be a mere ghost in the image
>
>

[karl shah-jenner]

Roger:
Could be a focal plane shutter just behind the lens, or would this raise
other problems?  In his computer images the lens appears to be about 2 ft in
diameter.  Can one purchase negative film the size he's suggesting?  And
handling it?  Wow!

You can buy film that wide and I'm guessing processing it shouldn't  be as
difficult as one might first think, the roll could be advanced, dropping the
film down into a bath feeder of the dev, wash/stop, fix and final wash..
Given the cost per sheet I'd imagine the minute cost of chemicals could even
permit dev straight to fix then wash.  He might waste $1 worth of acetic
acid and thiosulfate, but eh - hardly here or there.

Well I've painted the hull of my boat, gone shopping, washed the car, run
the ferrets and started cooking dinner.. and I'm still not in the mood to
work out the aperture he'd be shooting at!

I'd guess like you Roger, the shutter is do-able as a roller shutter behind
the lens. but at 1000th of a second that slit is going to be pretty narrow
and will introduce diffraction softening .. unless it gets up a fair head of
steam before the slit passes the back of the lens then it could be wider.

He could also do it with LCDs but that would drop his light levels even
more.  Another way could be venetian blind style shutter blades that sort of
do this


   |        /        --     \      |
  |        /        --     \      |
  |        /        --     \      |
  |        /        --     \      |
  |        /        --     \      |

[karl shah-jenner]

grr.. silly fat fingers hit sent


me:
> He could also do it with LCDs but that would drop his light levels even
> more.  Another way could be venetian blind style shutter blades that sort
> of do this
>
>
                  closed            open                closed
                  |            /        --         \          |
FILM         |            /        --         \          |
LENS
                  |            /        --         \          |
                  |            /        --         \          |
                  |            /        --         \          |
        begining to      begining to
            open              close

[Elson T. Elizaga]

Does this camera have a camera bag?

[PhotoRoy6]

I only used the title to catch the reader eye, not start a war. Film is not for general photography anymore but has become an art thing.

Roy