[Frameworks] Bi-packing acetate in a Bolex

[Bernd Lützeler]

I have heard of this idea, using the Bolex as a contact printer. Not with these particular stocks. Rather like a rumor...

Bernd.


> Am 03.12.2015 um 06:19 schrieb Dominic Angerame <dominic.angerame at gmail.com>:
> 
> I think its a big mistake to attempt. There does not seem to be room for the thickness of the stock and the Bolex has no registration pin to keep frames steady. I would not like to damage my Bolex through bi-paking.
> 
> Dominic
> 
>> On Tue, Dec 1, 2015 at 9:49 AM, Francisco Torres <fjtorrespr at gmail.com> wrote:
>> 
>> try this book-
>> 
>> Techniques of Special Effects of Cinematography
>>  By Raymond Fielding
>> 
>> https://www.google.com.pr/search?tbo=p&tbm=bks&q=isbn:1136055533
>> 
>> the nypl used to have it.... years ago.
>> 
>> it cites this article---
>> 
>> '' bipacking with a bolex'', American Cinematographer, March 1964,p.140 Day,W. Percy
>> 
>> 2015-12-01 7:44 GMT-04:00 Chris G <spydir at gmail.com>:
>>> Hi all,
>>> 
>>> I was wondering if it was especially idiotic to bi-pack two acetate-base stocks (in this case both Kodak Hi-Con) in a Bolex for mattes while running it slowly with an animation motor. 
>>> 
>>> Thanks!
>>> Chris
>>> 
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> FrameWorks mailing list
>>> FrameWorks at jonasmekasfilms.com
>>> https://mailman-mail5.webfaction.com/listinfo/frameworks
>> 
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> FrameWorks mailing list
>> FrameWorks at jonasmekasfilms.com
>> https://mailman-mail5.webfaction.com/listinfo/frameworks
> 
> _______________________________________________
> FrameWorks mailing list
> FrameWorks at jonasmekasfilms.com
> https://mailman-mail5.webfaction.com/listinfo/frameworks
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://mailman-mail5.webfaction.com/pipermail/frameworks/attachments/20151203/1a983c72/attachment.html>