Working Within My Limitations: “Who Shot the President”

As I’ve aged, I find it harder to make movies. I don’t have the energy that I had when I was younger. I won’t let that stop me.

In this post, I want to take a look at one of my first movies, “Who Shot the President,” and consider how I worked with my limitations back then..

This post includes spoilers, so you may want to watch it before you read the rest of the post, you can watch it here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3lSTEhH0d4E . The film runs about 3 minutes.

I made two versions of this movie. The first in 1994 on Super 8, and a second in 2004 on 16mm.

Inspiration

While I completed the first version of “Who Shot the President” back in 1994, the idea came to me a few years earlier. In the late 1980s and early 1990s I watched several documentaries about the assassination of John Kennedy. Then in 1991 I saw the movie JFK. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/JFK_(film)

To begin with, I was open to the possibility that there was a conspiracy. But I am also something of a skeptic in general, so I was apt to question what people said. The more I learned about the assassination, the less likely I felt that there was a conspiracy.

This was before I really got serious about making movies. But I began to think about making a parody movie of the conspiracy documentaries that I had watched.

Generating Ideas

Over the next few years, I came up a quite a few ideas for my parody movie. At the time I thought of this as a feature length live action movie.

One idea was to have a character do a blow up of a reflection in a piece of chrome on one of the cars to reveal the shooter. Who would be someone who obviously couldn’t be the shooter.

Another idea I had was an “interview” with one of the co-conspirators to expose the plan. I had several different ideas as to what the interview would expose.

Realization

It was during this period that I began to get serious about making movies. I made one movie on Super 8 (“Weekend in Calgary” https://www.dynamiclethargyfilms.ca/filmlist/weekend-in-calgary) which was screened at the first $100 Film Festival.

I started to look for an idea for another movie, and I went back to my assassination conspiracy theory parody movie idea. At this point I had managed to make a 3-minute film on Super 8. The ideas I had for my parody movie were far beyond what my skills and finances could accomplish.

The realization made me discouraged and, so, I gave up on the idea.

Reconsideration

Later, though, I went back to the idea. I knew I had the skills and money to do a 3-minute movie on Super 8. Could I develop one of the ideas I had come up with into a movie of that scale?

My first question was to ask myself, what do I want to say with this movie? I didn’t want to just have a joke. It had to have a bigger meaning.

The answer was that I felt that so many of the conspiracy theories used circular reasoning. For example: If there was no proof of a conspiracy, that was proof that there was a cover up. Since there was a cover up, that proved that there was a conspiracy.

Recognizing Opportunity

My observation that conspiracy theories follow circular reasoning fit with one of the ideas I had for the interview with the co-conspirator. The interview would follow the pattern of the old Abbot and Costello “Who’s on First” routine, where the conversation plays off misunderstandings and goes around in circles.

I didn’t feel up to the technical challenge of doing an interview, so I came up with a different approach to the visuals for the movie. I would use a series of stills related to the assassination. As the interview progressed the individual shots would get shorter. I would select these images so that at the end of the film they would create the impression that the screen was spinning in a circle.

The spinning effect worked well on the Super 8 version of the movie, but when I redid the movie on 16mm, the effect wasn’t as effective.

Later, when I watched Chris Marker’s movie “La Jetée” I was struck that he used a similar approach. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fU99W-ZrIHQ

Making the Movie

Some years ago, I wrote another blog post about making “Who Shot the President.” So, if you want more details on how I made the movie, you can read about them here: https://dynamiclethargyfilms.ca/how-to-make-a-film-for-the-hundred-dollar-film-festival-part-3/

Of particular note, when I did the first version, I used a tripod and placed the stills on the floor. This resulted in my doing about 2,000 deep knee bends while shooting the movie. I don’t think I could do that now.

Lessons Learned

The movie was a success from my point of view, and I got a lot of positive feed back from people. I also got physical threats from people who found it upsetting.

However, what I learned from making the movie the way I did was that it was possible to rethink an idea to fit both the goals you want to achieve with a movie and the limitations of your own abilities. In the end, I believe the film I made was better than what I would have made if I had the wherewithal to make the feature I originally conceived.

Another lesson is the importance of having a clear idea what you want to say with your movie. In this case, knowing what I wanted to say helped me focus on those aspects of the movie that carried that message and in a way that I could actually achieve.

I’ve thought of this approach as similar to poetry. The structure of a poem constrains how a poet can express themselves. It is those constraints that encourage creativity.

This post is a mirror from my main blog http://www.dynamiclethargyfilms.ca/blog

Film to Video Transfer

A few weeks ago I bought an 8mm/super 8 film to video transfer unit made by Wolverine. I wanted to use it to transfer some old home movies. It has been a bit of a struggle.

Old Home Movies

Many years ago, about 1983 or 1984, I used an old projector and a rented video camera to transfer all of our families home movies to VHS tape. As I recall, it took me about a day. Later, in 2004, I converted the VHS tape to a DVD. The image quality after a couple of transfers is not nearly as good as the original film. There was some loss of colour quality in the initial transfers and I didn't do a really great job of focusing.

For quite some time now, I've wanted to do a new transfer from the original film to digital files. Our old super 8 projector isn't very reliable and I'm reluctant to use it. I did some video transfers for “Contingency” using a 16mm projector and a digital camera. The quality was poor, but good enough for what I wanted to do.

Film Transfer Options

I looked into what it would cost to get the film transferred by a professional outfit. It looked as if I'd need to spend in excess of $1,000 at least. I couldn't justify that kind of money to myself.

I came across an 8mm/Super 8 film to video transfer unit made by a company called Wolverine. It cost about $450 Canadian, so a lot less than what it would cost to get some one else to do the transfer. I figured that it would be cheaper to do the transfers myself, then I could resell or even give away the unit.

There were quite a few videos posted on YouTube by people who have used the unit, so I watched those before I decided to buy. People seemed to be quite happy with the image quality, so I decided to go ahead.

I got the unit a couple weeks ago and tried it out with the original version of “Weekend in Calgary”. I was disappointed with the image quality. It looked very noisy. Because I had paid for it, I decided I would experiment with it before I gave up on it.

Image Settings

The unit allows you to adjust the framing, exposure and sharpness. Sharpness appears to be the same as contrast. I adjusted the framing a bit, but it doesn't affect the image quality I am concerned about. The exposure can cause the image to look too dark or too light, but it didn't apear to affect the noise much.

The sharpness did make a difference though. With high sharpness, the noise is worse than with low sharpness. The low sharpness setting didn't eliminate the noise entirely. However, with low sharpness the image tends to look fuzzy.

Video Compression

One of the videos I watched earlier suggested that the video compression may be a factor in image quality. I contacted Wolverine to asked if I could adjust the compression. They got back to me quite quickly. They said the compression cannot be changed. They added that the unit is set to the lowest level of compression that the chip allowed.

Bypassing the Video Recording

After considering the reply from Wolverine, I felt that either this was as good as the unit could produce, or that I had a defective unit. The unit does have a line out to a TV monitor, so I decided to try that so I could record the video with my computer. I wouldn't get a usable video because the computer would record continuously and not just the still frames. It did allow me to isolate individual frames and compare.

I could see very little difference in quality that I could see. The frames from the computer recording seemed a little fuzzier. If the unit is defective, it isn't because of the video recording.

Next Steps

As I worked with the unit, I started to feel more comfortable with the image quality. It may be that because I have paid for professional quality transfers for my films in the past, that my standard may be higher than I need for our family home movies. I used one of my own films as a basis for the tests, so it may not give me a clear indication of what the home movies would look like.

I plan to transfer some of our home movies and then compare the image quality against the images from the earlier transfer. As long as the quality is better, it makes sense to go ahead with the transfers.

Wolverine did suggest that the image could be improved with some professional video editing software. I have Premiere Pro and Lightworks, so I plan to use those to experiment with them.

Lessons Learned

One of the difficulties I had was that I didn't set aside the time needed to properly test the transfers. Partly this was due to my other commitments, but I am also struggling with motivation these days. In future I should ensure I have the time to follow up before I buy new equipment.

I also feel that I didn't do enough research before I decided to buy this unit. There are many video reviews available on-line, and I only watched a few of them before I decided to go ahead. I am not sure if I would have gone with this unit if I were more aware of the limitations.

This post is a mirror from my main blog http://www.dynamiclethargyfilms.ca/blog

How to make a Film for the Hundred Dollar Film Festival - Part 7

In the previous posts, I’ve looked at how I made some of my films for the Hundred Dollar Film Festival. In this post and subsequent posts, I will use those experiences to give advice on how to make a film for the Hundred Dollar Film Festival. I will begin with the limitations that technical side of filmmaking impose. This will be important to keep in mind when it comes to the creative side of filmmaking.

Experience

Now that digital video is so much part of the culture, many people do not understand the technology of film as much as people used to. If you don’t have experience with film technology, I encourage you to experiment with film and cameras before you start your film. You may be able to use some of your experimental footage in your film, but don’t count on that.

Most cities have groups like the Calgary Society of Independent Filmmakers that can provide the support you will need to make your film. This can include access to equipment, training, and advice.

If you can find a more experience filmmaker to help you, that can make the process easier for you.

Film Length

I would plan on a film between three and four minutes long. The original rule limited filmmakers to four rolls of colour film, or five rolls of black and white film. This gives you about twelve to fifteen minutes of film.

I know some filmmakers were able to use almost all of the film they shot. More often though, you use only a fraction of what you shot in the final film. It’s common for a feature film to use just one per cent of the film shot. For a three to four minutes long Hundred Dollar Film Festival Film, you will need to have between 20% and 25% of what you shoot in the final film.

That goal can be difficult to meet, so you need to avoid complicated and tricky shots that may not work. Some may see this as stifling creativity, but it can also be a spur to be more creative.

Type of Film

Super 8 film is available in reversal and negative, but as far as I know, you can’t get prints from the negatives. For Super 8, reversal film is the only real option if you want a final version you can project.

In 16mm you can use reversal as well, but I prefer negative. I used negative film for Contingency and then I edited the print for the final film. You can go back to a negative cut and answer print, but that is more expensive. One reason I prefer negative is that I still have that to fall back on if something happens to my print.

Post Production

The approach I have used for the last few films I made was to transfer the images to video and edit them on the computer. Then I used information from the video cut to cut the actual film. That can be tricky to do, and I have used different approaches with each of the films I have done.

On My Next Film, I wrote some of the edge numbers on the print so I could match the video to the film print. This wouldn’t work as well if you want to use the print for your final film.

When I did Contingency, I planned the shots so that the exact cuts were not critical. I only needed to get the length right. The final shot of the film was an exception, but I could identify the correct frames visually.

Sound

Super 8 sound film is no longer available, and 16mm sound requires a much more sophisticated, and expensive, approach. That pretty much limits your options for sound to non-sync sound. If sync is critical, you may be able to achieve that will live sound at the screening.

For Contingency, I created the sound track in my video editing software (Premiere Pro), and then output the sound on a CD. I had a beep on the CD that corresponded to the “2” frame, that allowed the projectionist to do a rough sync. Projects all vary slightly in their run speed, so the sound could be a second or two out of sync. It can vary through out the film.

If you work with non-sync sound, it is best to stay with either music or voice over on the sound track. Sound effects that don’t need to be in sync work as well.

Another option is to have no sound at all. Sound can add a lot to the impact of a film, so a silent film can be more of a creative challenge to make.

In the next post, I will move on to the creative side of filmmaking. Creativity is difficult to explain, but I feel some aspects of the creative process are easier to convey.

This post is a mirror from my main blog http://www.dynamiclethargyfilms.ca/blog

How to make a Film for the Hundred Dollar Film Festival - Part 3

In this and the next few posts, I will look at how I made some of my films for the festival. In later posts, I will summarise what I learnt from those experiences and suggest how you can make a film.

Who Shot the President started out as an idea for a feature film. The idea came to me after I had seen one too many documentaries on the Kennedy assassination. After I played around with the idea for a while, I realized I wasn’t ready to make a feature.

Rather than abandon the idea though, I asked myself what was the point I wanted to make. What I wanted to say was that most conspiracy theories base their argument on a logical fallacy. I reviewed all of the scenes I’d come up with and picked one that would make that point.

It took me longer than I expected to make this film. Although I shot it twice before I was happy with it, the hard part came in developing the idea. I did a fair bit of research to find appropriate images to use. I used a series of still images for most of the film. I did have one short “live action” segment in the film. Years later, I learnt that Chris Marker used a similar approach for La jetée.

I use regular tripod, and put my images on the floor. At first, this worked well, but as I moved to shorter and shorter clips, I realized that it required about 2,000 deep knee bends. I wasn’t a fan of deep knee bends to start with. But, I got it done. Later when I redid the film on 16mm, I used projected slides to make it easier on my knees.

The sound track was an interesting challenge. I had two actors to play the parts, but couldn’t arrange them to be in the same place at the same time. I used an old two track reel to reel tape recorder, which allowed me to record one track at a time.

First I had Michele L record her lines, with gaps for the other actor’s lines. Then I had Steve Hanon record his lines while he listened to Michele L’s recording. We ran into a problem when some of the gaps were not long enough for Steve’s lines. When we played back the recording, it sounded like she interrupted him several times. Steve could have talked faster to fix that, but we decided that the interruptions worked well, so we kept it as it was.

The final touch was to add an echo. The recorder’s playback head was after the record head, so I could feed the recorded sound back into the recording. The sound turned out rather muddy, but years later when I redid the sound for a 16mm version of the film, the better quality sound equipment produce a sound that was too clean, so I used some of the original sound.

This was one of the more successful of my films and I got a lot of good feedback on it. I also got a lot of very negative feedback. I talk about that in an article I wrote: Why Do People Hate my Film?

In my next post, I will look at The Fence, the film I made for the fifth festival in 1996.

This post is a mirror from my main blog http://www.dynamiclethargyfilms.ca/blog

How to make a Film for the Hundred Dollar Film Festival - Part 2

In the next few posts, I will look at how I made some of my films for the festival. In later posts, I will summarise what I learnt from those experiences and suggest how you can make a film.

I made Weekend in Calgary for the first Hundred Dollar Film Festival in 1992. This was a film that kind of just happened. I wanted to have a film in the first festival, but I was stuck for an idea.

One of the Super 8 cameras the CSIF had an Intervalometer. That is, it could be set to take a picture at intervals of 5 or 10 seconds. Out of curiosity, I wanted to try it out. At the time, I did not intend that this would become a finished film.

One Sunday, I set up the camera in my car and drove out to Lake Louise and back. Because of the length of the trip, I used up a bit more than half of a roll on the way out, so I switched to another roll for the trip back. I had to finish off both rolls later before I could get them processed.

At noon the next Monday, I went for a walk during my lunch break and ended up at Olympic Plaza where a local band was playing. For one of their original tunes, they had lifted a guitar riff from Pipeline by the Chantays. Pipeline was one of my favourite tunes from my childhood days. As I listened to the music I thought that Pipeline could work well with the film I’d just shot.

At the time, I knew many people in Calgary who, after a hard week at work, would rush out to Banff to “relax”, then rush back to work. I thought it was an odd thing to do, but it reflected the “go go” attitude that many people had at the time. That led to the title of the film. Now, with a point to make and music to go with it, I thought I had a film.

There were a few more hurtles before I was done. First, I would need sound and I had shot on silent film. My solution was primitive. I cut the two sections of the film together. Then, I used a sound camera to shoot the projected image. That proved to be a little trickier to do that I thought, but eventually I was happy with what I had.

I dubbed Pipeline onto the magnetic stripe. The film went on to win the award for consistent vision in the festival. Although we only screened the film a few times, years later people would still talk to me about it.

Years later, after I found out what it would cost to get the rights to use the music, I asked James Reckseidler to do a new tune for me. If I had to pay money for music, I’d rather pay a local filmmaker than a faceless corporation. I used his music for the version of the film I posted on YouTube.

In my next post, I will look at Who Shot the President, the film I made for the third festival in 1994.

This post is a mirror from my main blog http://www.dynamiclethargyfilms.ca/blog

How to make a Film for the Hundred Dollar Film Festival - Part 1

When the Hundred Dollar Film Festival first began, the idea was that you could make a film for under $100. Now, twenty-one years later, is that still possible? In this and later posts, I will to talk about how to make a film for the festival. As I wrote this post, it began to get very long, so I decided to break it up into several separate posts. In this post, I will look at what kind of film I will discuss.

As the deadline for the twenty-first festival looms, this may seem a bit late to talk about how to make a film. But, there is always the twenty-second festival.

What qualifies me to talk about this subject?

I’ve had eight films in the festival over the years, with films in both the first festival in 1992 and the twentieth in 2012. I also started the festival.

The Festival Rules

The festival rules have changed over the years and it doesn’t need to be constrained by the original intentions, but I hope that films made to the original limits will always be welcome at the festival.

When I first came up with the idea for the festival, the kind of filmmaker I aimed it at was someone who had just begun to make films. That was what I was back in 1991. Maybe they were someone who had never made a film, or who had only made a few small films. Their interest would be to learn and develop their skills, and, of course, to have an audience for their films.

I became aware of a different group of filmmakers who were interested in the festival. These were experienced people looking for a challenge, or a chance to have some fun when they made a film. I know that some looked at these films as a way to reinvigorate themselves after a frustrating project.

The challenge came in the constraints on how they could make the film. In the first festival, the cost was not the limitation, as implied by the name. Instead, we set a limit on how much film the filmmakers could use to make the film. The limits were five rolls of black and white, four rolls of colour, or three rolls of sound. With a shooting ratio of 3 to 5, the final films would be 2 ¼ to 5 minutes long.

Can It Still Be Done?

A lot has changed since 1992. Can you still make a film the way it was back then? I believe so, although not as cheaply. Super 8 is still available, and you can make films on 16mm in the same spirit as Super 8. I did that for my film Contingency for the 2012 festival.

I estimate that films made to the original rules would cost $300 to $550. You can still make a film for under $100, if you shot only one roll of film. Shipping the film to the lab and back can cost more than the film and developing!

There are some further limitations on the films now. Super 8 sound film isn’t available any more. If you want sound, you need to put it on a CD, or have live sound. With pre-recorded sound, you can’t guarantee sync. It is not as easy to get a 16mm film negative cut and printed these days, so you can’t do effects like dissolves or title overlays, unless you can do them in-camera.

In the next post, I will review how I made each of my films. In later posts, I will use my experience to provide advice on how to make a film for the Hundred Dollar Film Festival.

I know that I don’t know everything there is to know about how to make a film, so I would appreciate any comments that build on my suggestions.

This post is a mirror from my main blog http://www.dynamiclethargyfilms.ca/blog

“Contingency” Wins Award at the $100 Film Festival - 2012 March 11

They screened my film Contingency Saturday night at the $100 Film Festival.

The screening went well. They had a good turn out. They moved the festival this year. The last few years it was at the Plaza theatre, but this year they had it at the Alberta College of Art and Design in the Stanford Perrott Lecture Theatre. The festival was there several times in the past. My wife thought it was a better location for the festival.

The last time I went to the festival I only met a couple people I knew. This time I met about a dozen. I did some promotion of the film, but I only know of one person who came because of the promotion I did. He got the date wrong and went to the Friday night screening.

After the films were finished, they announced the awards. I was very pleased when they announced that Contingency had won the Best of Alberta award sponsored by Calgary Economic Development. That impressed my wife. I got a trophy designed by George Duncan

The host, Nowell Berg (who hosted the first $100 Film Festival) asked me to give a little speech. I said that I knew that while many in the audience were film makers, many others had never made a film. I challenged them to make a film for next year’s festival. I would really like to see that happen.

After the screening, several people came over to me to say they liked my film. That makes me feel good. I get a screening fee for the film. That makes me feel good too.

I haven’t decided what to do with the film next. Ordinarily I would look into getting some distribution of the film (Moviola showed My Next Film), but that requires I get releases for everything on the screen, and that would be a nightmare to do. I've lost touch with some people and I never did know the names of some other people. I haven’t decided what to do with My Next Film either.

I do feel inspired to make another film for the festival.

This post is a mirror from my main blog http://www.dynamiclethargyfilms.ca/blog

“Contingency” Update 2012 March 4

I got the picture and sound done for Contingency this week. I used a CD for the sound. It is very hard to get perfect sync with that arrangement, but I think it should be close enough. The projector I used varied between a little fast to a little slow.

I took the film and CD into the CSIF office Tuesday. The festival will screen it as the first film on the Saturday night (March 10). The screening starts at 7:00 p.m. in the Stanford Perrott Lecture Theatre in the Alberta College of Art and Design (1407-14 Ave NW). More information on their website: http://100dollarfilmfestival.org/fest2011/

Melanie Wilmink, who runs the festival, told me she’d like me to record more information about the start of the festival. Back in 2003 (year 11 of the festival), I wrote a short history of the festival for the CSIF’s newsletter. I’ve posted it on my website now http://dynamiclethargyfilms.ca/articles/the-history-of-the-100-film-festival/ Melanie also posted it on the CSIF blog. http://csifblog.wordpress.com/2012/02/28/the-history-of-the-100-film-festival/

Over the next few days I plan to do some promotion of the festival, and my film of course.

This post is a mirror from my main blog http://www.dynamiclethargyfilms.ca/blog

“Contingency” Update 2012 February 26

I made good time on Contingency this week. I had it ready to take into the film festival office Friday, but then I got the extra film I shot delivered Thursday. Most of the new shots looked very good, but a few were disappointing. My sloppiness I’m afraid. I got most of what I wanted, so I was happy. There was only one shot I debated about using.

I felt the new shots were an improvement on what I had.

I tried to refinish the film Friday. I got all the new shots in, but the recut film is longer. It was only about three seconds, but I need to adjust the sound a little to make it fit. I didn’t have time to do that Friday.

I asked for an extension to get the film ready and they said I could bring it in early next week. I don’t think I’ll have a problem with that.

They have started to promote the festival and posted a “review” of my film on-line. csifblog.wordpress.com/2012/02/22/more-100-film-festival-reviews-by-tim-zak/ It is only one line long, but he is nice to me.

I showed the film to my wife and she said nice things about it.

I’d reshot my film Some Days . . . as well, but I had accidentally jarred the camera when I was shooting and the image was off center. Other than that, it looked very good. I decided that it wasn’t ready to show. Next year for sure!

This post is a mirror from my main blog http://www.dynamiclethargyfilms.ca/blog

“Contingency” Progress Report 2012 February 12

 

I worked on my film Contingency most of the week. Some of the shots I had in the film were not as good as I would have liked, so reshot them. During the first part of the week, I set up or arranged the images I needed.

Wednesday I went downtown to pick up a camera from the Calgary Society of Independent Filmmakers. They moved their office just before Christmas and it was my first time to visit it. They have far less space now, but I think they have it more efficiently laid out. I believe they plan for this to be temporary. Temporary can last longer than permanent though.

I shot Thursday. It was a long day and slow work. I had to move the camera and tripod around, but fortunately, I didn’t need to use any lights. Even as it was, my cracked rib gave me a lot of pain. I tried to reshoot my other film, Some Days . . . , as well, but I’m not confident I’ll have a final version from that.

Friday I returned the camera. I sent the film to Niagara Custom Lab in Toronto http://www.niagaracustomlab.com/. I hope I get it back in time to get it ready for the festival. The time is tight though. In the past, I knew Rick Doe, who ran the film lab here in Calgary, would give priority to a project if you asked for it, but not for a 100-foot roll.

The $100 Film Festival accepted both Contingency and Some Days . . . this week. I told them that I didn’t think Some Days . . . would be ready. I have a version of Contingency that I feel is good enough to show, so even if the new film isn’t back in time, I can show it.

This post is a mirror from my main blog http://www.dynamiclethargyfilms.ca/blog

My Film Equipment Repair Adventure

I have an old Super 8/Regular 8 movie projector that hasn’t worked for so long I don’t remember when it stopped working. I decided to see if I could get it to work again.

I transferred some old home movies to video 28 years ago, but I’m not happy with the quality of the video bow. I think I can do better now. I also want to transfer some of the super 8 film I shot for Weekend in Calgary, Who Shot the President, If I Knew . . . and a couple abandoned projects. I think I could reuse them. The CSIF does have a Super transfer system, so I could use that too.

I investigated on-line to see if I could get any information about the projector, a Sankyo Dualux 1000. I was surprised to find out that replacement parts are for sale on the internet. In fact, some people have “new in the box” projectors. I found a copy of the manual that I downloaded. It is in Spanish or French, but it helps a little. Apparently it is still a popular projector because it is good for video transfers. Sanko hasn’t made any for over 30 years.

The problem with the projector is that the drive belt has disintegrated. Replacements are available, but expensive. Some people suggested using an O-ring, which is much cheaper and easier to find. I tried an elastic band, and that didn’t work. I also worry about the bulb going. Fortunately, the bulbs are still available. The bulb seems to be working OK now, but I wonder if I should get a replacement one, just in case.

I looked to O-rings in Rona and Canadian Tire. They both had O-rings, but they were all too small. I asked my brother for advice and he said that an auto parts dealer should have what I’m looking for. He gave me the names of a couple of places in town that he thought would the best to try. I went out searching and visited several places before I found one that I thought would work.

I tried to install the O-ring a few weeks ago. The ring itself seemed to be the right size, but in order to install it I have to get it through some thin gaps, and the O-ring was just too thick. I suppose that if I more completely disassembled the projector that I could make more room, but I didn’t have that much confidence in my ability to put it back together again.

I decided that if I cut the O-ring in half lengthwise that I could get it to fit. It took a long time to cut it in half. I tried to install the cut O-ring last Monday. It worked! It was easy to install and it was just the right length. The projector seemed to operate well enough. Unfortunately, the next day when I tried to use the projector to screen a Super 8 film, the O-ring broke. When I cut it in half I must have weakened it.

I was at a loss as what to try next. I couldn’t see myself getting back out to buy another O-ring again for a long while. Even then, I couldn’t be sure I could get one skinny enough to fit through the thin slots.

Although an elastic band didn’t work when I tried it before, I decide to try again. This time I picked one that was thicker and shorter. I thought that would keep it from stretching too much, which was the problem last time. That seemed to do the trick. I’ve used it a few times, the project has worked well, and the elastic band looks like it is in good shape. We have several more elastic bands of a similar size, so if this one breaks after a while, it will be fairly easy to replace.

One of the joys of filmmaking is the struggle to keep the old equipment alive. On the other hand, the old film equipment does hold up better than newer video and digital equipment.

This post is a mirror from my main blog http://www.dynamiclethargyfilms.ca/blog

“Contingency” Progress Report 2012 January 29

Both Contingency and Somedays were accepted to the $100 Film Festival this week. I felt good about that. I’m sure that they accepted the films on the merits and it had nothing to do with my starting the festival. I decided to withdraw Somedays because I was so unhappy with the image quality. I can redo it for next year’s festival.

I made good progress on Contingency this week. I finally got all my clips ready and taped them together. There are a few things to do before it is ready to show. There is one clip that I think I’ll trim down a bit. Otherwise, I think it is about ready. I’d still like to redo some shots, but I’m not sure I’ll be able to.

I want to make a few changes to the sound track too, which should be easier. I want to have short clips of people talking about randomness, uncertainty and so on. I have a few, such as one from Steven Jaye Gould, but I’m having trouble finding more. I plan to add Trudeau saying, “Just watch me”. I watched a bunch of stuff of Marshall McLuhan, but didn’t find anything that I felt fit. If you know of anything please let me know.

This post is a mirror from my main blog http://www.dynamiclethargyfilms.ca/blog