|
|
This topic comprises 4 pages: 1 2 3 4
|
|
Author
|
Topic: What are the sound formats on 16mm film?
|
Stephen Furley
Film God

Posts: 3059
From: Coulsdon, Croydon, England
Registered: May 2002
|
posted 12-02-2002 04:01 AM
Scott wrote: quote: For what it's worth, there's also an airline format that usually has a narrower-than-normal English-language optical track and foreign-language mag track. I've never seen one of these prints, but apparently the sound quality on both tracks was pretty lousy.
I've run just one of these, 'Mahogany', sometime in the mid '80s. The optical track was in English, and was noisy, the mag was in Italian, the stripe was uneven, lumpy (bits of hardened stripe emulsion embedded in it), had nothing above about 5k and seemed to have been partly erased in places; other than that, it was ok.
I also have an industrial training short somewhere in this format on which the mag is very good.
There are many magnetic formats on 16mm, Full width stripe in the same position as the optical, half width stripe covering half of the optical track, I have seen both inner and outer half versions of this, quarter width edge stripe outside the perforations on double perf stock, and all 16mm stripe prints I have seen also carried a balance stripe outside the perforations on the other edge. A few projectors were capable of recording and replaying sound on this stripe as well.
Full, inner half, outer half and edge (quarter) track heads were available for some machines, sometimes music or a commentary was added to an existing track, using a half track head, producing tro tracks side by side on one stripe, like the wide stripes on 70mm, and these could then be played back together by a full track head. This never seemed to work very well. I have been told that a 'centre third' head was available at one time, to enable a third component of the track to be added in the same way, but I have never seen this.
Some projectors, e.g. some of the later (large lens barrel) Bell and Howell models, could replay both optical and mag tracks ant the same time on mag-optical prints, and had separate volume controls to enable mixing between them.
On sep-mag there is edge and centre track, or both. For mono centre track is more common in Europe, but I believe that edge track is more common in America. Both tracks can be used for two-channel stereo, there doesn't seem to be a standard as to which channel goes on which track. Of course, as with any two channel system, this can have four channels matrix encoded, but this was not common. I recently ran a print made directly from a 7245 camera neg, with sound encoded in this way, and with Dolby 'A' noise reduction. Projection was by carbon arc on a screen of about four metres, It took a bit or setting up to run this, but both picture and sound quality were suberb. It is surprising what 16mm is capable of at its best; and how bad it can be at its worst.
16mm sound on disk was also used, but very rare. The machines ran 400 foot spools, and used the standard 16 inch Vitaphone type disks, they looked very strange, not so much a turntable attached to a projector, but rather, a very small projector attached to a very large turntable. There was one of these in the museum at Bletchley Park, but I'm not sure if it's still there.
Almost any 16mm feature film hired from a normal distributer will have a normal mono optical track, the English/Italian mag-optical one is the only exception I have ever run.
Even super 8 film can have matrixed four channel sound recorded on main and balance stripes, and though it was never very widely used, mono optical was also available. It wasn't as bad as might be expected, but the track was very narrow, it looked almost like a scratch, and was bilateral VA dye in magenta and cyan layers, with no silver. Alignment of both printer and projector sound head was very critical, and the slightest speck of dust in the sound head could almost obliterate the entire track! I have a handful of these prints, and one of them, an airline advertising reel, sounds much better than the others.
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
Stephen Furley
Film God

Posts: 3059
From: Coulsdon, Croydon, England
Registered: May 2002
|
posted 12-02-2002 01:40 PM
quote: If you are serious about the frequency response of your 16mm projection, you can have the lens assembly refocused at the position of most studio prints, which is (I THINK) the emulsion toward the lamphouse (but I can check that for you) -- perhaps John P knows the SMPTE standard for 16mm emulsion orientation.
The 'normal' standard grometery for 16mm, and 8mm, prints was base towards lamp, emulsion towards lens, the opposite to that used for 35mm and 70mm prints. The reason for this is that both of these gauges were designed originally for amateur 'home movie' use, and this would be the geometry of a reversal camera original used for projection, as would have been normal for most amateur use. A 16mm print made from a CRI negative, in turn made from a normal 35mm negative would also have this geometry. CRI is now no more, and projection of 16mm camera originals by amateurs is now uncommon, so it would now make more sense for 16mm prints to be made to the same standard as 35mm, but it is probably too late for this to happen now.
Because of the emulsion position magnetic stripe on 16mm prints is on the side facing the lamp, as this is normally the base side. This creates problems when striping a contact print from a 16mm negative; the stripe has to go on the emulsion side. It is possible to apply past stripe to the emulsion side of film, but a different coating has to be used, with a rather strange smell, and it doesn't seem to wear as well as the normal stripe.
I'm not sure of the correct emulsion position on 9.5mm prints, I have seen it both ways. Although an amateur gauge it was originally used mainly for the projection of printed films, the first cameras did not appear until some time after the first projectors, given this, and the fact that the Pathe formats tended to do just about everything the opposite way to the Kodak ones, I suspect that emulsion towards lamp was standard for 9.5mm.
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Stephen Furley
Film God

Posts: 3059
From: Coulsdon, Croydon, England
Registered: May 2002
|
posted 12-05-2002 04:06 AM
I have an old, (early '60s?) Bolex projector which has a knob to focus the sound optics, this is continuously variable between certain limits.
The Philips 16mm machines, or at least the ones I have seen, left handed machines with intermittant sprockets, have a small lever to select which side the emulsion is on.
I have a 16mm SMPTE 'Jiffy' test film, one section of which has the emulsion on the opposite side for testing purposes. They recommend setting to the best compromise position between the two. Seems less than ideal, but I suppose with thinner polyester stock the problem would be less than with diacetate or triacetate.
Having the emulsion against the drum does at least mean that it is in the same position, whatever the thickness of the stock. Of course, it would be very difficult to releive the sound drum in the picture area, there's not a lot of space left on a 16mm print when you take away the picture and track areas.
Of course, there was a time when even which ede of the film the track should be on was not certain, the D.I.N. standard had it on the left, and to run these prints on a normal machine you have to lace them reversed, and then either rear project, or use a mirror or prism. Of course, doing this puts the emulsion on the wrong side again. .
Sound always seems to have been more of a problem than picture with 16mm.
| IP: Logged
|
|
Mike Rendall
Film Handler

Posts: 78
From: Southampton, Hampshire, UK
Registered: Nov 2002
|
posted 12-05-2002 04:25 AM
Regarding the original post..
We have a Fumeo XL1000 (1k Xenon) 16mm. I have this wired in to the format 22 selector on the CP65 (bridge the Left and the Right channels together to get mono sound on both channels (you could also wire in the centre as well if you wish to get a complete sound spread across all stage speakers))
Regarding getting 16mm prints in the UK, it is quite difficult, Film Bank has a large archive, so has the BFI. It is worth knowing, that in the UK we tried to screen an original copy of the Blues Brothers about 2 years ago on 35mm but could not get hold of a print that wasn't trashed - Spoke to film bank and got a perfect 16mm print with no scratches with crystal clear sound, It was like it had only been run a couple of times.
We go to filmbank to get shorts and cartoons normally before our normal features, For a student venue I recommend you ask them about the 'Look at life' featurettes, has our house rolling in the aisles constantly!
(for those of you unaquainted with Look at Life, they are late 60's early 70's B-reel documentaries based on completely mundane pasttimes, the one about a motorbike and sidecar towing a caravan was particularly funny.)
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Stephen Furley
Film God

Posts: 3059
From: Coulsdon, Croydon, England
Registered: May 2002
|
posted 12-07-2002 08:07 AM
Paul wrote:
quote:
OK, I'll bite. A quick Google search yielded several German-language sites that, despite my Bavarian-sounding name, I cannot read. Scott's FAQ makes no mention of these. So, what are Mauer soundtracks?

A few yeas ago I was asked to produce some slides of various types of soundtracks. For some reason which I cannot now remember, I made negatives on Kodak Royal Gold 100, and then had the slides made from these, rather than shooting directly on slide film. This does mean that I still have the negatives, so I have scanned some of them and inserted them below for anyone who may be interested, and is not familiar with the various types of tracks which have been used in the past. I used 16mm prints for two reasons, firstly because I was asked to produce slides which included the full width of the film, not just the track area, and the track takes up a greater proportion of the film width on 16mm, and therefore appears larger, and secondly because I had a greater number of different track types available to me on 16mm than on 35.

This is a variable density track. The print is Technicolor dye transfer, and the track is therefore silver only. The film is 'We've Come a Long Way', about the history of the design of oil tankers, made by British Petrolium, and released in 1951. I recently discovered that it was shown at the Festival of Britain, in that year. In the mid to late '60s, the early days of colour television in this country, the BBC ran what they termed 'Trade Test Colour Films' during the day as a cheap way of putting colour pictures on screens at times when normally no programmes were being broadcast. Yes, television programmes were not broadcast throughout the day at that time, not really that long ago! This was one of the films they used. Any of the British members remember seeing it? Interestingly, I also have a 35mm print of this film, and that has a variable area track.

This, , is another variable density track, on an Eastmancolor print. Thank goodness print stocks have improved somewhat since then! There is obviously dye in the track, but there seems to be very little, if any, silver. I have a couple of frames of an 8-perf print of 'The Battle of the River Plate' and that has a very similar track, and has faded almost as badly. I don't know the reason for the lack of silver in these tracks, cost saving by not re-developing the track might be a reason for mass-produced 16mm prints for educational use, but would seem very unlikely for a handful of 35mm Vistavision prints. If anyone knows why this type of track was used, please let me know.
The film is 'Moscow to Peking', about a journey by train between these two cities, made in the late '50s, or early '60s. Quite surprising that this was made in what were very much the days of the Cold War. Historically interestng, but a pity it's faded so badly, one of the worst examples I have seen.
The vast majority of variable density tracks look very much the same; there are a couple of obscure variations, but I don't have examples of those. There is a much greater variety of variable area tracks.

This is a unilateral variable area track. Actually, it's a fairly unusual variant of one, but you can't tell that from this sample, so more on that later. The film title is obvious, it was made by the G.P.O. (General Post Office) in the '30s, about the same time as the much better known 'Night Mail', and is about a ship in distress, made to promte an early form of ship to shore radio.

Another unilateral track, of about the same vintage, but showing the most common form of ground noise reduction on these tracks, a separate shutter which comes in from the white edge of the track. I cannot remember the film title.

Another sample from 'North Sea', revealing the true nature of the track. It is Marconi Visatone, with the ground noise reducton taking the form of an extra black line to fill some of the clear film. During the quietest passeges a second such line was used, and this can just be seen at the bottom of the picture.

A bilateral track. The print is Eastmancolor, but has obviously faded much less than the previous example, despite being only about ten years younger. The track has dye, in the magenta and cyan layers, and redeveloped silver. Two modulated edges rather than one. The film is an educational title about electrostatic copying.
I'm not allowed to put any more pictures in one post, so I'll try making another post with the others.
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
All times are Central (GMT -6:00)
|
This topic comprises 4 pages: 1 2 3 4
|
Powered by Infopop Corporation
UBB.classicTM
6.3.1.2
The Film-Tech Forums are designed for various members related to the cinema industry to express their opinions, viewpoints and testimonials on various products, services and events based upon speculation, personal knowledge and factual information through use, therefore all views represented here allow no liability upon the publishers of this web site and the owners of said views assume no liability for any ill will resulting from these postings. The posts made here are for educational as well as entertainment purposes and as such anyone viewing this portion of the website must accept these views as statements of the author of that opinion
and agrees to release the authors from any and all liability.
|