Home of Professional Cinematography since 1996

class="style10">Hand Crank

>Published : 11th Sept. 2006

>OK this ones for all those who can remember and those that wish they weren’t.

>I am looking for a hand crank for a Cameflex CM3. We have a job that believe it or not is a silent film and hand cranked. We have looked at both a Universal and a Debrie but I think they will need to much work to be useable apart from the fact that all stock these days has antihalation backing so no focus.

>Two other choices that I am looking at are the CM3 (the glass is 1950's) or a rack-over Mitchell which has 1970's glass.

>My preference is for the CM3 (Éclair users are like Renault Drivers)

>Any help would be appreciated

>Jon Armstrong
Cinematographer, Photographer and Editor
http://www.nildesperandum.tv
11 Clifton Street
Maylands South Australia 5069


>Jon Armstrong wrote:

class="style11">> Two other choices that I am looking at are the CM3 (the glass is >1950's) or a rack-over Mitchell which has 1970's glass.

>Why not a Konvas 1M? You can get them dirt cheap and most of them come with a hand crank. The optics aren't bad and they're pretty close to being a Cameflex when you get right down to it. I have one and love it. I don't even take the electric motor with me.

>I just use that camera with a loaded turret (I keep an 18mm, a 28mm and a 50mm on mine) as a dedicated hand-crank camera. I think I've got $600 in the whole rig.

>Robert Jackson
Santa Rosa, CA


>Jon Armstrong wrote:

class="style11">> Two other choices that I am looking at are the CM3 (the glass is >1950's) or a rack-over Mitchell which has 1970's glass.

>Mitchell’s are great, and you could use a Fries reflexed Mitchell with a handcrank -- and modern lenses if you'd like (different mounts are available). The CM3 handcrank accessory is pretty rare.

>Of course, there is a handcrank accessory for the Arri 435, though it's not a direct mechanical crank. You can also rent handcrank Arri IIc’s.

>Jeff "has probably 25 handcrank cameras of various vintages" Kreines


>Actually, it is possible to use a focus prism on current B&W stocks, in spite of the antihalation coating. The image is not very bright but it is workable. The Debrie is not a bad choice at all.

>The usual B&W MP stocks don't have a rem-jet backing, but a much easier to deal with coating. I think Kodak _might_ still make 2615 RAR film, which has no antihalation coating of any sort. 2615 is lots of fun to shoot, and it does have a look that is a lot closer to that of the old stocks.

>You also might consider shooting an ortho or blue-sensitive lab stock.

>That said, I have improvised cranks for the Cameflex before, just with a door crank rigged to sleeve cut on a lathe. Ask your local machine shop if they can make you something; it was less than an hour's work for us.

>Scott


>The Debrie Parvo has 2 gates, one next to the other, and you shift it the film one out of the way to see through the lens- modern stocks should be ok to use. It was probably the first coaxial design, even though they were 2 separate mags on each side of the camera (and I believe it was in 1953 the Super Parvo reflex was introduced)

>Since you're in Austraaaaaalia,(down under lol) you should contact Steve(last name?)-he posted a link on CML with a pic of a hand cranked 2C (perhaps you could do a search through CML archives) ... but a variable shutter handcranked 2C probably won't be as easy to find, while a handcranked Mitchell does offer variable shutter (the Debrie also had variable shutter).

>Funny how many cameras (even before the 20's) had variable shutters, running slow film stocks from that era-

>Best regards

>John Babl
DP
Miami


>>>Since you're in Austraaaaaalia,(down under lol) you should contact >Steve(last name?)-he posted a link on CML with a pic of a hand cranked >2C (perhaps you could do a search through CML archives)

Steve Morton.....of Monash university, I believe.

Nick Paton
Director of Photography
High Def./Standard Def./Film
Aaton Xtr Prod owner operator
Brisbane, Australia
www.npdop.com


class="style11">>Jeff "has probably 25 handcrank cameras of various vintages" Kreines

>Hey Jeff.

>I have two or three hand crank cameras myself- more, if you count Bolexes. I suppose almost any camera can be made hand crankable. The one I would suggest as neat would be an Eyemo. I have two with hand cranks as accessories. The lenses for the army version are very sharp. Part of the look of hand cranking is the change in exposure. I was wondering - were there any cameras that somehow compensated for that, other than using a flywheel, perhaps by changing a variable shutter?

>I'm sure many of us would like to hear more about your cameras- the years and the interesting facts of.

>Edwin Myers, Atlanta


>Thanks to everyone who replied.

>Fun things these hand cranked cameras unfortunately this is Austraaaalia (down under) and nobody gives funding to feature films that are not just like Hollywood only cheaper.

>This is believe it or not, a silent comedy, in B&W (though shot on colour stock) and I have to find the cheapest way out.

>A rack-over Debrie would be nice but the only Debrie I can find is one that use to belong to Frank Hurley. Its an old reporter and needs a lot of work to get it up and running. Of the cameras I can lay my hands on, its a choice between a rack-over Mitchell or the CM3.

>Being an Éclair fan from way back (NPR's with BBC) I am tempted to use the Cameflex. I will get a machine shop to make the geared crank. I must say though, I like the idea of the Gear Head Handle used on the 2C since the DOP (who has never even seen let alone used a hand-cranked camera) to achieve a smoother operation.

>Another reason for opting for the Cameflex is the long gate.

>Regards Jon Armstrong

>Cinematographer, Photographer, Editor and all round good guy.
http://www.nildesperandum.tv


I own a CM3 and would love to get a hand crank for it.


It would be pretty simple to have one made the socket where the motor connects to the camera body is pretty straight forward.

>I would be curious to know if you are able to go forward as well as backward with the hand crank on the CM3.

>There are some CM3's with PL mount so you could use modern glass.

Zack Richard LA DP
http://www.zackrichard.com


class="style11">>A rack-over Debrie would be nice but the only Debrie I can find is one >that use to belong to Frank Hurley. Its an old reporter and needs a lot of >work to get it up and running.

>One couldn't use colour film in a Debrie since one can't view through the rem-jet backing.

>Also it uses a now nonstandard core size, so one would have to rewind the raw stuck on to Debrie cores. I think the Russian Rodina uses the same cores, it basically being a relexed Parvo knock off.

>Leo Vale
Pgh PA