Camera Lube Intervals

26th December 2005

Since all greases are soap based, grease gradually absorbs atmospheric moisture. Hence during storage, the grease gradually degrades, regardless of whether the camera is used.

This is the only factor I am aware of that would require re-lubing a camera in the absence of use.

Does anyone have any guidelines on how long a camera can be stored at, say, 50% or lower humidity without requiring lubrication before use?

Bob Morein
Indie filmmaker

This is very specific to the model camera. Some are self-lubing sealed systems, which means that a lubrication is part of an overhaul where bearing may need to be repacked in a vacuum chamber and seals replaced. Other cameras simply require an occasional drop of oil. To which camera are you concerned?

Mitch Gross
NYC DP

As Andy mentioned it's good to pull any camera out of storage once a month or two and run it for a few minutes to distribute the lube. The old Aaton needs to have its bearings repacked every 10 years and it's certainly not a do-it-yourself job.

I believe Abel charges $1500 for a complete servicing of this kind (they'll also go through the camera and check it as part of this). If memory serves, the Ã‰clair ACL uses a belt so it should be re-lubed a bit more often, perhaps 5 years. The camera should also be checked with a speed checker to make sure the timing is still correct. Lubing the ACL may be something you could do yourself but I wouldn't know how to tell you to go about it.

BTW, know all those cameras selling for so cheap on Ebay? Wanna bet that every single one of them is overdue for a re-lubing?

Mitch Gross
NYC DP

The ACL has one steel spring belt in the magazine. It's actually a clutch, and is driven so that it constantly slips. The camera body is entirely gear driven. Unlike the NPR, there are no parts in the ACL that would cause speed inaccuracy, other than motor failure.

Thanks for the correction â€¦ it has been a long time. Of course it makes sense as the ACL design was evolved into the Aaton. In this case I would think that the lubing would be similar to the Aaton.

Mitch Gross
NYC DP

>This is very specific to the model camera. Some are self-lubing sealed >systems, which means that a lubrication is part of an overhaul where >bearing may need to be repacked in a vacuum chamber and seals >replaced.

The cameras are LTR54 and Ã‰clair ACL, both of which I recall you are intimately familiar with.

>If memory serves, the Ã‰clair ACL uses a belt so it should be re-lubed a >bit more often, perhaps 5 years.

Bob Morein
Indie filmmaker

Andy Taylor wrote:

>Belt driven cameras should be checked when coming out of storage as >the belt can take on a "set" over time and could cause noise/flicker >problems.

Or, in the case of a CP16, with the horrible PIC belts, shed little blue nubbins all over the camera interior which get caught in the gear.

Jeff "once shattered a gear" Kreines

Abel recommends that you get a complete overhaul for your camera (be it 7LTR or an XTRprod) every four years, regardless of use. The camera is stripped down to bearings, which are made of porus aluminium.

Everything that can be is ultrasonically cleaned everything else is done with the old cotton swab or tooth brush. Then the bearings are placed in a vacuum with oil, which they absorb overnight. We add different greases to the cam, bascule and gears as well as adding oil or grease where needed to rollers and spindles on the magazines. Everything is cleaned and reassembled to factory specification and any issues found in the pre-check (such as a timing problem, registration error, time code problem etc..) are resolved.

Granted, the camera can run longer without an overhaul. Some (Aaton) cameras can run neigh on 10 years without seizing... but it's kind of like hydrating your body when you're running. If you're thirsty, it is already too late. The camera can run dry but eventually it'll catch up, and every day it runs dry over a week, over a year, over a decade (if it hasn't seized yet) it is slowly eating itself, Teflon washers are wearing away, possibly rasining the height of the mirror and throwing screen focus off and adding play here and there that shouldn't be there... the crankshaft bearings will begin to fail, raising the current draw of the camera drastically, eating away at your batteries...

A seized camera is a very nasty and expensive thing, and very embarrassing In front of clients if it is your own kit. Replacing a bearing adds hours and hours to the overall price of service as well as possibly making the camera not worth the cost of fixing.

The newer cameras are a bit easier to service so we usually charge 12 hours of labour (at $120/h excluding parts) for a complete overhaul for an XTR body. LTR's vary due to age, serviceability and the period since their last service, they can go from 12 to 16 hours.

Nathan Milford
Camera Tech
AbelCineTech, NY

Nathan, with all respect due to Abel Cine Tech, this is very expensive service for a lightly used camera.

There is a method used by independent camera repairmen that IMHO should reliably indicate the state of lubrication: measurement of the motor current draw. As long as the current draw is nominal, it indicates that the minimal amount of energy is lost to friction of the movement.

Has anyone measured current draw of a freshly lubed camera? Has anyone measured an increase with hours of use or years stored?

Robert Morein

Robert Morein writes:

>Nathan, with all respect due to Abel Cine Tech, this is very expensive >service for a lightly used camera.

That depends on your point of view, but that's just a question of how much money.

>There is a method used by independent camera repairmen that IMHO >should reliably indicate the state of lubrication : measurement of the >motor current draw.

Theoretically this may be true, but in practice a power consumption reading will only give a very superficial indication of the camera's condition --particularly with respect to lubrication. For instance, an un-lubed bearing may actually have little resistance. I have seen situations where a worn out camera and a new camera have identical power draws.

Compensating errors, or slop in the movement can reduce the internal friction reducing current draw, and a weak motor can increase the draw. The net result is a current draw that is within nominal specs.

>Has anyone measured current draw of a freshly lubed camera? Has >anyone measured an increase with hours of use or years stored?

The differences are very slight and depend enormously on the storage conditions, but I doubt very much if anyone has tested a large enough sample of cameras to be able to extrapolate any useful results. Individually, even new cameras can vary from the nominal specs. Furthermore, unless all the ammeters used over all the years are all equally accurate and precisely calibrated, the results can be very misleading.

Brian Heller
IA 600 DP

Robert writes :

> this is very expensive service for a lightly used camera

Not really. Ever had a timing belt replaced in your car and drove away wondering what the F*** you just dropped $350.00 for?

It's called preventive maintenance. Arriflex charges $100+ for it, too. If more owner/operators got their cameras serviced regularly (like your car!), those issues you come across in the field wouldn't happen so often. I'll admit, most people get away with murder when it comes to their gear...I get stuff sometimes and wonder how it's still even functional.

If you are using an "independent" camera tech who says he can tell you everything you need to know about your camera by the amp draw, go somewhere else. Amp draw is one of many, many tolerances used in analysing camera condition.

A "freshly lubed" camera is much more than just flushing the radiator in the spring...it's checking each individual part in the transport assembly to check that it's within proper operating tolerance, checking and flushing/re-greasing or replacing bearings, checking/replacing seals, gears, cam assemblies/followers, shutter backlash, transport claws, registration pins for proper tolerance, FFD, ground glass collimation, frame line, optical axis, parallax....you get the point.

By the way, at least with SR's, amp draw goes down with wear.

When a camera is freshly serviced the amp draw should be slightly higher than normal.

Brian Heller sums it up best, as usual...

>The only way to accurately assess the condition of a precision >mechanical device is to disassemble it. The amount of money you pay >is irrelevant to the results. The important thing is to get the work done >correctly, and have confidence that it was.

Steve Richer
Camera Tech
NFL Films

Robert writes :

> <this is very expensive service for a lightly used camera

> Not really. [snip]
> It's called preventive maintenance. Arriflex charges $100+ for it, too.

$100 is not an issue. However, the Abel Cine guy quoted $1200+ for a job that, according to him, should be done every four years, which is vacuum impregnation of the bearings. He offers no extension for lightly used cameras, or those stored in low humidity. The rate of grease degradation is directly related to the ambient humidity.

The SR is radically different from the Aatons and the Ã‰clairs, since the SR uses ball bearings. I wouldn't like to put the former U.S. rep for Ã‰clair on the spot, but I spoke to him today, and he provided the following standards for the Ã‰clair ACL, which in lineage and design has a lot in common with the Aaton:

camera body alone, at 24fps: 1 amp at 12V.
camera body with mags and film: 1.5 - 2 amps.

I'm not saying that the current draw tells all. However, when the grease in an impregnated bearing degrades, the friction goes up, not down. Although there are bearings in the camera that can degrade without increased drag, the main bearings are a "marker" for grease degradation.

As far as the other issues you mention, they are caused by wear, misuse, and rough handling, none of which occur when a camera is properly stored.

For a camera that is in use, I fully agree with you that service and adjustment are essential to ensure reliability, precision, and longevity.

Bob Morein
Indie filmmaker

Howdy List,

I simply quote what I've been taught by the factory and what I've learned on my own.

The 4 year (Presidential *grin*) overhaul schedule is the suggestion regardless of use.

Most owner/operators I deal with have a solid business plan built around their camera. They figure in the cost of maintenance as the cost of the camera. If you think of it as $375 a year (instead of $1500 every four) and it quickly becomes a nominal amount if you have enough work to justify having a highly complex and precise tool such as a movie camera.

Current draw will definitely tell you something is wrong with your
camera, but sometimes more subtle and permanent damage has been wrought before that.

Also, the Ã‰clairâ€™s are beautiful cameras and indeed share traits with their Aaton cousins, but the cameras have very distinct personalities, likes and dislikes.

Regards,

Nathan Milford
Camera Technician
AbelCineTech, NY

Robert Morein writes:

>$100 is not an issue. However, the Abel Cine guy quoted $1200+ for a >job that, according to him, should be done every four years, which is >vacuum impregnation of the bearings.

Being more than a little familiar with Arri's rates, I believe that's $100+per hour, as in Abel's $120 per hour.

I think the last time I got a service bill from Arri of $100 was in 1968.

Brian Heller
IA 600

Robert Morein wrote:

>As far as the other issues you mention, they are caused by wear, >misuse, and rough handling, none of which occur when a camera is >properly stored.

If you aren't storing a camera in Stasis, or a hermetically sealed environment, what is proper storage?

I actually have my camera overhauled and lubed every two years, as that is what I was taught. I have an Aaton.

Here is my recollections from the first service I had after I bought the camera, and it had been an unknown times between re-lubing. This example may show just how valueless an ampmeter is (depends). I've one of those gauge type, analog, with a needle, and before I brought the camera in for service, she purred, and ran at under an AMP with film.

My service guy also checked it with the same type of Ampmeter (Ameter?), just as part of his service - Make a test before the service, checking depth and such. Then after service, check all the same things. So all though I had a smooth current draw,, under an Amp.

After the service, the current draw was more, and the camera was louder (for about 600 feet of film, and then she became so quiet and the amp draw was less). I guess it was the oil soaked bearings working in. In any case, while the camera was serviced, the tech checked it with a more sophisticated amp meter, and found that the camera was so in need of service - bearings really dry, that it was pulsing. Still running at sync, but chasing itself, and catching up, and then falling behind.

Still running in Sync, but really working hard to do so. That wasn't apparent from anyoneâ€™s first look at an ampmeter. You had to do a much more refined test of current draw. The overall current draw was less for the camera with dry bearings, however it was pulling more than an amp at times to keep the camera in sync. NOT GOOD. Sync failure and damage to camera was sure to soon follow, even though the ampmeter said all was good.

Find a service tech you like, and do what they suggest.

I also would put no stock in anything about an ACL as it relates to the Aaton. They may have evolved from similar ideas, but they are just completely different beasts.

Steven Gladstone
CML East Coast List Administrator
Gladstone Films
www.gladstonefilms.com

>If you aren't storing a camera in Stasis, or a hermetically sealed >environment, what is proper storage?

Thanks for your thoughtful reply.

Cameras are specialized machines, but they obey all the laws of physics, friction, oils, and grease. I'm going to try to find a tribology (friction) specialist for general advice about sintered bearings, which is what Aaton uses. I'll post back the results.

Bob Morein
Indie filmmaker

Some techs call that behaviour "cogging". That would require an oscilloscope to see.

Interesting that a tech would do that.

Bob Morein
Indie filmmaker

Robert Morein wrote:

>Some techs call that behaviour "cogging". That would require an >oscilloscope to see. Interesting that a tech would do that.

While interesting, my word for it is - thorough. It certainly gives me confidence knowing that my tech really checks out the camera, and knows what is going on inside my camera before he even services it.

Steven Gladstone
CML East Coast List Administrator
Gladstone Films

Steve wrote:

>It's called preventive maintenance. Arriflex charges $100+ for it, too. If >more owner/operators got their cameras serviced regularly (like your >car!), those issues you come across in the field wouldn't happen so >often.

I usually have a tech look at my SR every 6 months. Or a week before a project if it's been a few months since my last one.

Maybe it's a bit overkill, but who can afford to lose a production day, or worse, have to re-shoot a day because of a stupid-simple tech problem with a personal camera.

The cost of preventative maintenance is generally less than the cost of a 400' load of film and processing, and far less than a re-shoot and even farther less than replacing the seized movement of the camera.

Thanks,

Rachel Dunn
-------------------------
Cinematographer
818-904-1124
-------------------------

>Does anyone have any guidelines on how long a camera can be stored >at, say, 50% or lower humidity without requiring lubrication before use?

Depends on a few factors, such as does the camera use ball races (Arri etc)or sintered porous (Oilite ) bearings (PV,Aaton ).

Most greases used in ball bearings are Lithium based, so they should be OK for >10 years.

Oilite bearing types use a thin oil impregnated into the bearing.
This should also last >10 years provided the camera is run occasionally to circulate the oil in the bearings. (Like a classic car in storage)

Belt driven cameras should be checked when coming out of storage as the belt can take on a "set" over time and could cause noise/flicker problems.

Andy Taylor
Camera Engineer
Arri Media
UK

>There is a method used by independent camera repairmen that IMHO >should reliably indicate the state of lubrication : measurement of the >motor current draw. As long as the current draw is nominal, it indicates >that the minimal amount of energy is lost to friction of the movement.

Don't take it as gospel...

But yes, it can be an indication of camera health when other checks are made.

Inch the camera over by hand, does it feel smooth and "fluid"?
Power up. How does it sound? Does it purr, or are there knocks and clicks? Put drag on the magazine drive, do the sounds change or vanish?? Subtle noises can tell a 'Tech a lot about the camera.

Mag drives always need frequent attention.

Test the camera motor and electronics separately from the movement, ***get your friendly 'Tech to do this!!***.

Motors have bearings too..

These checks and a close visual inspection can indicate a healthy camera without incurring a huge bill.

>They figure in the cost of maintenance as the cost of the camera. If you >think of it as $375 a year (instead of $1500 every four) and it quickly >becomes a nominal amount if you have enough work to justify having a >highly complex and precise tool such as a movie camera.

Also, its an expense that can be claimed against your tax bill

Andy Taylor
Camera Engineer
Arri Media
UK

Friction specialists speak on camera lubrication

In response to my question about lubrication intervals for camera equipment, the firm of NEALE CONSULTING ENGINEERS LTD has replied.

Unfortunately, their informative reply is too long for the 10K attachment limit of the list server.

Bob Morein
Indie filmmaker

Robert Morein wrote :

> Unfortunately, their informative reply is too long for the 10K attachment >limit of the listserver.

Perhaps then you would just like to include the pertinent parts.

The thing you might consider is this.

I can be hired to shoot a film, but if the person who hires me is not an expert, then it is inefficient for them to tell me how to do my job.

They need to tell me what they want, and then I can tell them what is possible or not, time frames etc. If they tell me exactly how to do my job, then they lose any benefit from hiring me. Or as Jessica Gallant once put it, it is like hiring a mechanic to fix your car, then standing over them, while they work, and telling them what to do, and how to do it.

Perhaps you want to be a camera tech, and not a filmmaker?

I bring my camera in for service based on my camera techs recommendations. The camera is quiet and solid, and works great, with fabulous registration. I could push the envelope, and skip a lube and save some money, but what would be the point. We are driving high performance machines, that are being asked to perform to exacting tolerances. We are not driving a 1985 rust bucket down two blocks to the grocery and back once a week.

Ore other thing to consider, is that if a camera is an unknown quantity to a service shop, the service shop usually has a planned course of service to familiarize themselves with the camera. This may include lubing the camera based on the fact that the last time it was lubed was an unknown time. This may apply more to older cameras, as in some cases parts may be difficult if not impossible to find. Also the service shop probably doesn't want to just check a few things on the camera, and then if it fails, the customer complains that they didn't do a good job, or should have seen the problem.

So while I'm sure your facts may be interesting :

1/. If your experts aren't aware of the conditions and environments, and exactly what kind of lubricants are being used, then their comments can only be considered as a general response, which may or may not apply to motion picture cameras

2/. I'm more than happy to follow the recommendations of the service tech I trust.

So if you want to post the answer from the experts. Make sure they know you want to repost them to a public list, and then select what is important.

Hey wow, a new record for a long post, responding to a post which had no information.

Steven Gladstone
CML East Coast List Administrator
Gladstone Films

>In response to my question about lubrication intervals for camera >equipment, the firm of NEALE CONSULTING ENGINEERS LTD has >replied.

Who?? What??? Why????????

Ask the 'techs who subscribe to the lists for gods sake!!!

Why do we need Consulting Engineers to answer this one???

I put my 10 groats worth in earlier, but I'm in Rental, I'm not trying to make money out of you guys

Anyone else out there want to comment.....

Andy Taylor
Camera Engineer ( 25 years working on cameras )
Arri Media
UK

Andy Taylor wrote:

> Who?? What??? Why????????

Just for giggles, I found their website. It is fairly impressive, and they are Authoritative (They say so themselves).

However the do not list motion picture cameras among their areas of particular expertise. Therefore, one would have to wonder about their expertise in this matter.

Hey you can find an expert to testify to anything.

Lets try to keep this focused on professional film making.

Steven Gladstone
CML East Coast List Administrator
Gladstone Films

>So if you want to post the answer from the experts. Make sure they know >you want to repost them to a public list, and then select what is >important.

NEALE CONSULTING ENGINEERS LTD are worldwide experts on tribology â€“ the science of friction. In response to my request, they circulated my questions among the staff. It took them two weeks to develop a consensus.

They gave me permission to repost and attribute.

Bob Morein
Indie filmmaker

I actually think that it could be interesting reading and illuminating. But I certainly wouldn't take what an engineering firm with no direct experience in motion picture equipment has to say as the complete gospel on the subject.

There are many issues and forces that they know nothing about that can affect what was the original question of how often to have a camera movement lubed.

For instance I would have no problem asking a motor oil company an opinion on lubricating automotive engines. It's what they do and it is essentially ALL they do so they should know a great deal on the subject. But I wouldn't ask them about aerospace equipment because this is not their field.

The difference between theoretical knowledge and practical knowledge is vast.

In theory I know how a DVD player works. In practice I certainly wouldn't attempt to dismantle and repair one.

Mitch Gross
NYC DP

It would be interesting to see the report, yes, but the topic will inevitably run away from motion picture applications. Lubrication is a fascinating topic, anyway.

As I observe it, cameras seem to have gone from oiled mechanisms to sealed/greased mechanisms or a combination over the years. The BL1 and 2 had felts that held oil, but at the right intervals you had to put a few drops, according to manufacturer's directions. Too much oil could also damage the camera if I recall the literature correctly. Different materials and tolerances require different viscosity in lubricants. So a camera that requires oil shouldn't be greased.

Compared to older design cameras like a 2C, an Arricam will also need lubrication at much longer intervals, by qualified techs, of course. Some Photosonics cameras need the tech lubricating it right there on the set (I think it's a mix of oil/graphite.

The best lubricant in the world from what I've read is still castor bean oil-a vegetable oil, from the plant seen growing wild in many tropical parts of the world. It was used in WWI planes, currently in racing two and four stroke engines. Castor oil bonds to metal on a molecular level and has to be machined off(!) of metal parts-it is however terribly expensive to refine/manufacture, and so that's one reason it costs about $15 a quart. I use it for 2 stroke lubrication on my Kawasaki H2(internal combustion lubrication definitely drifts from the original topic, but it is an amazing lubricant and if I recall , also can be used as biodiesel/additive...)

Synthetic oils consist of two key elements, ester, which is an artificial version of castor oil and Polyalphaolefin (PAO), an artificial hydrocarbon. Though I don't think castor bean oil is used in camera lubrication-NOSE GREASE is still recommended in some older cameras pressure plates/gate areas! (laughs)

For an interesting overlook of the castor plant(Ricinus Communis), check out the link :

http://waynesword.palomar.edu/plmar99.htm

The best thing to do is get a tech to lube your Aaton or modern Arri. The older cameras that take a few drops of oil could be lubricated by yourself if you have a factory manual, the recommended oil, and done during the right intervals. Don't use grease on a camera that takes oil (applied with a syringe)

John Babl
Miami

>Hey wow, a new record for a long post, responding to a post which had >no information.

Boy no doubt. What exactly is the point you're trying to prove here, Robert?

>Why do we need Consulting Engineers to answer this one???>

There's enough qualified camera techs/engineers lurking around here to answer anything you could ever possibly want to know about any motion picture camera. Did the consulting engineering firm factor in the two weeks you had your SR in the blowing sand in Afghanistan? A month in the tropics? What about the year you were contracted to shoot sports and put 400 rolls through your camera at Lambeau Field at 120fps?

Steve Richer
NFL Films
Camera Tech

>I use it for 2 stroke lubrication on my Kawasaki H2

Ah, the widow maker. Uninsurable in it's day, wasn't it? As an ex-Yamaha 1973 RD-350 owner (chambers, porting, sticky Dunlopâ€™s and Konis), we always thought of the Kaw's as machines incapable of rounding corners Topic qualifier: motorcycle handlebars are a great place to clamp an under cranking camera.

Tim Sassoon
SFD Vex & creative post
Santa Monica, CA

As far as clamping cameras onto motorcycles, I've tried a few things but had too much blur due to high speed vibration (120mph) The blur actually became a fuzz, kind of.

A 22 or 11 degree shutter angle would probably be the best idea-I'll try something of the sort in the future.

Note: a couple of years ago a friend of mine spent the whole day with his SR on a car mount and some screws came loose( I think it was on the mags, can't remember)I can't say if it's because the camera was older and more prone to it- so to add to the topic of lubrication, in these high vibration situations I would keep an eye on the camera between takes, etc.

John Babl
Miami

>Note : a couple of years ago a friend of mine spent the whole day with >his SR on a car mount and some screws came loose

A brief note from my files. When I was road racing, I took a freshly set up road race bike to the track to test. I went out sans safety wire on the front axle nut. Every nut and bolt on the chassis was torqued to spec and wired save for said nut. 4 laps go by and everything seems pretty settled, middle of lap 5 the braking seems a bit off, the bike starts to wander a bit. As this was at Bridgehampton, Long Island, average lap speeds in the low 90's (mph) I pull in after lap 5 to find the only nut that was unwired had backed off a 4 turns (4mm) causing the front wheel to wander a bit between the forks.

This was a cheap lesson in what vibration can do to fasteners, cheap as I still get to tell the story, nothing ill having come of the incident.

Same thing applies to all vehicles that move, that we like to rig cameras on and in: cars, helicopters, power boats..... bicycles.

Mark Smith
Oh Seven Films
143 Grand St
Jersey City, NJ 07302

I've built a number of motorcycle mounts and shot footage from them - mostly twins a few BMW's and a Harley as well as some Japanese bikes) Some were hard mounts and one, in particular, was a "fairly hard" mount with a little bit of hard shock attenuation.

I have occasionally tuned vibration out of camera mounts by adding chunks of lead or brass here and there...this is a slow annoying process of trial and error to tune out resonant vibrations at particular engine RPMS etc but it can be done.

I had and Arri 3 mag jump off a camera when the screws holding the mag retention dog vibrated out (actually in and down) on a mount on the Cyclone at Coney Island. DP caught the mag - no harm, no foul, and the screws managed to fall to the bottom of the movement box without jamming the claw or sprockets on the way...

But it was a reminder.

Ever since then, I carry the lightest wicking screw lock loctite product on these sorts of jobs - and I have always safety wired lens mount ears on aircraft nose mounts, wing mounts, or belly mounts...safety wire is cheap and fast to put on and take off - and dropping things over populated areas is always a bad thing.

Mark Weingartner
LA based

Mark H. Weingartner wrote :

> I had and Arri 3 mag jump off a camera

Anyone notice that when the mag is knocked off the B&H 2709 in "The Aviator" that it was loaded with colour stock?

Jeff "and what about the camera without a viewfinder?" Kreines

>had and Arri 3 mag jump off a camera when the screws holding the >mag retention dog vibrated out (actually in and down) on a mount on >the Cyclone at Coney Island. DP caught the mag - no harm, no foul,

Had a similar thing happen at Rye Playland. My friend was operating my Aaton and I was in the seat behind him with the director. Trying to keep his eye to the finder he rubbed his cheek so hard against the side of the camera that he flipped the spring-loaded mag release lever. Mag popped off into my hands but I had visions of it crashing down on some kid 50 feet below.

Mitch Gross
NYC DP

Yes, I noticed that, and also one of the camera mags was belted wrong. I just winced, thinking "there's gonna be a film jam!"

Sam Longoria
Hollywood, CA