Movie Makers (Jan-Dec 1952)

296 ADDENDA ON ICE Wherein a reader adds advices from his own experience on filming an indoor ice show MOVIE MAKING being the friendly, congenial hobby that it is, I have no slightest wish to dispute the dicta of any amateur cameraman. Especially when, as in the case of Samuel R. Fass, ACL, he so generously and explicitly shares his knowledge with others. The author, in his September article, Ballet on Blades, quite clearly wrote from experience. His diagrams were exact, and his data specific. The only trouble is that his findings don't seem to synchronize with my own. For example . . . Mr. Fass recommends the use of a unipod in making movies of the great ice shows. And he accompanies this recommendation with a diagram of what I am sure is a very simple and efficient unit. But, in my experience, it would not be efficient in filming an ice show. For I have only recently exposed some 700 feet of 16mm. Kodachrome at the Ice Capades of 1953 in New York's Madison Square Garden. I went there (after reading the Fass article) equipped with my own version of a simple camera support, a gadget which is pictured on this page. I'll discuss its construction in a moment (for this gimmick is useful on many occasions) ; but right now I'd like to report my findings on camera handling at these ice shows. In my experience I found that any sort of camera mount seriously restricts your ability to follow the swiftly moving skaters — especially if you are sitting fairly close to the ice. To put it another way, I found that it is better (all things considered) to hand-hold the camera. Whatever slight unsteadiness of image this may create is likely to be wholly overlooked, since the subject is moving constantly and the background therefore is blurred. (Mr. Keller's clamp-on camera mount, designed for attachment to, say, a balcony railing, might prove to impede swift camera movement because of the fixed nature of its mounting. However, with the base of the Fass unipod resting and turning freely on one's auditorium seat, it seems possible that it may well provide a free-swinging camera support. — The Editors.) Just in passing, this clamp-type camera bracket does have other uses — and you may wish to assemble one for yourself. The unit's secret of success is the three-pronged grip which it provides, with two obliquely angled prongs on one side and a single curved one on the other. By virtue of this design, the clamp may be snugly secured around odd-shaped supports; it will even get a firm grip on a round railing, as in a theatre balcony — an ability which is far beyond that of the flat clamps conventionally used with portable lighting units. The gadget is simplicity itself to assemble. The clamp part I found in the catalog of the Scientific Glass Apparatus Company, Bloomfield, N. J., where it is itemized as No. C-4651, a three-prong grip or clamp, and priced at $1.25. The upper part of the assembly is simply a standard ball-andsocket camera mount, available reasonably in any average photo store. The bottom of CAMERA CLAMP designed by author is pictured herewith. OSCAR KELLER, ACL this unit is threaded to accept a standard 1/4/20 tripod screw; so this was exactly the kind of screw which I soldered onto the top of the clamp component. Very well. Let's now get back to these addenda on ice filming. I went to the show twice, sitting first on the lower floor and then in the end arena of the balcony — as suggested by Mr. Fass. They are good seats, all right, and our experience checks out on that. But, having shot some ice show footage previously, there was some doubt in mind concerning his exposure recommendations. So let me itemize my findings on this score . . . To begin with, here was the equipment used. It consisted of two cameras, both roll-loading. These were (1) a Cine-Kodak Special II equipped with a 13mm. f/1.5 wide angle lens and a 63mm. //2.7 telephoto and (2) a Cine-Kodak Model K equipped with its standard 25mm. f/1.9 lens. If at all possible, this two-camera setup is the most efficient for obvious reasons; however, even its value is heightened by inviting along a movie-making friend who can thread up one camera while you are using the other. The wide angle lens I used to cover the entire rink for the group shots and big production numbers. The telephoto picked up the individual stars nicely, while the standard 1 inch was a good in-between compromise. But the important point is that I used all three lenses at their ividest apertures, and no one of my shots turned out to be overexposed. Matter of fact, some of the group shots under colored spots were a little on the under side, even with the f/1.5 wide open. Assuming that Madison Square Garden has as efficient and high-powered a lighting system as any in the country, my advice would be to use the largest stop on either your f/1.5 or f/1.9 lens. The maximum aperture of the telephoto (//2.7) will be fast enough only on single acts, where all of the spots are concentrated on one performer. While I found color renditions generally excellent, I did notice that on scenes where white spots predominated, the subject, and especially the ice, had a bluish cast in the film image. I attribute this to the fact that the spotlights are carbon arcs, probably high in bluish component, for which the Type A Kodachrome in use is not color balanced. Although this bluish cast on such scenes is not particularly objectionable, the inquisitive picture maker may wish to experiment with one or another of the available filters corrective of this condition. These might include the salmon-colored Daylight Filter for Type A Kodachrome (Wratten 85) and the yellow Kodak Light Balancing Filters of the 81 series, which run from No. 81 and 81A through 81H. The loss in effective exposure occasioned by the No. 85 will be about % a stop; the compensation required by the No. 81 filters varies from Vz of a stop through 81C, % of a stop through 81F, to 1 full stop through 81H. I do agree ice shows are good filming.