I have some projects and need to learn how to use a 16 mm camera. I don't know a thing about this and will be starting from scratch. What should someone like myself do first?
What equipment do I need to be able to view , edit and add sound?

I would be very grateful to anyone who could steer me in the right direction.

Best regards,
Leigh

Well, you'll need a lot of expensive equipment. To edit, at the minimum, you'll need a guillotine splicer. Pros use a flatbed editor that is very expensive. The best option is to take your footage to a lab, have them do a telecine transfer, and view, edit, and add sound on final cut or whatever program you have. Then you just take the digital cut back to the lab and they transfer it to stock. I would suggest this if your project is longer than 30 min. Or you can cut your film in a splicer (non-sync audio too if you have a magnetic reader) and take both stocks to the lab and they can combine them for exhibition.

Good Luck,
Eric

Good luck

oh and I forgot to add:
Look up some articles on basic still photography to give you an idea about how the camera and film interact. motion pics are the same thing, just repeated quickly. My suggestion:
Ch. 1 "Basic Photography" from The Technique of Film Production by Steven Berstein, 1980.

How much experience do you have with with video and lighting?

What are you trying to shoot? -E

Thank you both for your input. I am trying to put together a 20 minute short that consists mostly of filming a subject from a distance. I'm trying to convey a feeling of eavesdropping. Sound is important. I've written the score, but need to figure out how to apply the music over existing street noise. It's possible 16 mm is not the right choice. My experience with film cameras is 0 as you can probably tell. Do I bite the bullet and go to digital? I've always been a little ornery about digital in photography. Please advise.

I would most definitely use digital until you feel confident in your lighting and shot composition...if you use film (even if you have a lot of experience) there is still a huge a risk that you will spend a lot of dollars on something mediocre or that doesn't turn out as planned.

Digital is cheap and convenient and can be very beautiful...take advantage of it.

That's good advise. I think digital is the best way to go in the beginning. Thanks so much for your help.

braininabox is right. You shouldn't be using 16mm unless you have had experience with it before, are learning it as part of a course, are working with someone who knows how to use it, or are really really gutsy and confident in your ability as a director and cinematographer. As a format it's far more expensive and finicky than digital.

Digital is cheap, which gives you the ability to mess up and try again (and again and again and again...). With the cost of film, you do not have that option, unless you are extremely wealthy.

If you are still set on starting to learn film, go out and buy an 8mm film camera. The quality isn't great, but it will begin to give you an idea of what working with celluloid is like.

Thanks. I had this romantic notion that film was the only option, but I'm not experienced or wealthy so it will be good to get acclimated to film making through digital first.

okay....first of all don't be afraid of 16mm.

second, pros do not use flatbed editors....i have used one and it is the biggest pain in the ass of all time. Editing is all done on computers.

Third, yes 16mm is for sure more complicated compared to video, however, i would argue that it is easier to get nice looking images with minimal effort using film, save for colour correction.

forth, a 20 minute film on 16mm will cost you a lot of money.

Finally, if sound is important, it is going to be very hard to use 16mm in a cost effective way.