Recommend me a good tape splicer?

[Patrick]

I was wondering if anyone could recommend me a good tape splicer for super 8? I'm specifically looking for one that is used in conjunction with a roll of tape. Basically I want one with the following attributes - good quality, precision and ease of use. Ive used those dreaded tape patches / tabs once in the past - never again! They were a nightmare to use....so damn tiny, they'd stick to your fingers and everything else nearby. Ive also used cement splicers in the past as well but I find it time consuming scraping off the emulsion prior to the splice.

[Andreas Wideroe]

My all time favourite is the Neumade S8-SW splicer. It is heavy duty, accurate and simply great to use.

It is (or was) made by a Japaneese company: http://www.tokyoseiki.com/

I think it can still be custom ordered.

Alternatively I'd check out http://www.cir-srl.com/.

Best,
Andreas

[nikonr10]

I was wondering if anyone could recommend me a good tape splicer for super 8? I'm specifically looking for one that is used in conjunction with a roll of tape. Basically I want one with the following attributes - good quality, precision and ease of use. Ive used those dreaded tape patches / tabs once in the past - never again! They were a nightmare to use....so damn tiny, they'd stick to your fingers and everything else nearby. Ive also used cement splicers in the past as well but I find it time consuming scraping off the emulsion prior to the splice.

Fujij has been my splicing tape single 8, love this tape and very easy too use , mind you it[s not cheap anymore ! but when it come's to film what is ?

[BAC]

The Ciro-Guillotine tape splicer AKA CIR Catozzo is a very popular one and they are easy to find on eBay. Bolex made one that was pretty good as well, it was a different design from the Ciro but basically worked the same way. The Bolex is a little harder to find but they both use roll tape and punch the sprocket holes. I agree with you, I cant stand the patches. Personally I prefer the Bolex beveled cement splicer because it makes the best splices but apparently I'm a little more patience than you. I also use FilmRenew to clean my film and that will dissolve tape splices. I also shoot more Regular 8mm than Super 8 and it is very hard to find a good tape splicer for Regualr 8mm that uses roll tape and punches the sprocket holes. You're pretty much stuck with tabs.

http://ian-partridge.com/bolex_tape.html

http://super8data.com/database/splicers ... rs_cir.htm

[Patrick]

Thankyou all for your suggestions. Bac, it's been a while since Ive done cement splicing. However, I can tell you my recollections about using this method. If I recall correctly, I was able to scrape off the emulsion from the left side of the frame relatively quickly. However, I always found the emulsion on the right side really stubborn. It would take ages to scrape the right side clean, even when using varying amounts of pressure. And that's just one frame....investing that kind of time and effort into every single splice was just too much work.

[BAC]

If you want to make fast cement splices then you should look at the Bauer K 20. It's battery powered and shaves the emulsion off pretty quick. It also makes very nice splices, similar to the Bolex beveled cement splicer. You still have to wait 20 to 30 seconds for the cement to dry.

[aj]

I was wondering if anyone could recommend me a good tape splicer for super 8? I'm specifically looking for one that is used in conjunction with a roll of tape. Basically I want one with the following attributes - good quality, precision and ease of use. Ive used those dreaded tape patches / tabs once in the past - never again! They were a nightmare to use....so damn tiny, they'd stick to your fingers and everything else nearby. Ive also used cement splicers in the past as well but I find it time consuming scraping off the emulsion prior to the splice.

Tape splicers like the CIR give the best low price per splice. Seems there are enough around in the USA and some other regions. Other places are Kodak minded or favoured Agfa/Würker style splicers. The Fujica tape splicer required expensive proprietary tape and it is only 3 meters.

Mind that you get the proper 8.5mm width tape for the CIR splicers. Other widths either will put the edge of the tape in the frame itself or the next one That will look ugly in transfer and projection.

[Patrick]

Does anyone have any links to instructions on how to use a tape splicer? A search on Google didn't turn up much at all. Ive used a 16mm tape splicer back in University but I can't remember the exact procedure. All that I can recall is that the film is joined end to end as opposed to overlapping (as in a cement splice.) Is the tape wrapped around both sides of the film? Is there ususally provision for cutting off excess tape from the film?

[ewanuno]

there is a manual for the CIR splicer at the bottom of my page:

http://www.ewancolsell.com/super8/

by the way, i also have CIR 8mm and super8 splicers for sale!(no 16mm or 9.5mm) these are splicers that i have saved an uncertain fate at various fleamarkets.


ewan.

[Patrick]

there is a manual for the CIR splicer at the bottom of my page:

Ah thankyou. Ive just been reading through it. Overall, fairly straight forward except....I'm puzzled by the position of the cutting blade. It looks like it's nowhere near the film or film pins (it's off to the side of the splicer.) I'm having trouble visualising how it could get anywhere near the film from that position. Most splicers I have seen (and the ones that I have owned) have the cutting blade on the end of an arm that can be lowered and raised directly above the pins holding the film. Perhaps there's something I'm missing or overlooking when looking at the instructions.

[carllooper]

there is a manual for the CIR splicer at the bottom of my page:

Ah thankyou. Ive just been reading through it. Overall, fairly straight forward except....I'm puzzled by the position of the cutting blade. It looks like it's nowhere near the film or film pins (it's off to the side of the splicer.) I'm having trouble visualising how it could get anywhere near the film from that position. Most splicers I have seen (and the ones that I have owned) have the cutting blade on the end of an arm that can be lowered and raised directly above the pins holding the film. Perhaps there's something I'm missing or overlooking when looking at the instructions.

The primary reason is that it's far easier to see the frame you want to cut when the cutter is at the end.

Also cutting and splicing can be understood as two different activities. For example, one might go through a whole film and cut it up into shots to hang in a bin for such. You leave clapper and all in each shot. There's no splicing involved during this stage. Having the cutter at the end, means you don't have to prise off two sections of film. Just one. After dismantling the film in this way you then pull in each shot from the film bin, in the desired order and splice them together. The first time is called an "assemble edit" where there's no particular concern for which frame the cut occurs on, just the order of the shots. You watch the film (with clapper and all) to get some idea of whether the order is correct - not the cut points as such. But you imagine the cut points. You watch the film and imagine what to do next. In the first case you might rearrange the order as a result. You watch it again. The final film is still in your head. Not on the screen. You then go back through and take out some material, from the head and/or tail of each shot. Not for a final result but a closer approximation of what is in your head. And you screen it again. And remove more material again. And watch it again. I've heard this called "rinsing" by Ingmar Bergman's editor. You converge on the required order, and requisite edit point, rather than trying to get it all in one go. Because there's a play off between what's in your head and the material you have. You are adjusting both (the subjective and the objective) to find the perfect co-operative point between them. Sometimes you make a mistake, and have to put a single frame back in! Because that can often be the difference between a perfect edit, and a god awful one.

C

[Patrick]

you then pull in each shot from the film bin, in the desired order and splice them together. The first time is called an "assemble edit" where there's no particular concern for which frame the cut occurs on, just the order of the shots.

Yea I always start with a 'rough cut' (that's the term I use) when I edit films. Then do the 'final cut' later on. By the way, with the film I'm planning to edit with the tape splicer, the individual shots are already cut (loosely) and contained in the 'film bins' - they've been inside these little plastic tubs for a number of years. Looks like I'm finally going to get around to assembling them into something meaningful. I just hope that they haven't accumulated any fungus growth, being stored in sealed plastic for so long.

[carllooper]

you then pull in each shot from the film bin, in the desired order and splice them together. The first time is called an "assemble edit" where there's no particular concern for which frame the cut occurs on, just the order of the shots.

Yea I always start with a 'rough cut' (that's the term I use) when I edit films. Then do the 'final cut' later on. By the way, with the film I'm planning to edit with the tape splicer, the individual shots are already cut (loosely) and contained in the 'film bins' - they've been inside these little plastic tubs for a number of years. Looks like I'm finally going to get around to assembling them into something meaningful. I just hope that they haven't accumulated any fungus growth, being stored in sealed plastic for so long.

Yes, the assemble edit can be called a "rough cut" as well, but there's nothing cut out of any shot. Everything is in each shot. It may seem unnecessary but it allows you to see all of the material before any cut is done. But at the same time you get to play with the order and approximate what you are after, rearranging shots without any anxiety about anything missing. So a "rough cut" is probably better reserved for when you bite the bullet and start eating into the shots.

In any case it sounds like you know what you are doing, regardless of terminology.

good luck

C

[Patrick]

In any case it sounds like you know what you are doing, regardless of terminology.

Well I did learn a thing or two from my film / media major at university. Anyhow, this footage will be transferred and then edited digitally. It was my original plan to edit it on film (and I admit it would have been rather special and satisfying seeing the end product projected on celluloid) but I don't think I have that kind of patience these days (re: film editing.)

[carllooper]

Well I did learn a thing or two from my film / media major at university. Anyhow, this footage will be transferred and then edited digitally. It was my original plan to edit it on film (and I admit it would have been rather special and satisfying seeing the end product projected on celluloid) but I don't think I have that kind of patience these days (re: film editing.)

So a digital edit and then conform the film to the digital edit? Or the splicing is just to get it all onto a single roll for transfer?

Either way, look forward to what you come up with.

cheers
C