you have to get a projecter.

So I did remove the shutter blades in the end. And replaced the motor with a much smaller one. The motor used here was completely over-sized for the job. And yes, the blades have to do a full 360 rotation for one frame for film. For the video I was just running it at different speeds for fun.

​@@LooperCarl Howdy, I've finally got a projector and removed the shutter blades as well. I'm looking at the stepper motor replacement. I realized you mentioned that you sized down the motor, I was wondering if you had any advice on determining a sufficient motor type? I suppose size, voltage and torque. Anything else? Thank you!

@@hausofwheat Hi - so I ended up using a torque meter to determine the optimum stepper motor. Each projector is different in terms of it's torque. Torque is the main quantity you want to know before selecting a stepper motor. If a motor is rated for the torque you're after then it's voltage and amps will be what they need to be to provide for the required torque. You then just need a stepper controller capable of driving that stepper. I used a phidget stepper controller (which can drive most bipolar stepper motors) www.phidgets.com/?tier=3&catid=23&pcid=20&prodid=1029

Was from a place called Phidgets. Most stepper motors have a square shape but obviously not all of them as this one has a tube shape.

The stepper motor used here is way too powerful for this application. It was my first foray into stepper motors and I got the biggest one I could find. I can't recall the torque rating but it was massive.

Was made for scanning Super8 to digital.

It didn't need to be as big as the one I used here. I ended up using a much smaller motor for the projector.

hello, theres a great thread at filmshooting.com about "Removing Orange Mask from Colour Negative Scans" by carl looper: www.filmshooting.com/scripts/forum/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=24780&sid=e4122c09b9f875a3bdc93107475b3e10&start=75 it really works, as i can confirm, and the initiator of the AE method, carl looper, was at the end of the thread struggling with the question: why? (does ist work).. and said, he would maybe post some new thoughts on that, but until now didn´t, and there is no new activity from him on the entire forum and also not on his yt channel since last year. i write you because he had your website in his signature, and wanted to kindly request if he´s still around and eventually has figured out any new infos on the above subject, because its a bit tricky, and im also curious how it can be that it works, despite, and this is only an assumption, that the masks in the film must work quite accurate, because else the analog transfer to positive film wouldnt work just with plain global cmy filtering. as far, up to now there are, if i interpreted correctly, the following possible explanations: 1) the masks dont work exact, but in the analog world there is a complementary error in the positive material ( not the same characteristics but characteristics which null the negative material mask errors (possibly intentional errors for handshake/armshake etc)) this is cited at serveral places in the web, sound plausible but is maybe not the (whole) truth OR 2) the masks work exactly, but only in the analog chain with cmy filtering, chemical color response of positive material etc (which has an equivalent of the errors, nonlinearities in the negative material, but nevertheless all masks in all materials work very accurate, they supplement the unperfections in the dyes that are formed from the couplers) BUT within the digital r g b scanning the masks dont work good, maybe because of metameria, for example a different response of the scanner color sensors to the magenta dye and to the magenta colored mask (probably different chemicals, doesnt matter in analogue but does matter for the electronic sensor or filter in front of it) and/or different nonlinear response curves to the severeal colors. im going to eventually shoot test color charts etc on negative film an mess around with some lee lighting gel filters, but expect to not find much out without enough theorie at first hand. would be really nice to hear from carl if he has any new thoughts on this, (or anybody who might have an insight in the matter) thanks, regards, paul