Some footage by request

[wado1942]

In what way did I misquote it? I was LOOKING at it while I typed that message. Some of you guys are SO caught up in semantics it's amazing. Just because somebody paraphrases or doesn't quote something word for word doesn't mean it doesn't have any merit. In another post I got into some technical details to prove a point, again paraphrasing to keep it simple and somebody there bashed me for being inaccurate but never bothered stating what was inaccurate. BTW, most people who know me will tell you I know FAR more than most people about this stuff, including some people who do it for a living. So fine, if you're going to insult me because I didn't quote the entire thing, here's the article. Read it for yourself.
http://www.gcmstudio.com/misc/comparisons.pdf
It said NOTHING about not paying for the services. All it said was that they sent 15 carts to various places and proceded to talk about the results. Also, how could the experiment POSSIBLY be objective without disclosing who the labs were and who the people sending it were? Not mentioning the names would completely negate the whole purpose of it. As for paying for the services, they should have paid for it like anybody else would but then, the lab isn't going to change the way they handle film because they're doing a free demo.

[aj]

The file you are publising is copyrighted. By somebody else.

I mention just that labs got involved unvoluntary and then get a bad reputation for not returning the film. You are propagating the outcome of a faulty and improper test.

I am not insulting anybody. It is your own signature text.

[wado1942]

Sue me. I'm not making any money off of it and I can't find where it was posted originally. So again, don't insult me for not quoting something word for word and then insult me again for showing the word for word copy. Make up your mind. BTW, if you're so smart, then you conduct the same test the right way and post your findings. I'll bet your results aren't much different.

[aj]

________________
I may sound stupid, but I hide it well.

You don't hide it well at all.

Your reasoning is too crooked to even take serious.

(claiming) Not knowing the original source and owner or not making money off it make you immune for other people's copyrights.

Why should I test films for other people's entertainment. I don't exploit or work for a magazine. I have no obligations to you or others. And I process all my film myself.

Aren't you the clever guy (without any obvious skills) who claims that he can make a good working 400ft S8 magazine for a few hundreds dollars where other find $500 too little. The audience is still waiting.

[Super8rules]

This is the only freakin internet forum where flame wars erupt in almost EVERY SINGLE THREAD.

All the guy was doing was posting some footage for us to see for crying out loud.

Some of you have way to much time on your hands and need to get a real life. :roll:

Is life that boring in the Netherlands?

[wado1942]

Well don't complain about other people when you are obviously no different. You complain about other people sharing supposedly inaccurate (though have yet to show a valid reason it's inacurate) but refuse to show the right information. You know what, enough people have stolen my published writtings and republished them in far worse ways than I did with that article so you have no right to complain. Furthermore you have no concept of what my skills are since you've never worked with me. A couple of short, silent, sylized art pieces aren't enough for you to judge me. And yet you insist I don't know anything even though I made a living doing what you wish you could do. So finally, I'm sick of you and other people like you on this board that won't budge a millimeter even though you refuse to give any valid information to support yourself.
Consider this my last post on this topic and probably this board. So are you happy? The guy who tries to get people to THINK differently is leaving so you can go on with your mindless drivel. Thank you for those who were supportive and those who gave valid input to the contrary of my opinion. I'm not shunning you, I'm shunning guys like AJ who think they need to pick a fight about everything. You know, I frequent other forums and even moderate one of them. This is the only one where having a different opinion makes you evil. On the forum I moderate, there's another pro audio guy who disagrees with just about everything I say. But he knows I do good work, I know he does good work and we even work together on some stuff. We just have a different approach to get to the same result....nothing wrong with that IMHO.

You have your forum back now.

[Super8rules]

Amen,

I've found AJ to be nothing but a self-rigteous ***.

he (and a few others) have done nothing but suck the life out of this place.

[steve hyde]

...thanks for posting the footage.

Cinepost does a nice job. Did you have a UV filter on the lens when you shot this? It' nice footage, but looks like it was shot on a low quality lens. (videoish looking lens flare) I think this footage would benefit from a grainier stock if you are looking for a super 8 look.

Steve

[super8man]

Personally, I read this thread and thought the footage was nice and was surprised a flame war did not erupt from the comment on it looking almost like video.

But, further down, I personally found the text about the various labs directly indicting of those who did not return the film. My first thought was WOW! THEY EAT MY FILM. WHO DID NOT SEND IT BACK. I DON'T WANT TO DO BUSINESS WITH THEM.

Then, I read Andre's reply.

Here's my 25 cents: Andre is spot on. He factually pointed out the methodology on the test of labs that was introduced in the proceeding thread which was, in case we forget:

"Dwayne's was average as far as the film look goes but it was so cheap and fast it got a higher rank. There were a couple of labs where they didn't get the film back at all."

I can make no other conclusion that this suggested some labs were evil and ate film and you were lucky to have your film processed by them.

And yes, to be exact, wording DOES matter. When you paraphrase something, you change its meaning. In this case, I thought the correction was required and I thought, HEY, ANDRE MADE A GOOD DISTINCTION HERE.

Later.

PS - In case I did not say so, I thought the footage was EXCELLENT and other than the two spots of fuzz on the lower right, was very very watchable. I even turned on my speakers hoping for sound.


_________________

[Will2]

Seems to me wado was just trying to share some information. No need to get all hyper about it. We're here for conversation and information to help with our love of film.

I had read the same thing in the original magazine article and I'm sure many others in this forum had as well. I was brought up to be polite when people told you something you already knew and not jump down their throat; rather thank them for sharing.

If you want to add something to what he said there are ways to do that without saying he's stupid.

[super8man]

Not everyone subscribes to the magazine (I cancelled my subscription long ago) and the message was incorrect (labs not returning film). Labs did not return UNSOLICITED films was AJs point.

And from what I saw, no one called him "stupid" - that is in the autosignature.

[Will2]

And from what I saw, no one called him "stupid" - that is in the autosignature.

Not to belabor the point, but here was the stupid I was talking about...

You are misquoting from a test by Smallformat magazine. Stupid and not well hidden.

He was being really funny and playing off the autosignature by actually calling his statement stupid, not him I guess. Sorry.

But hey, that's cool. It's a free planet (?) and we can say what we want.

[super8man]

Will2, in my job, what you did in your reply is what must do in my daily life - accurately reflect what was said by stakeholders. I should hire you to help me in my work.

Cheers,
Mike

[toby_tools]

I would think the lab would have to agree to the test before film would be sent. YES'NO?
Or where carts of film just sent out hoping they would come back?
Toby

[super8man]

I would think the lab would have to agree to the test before film would be sent. YES'NO?
Or where carts of film just sent out hoping they would come back?
Toby

You made my point, I need more information about the whole "lab test" thing.