The 8mm Revolution - JJ Abrams / Spielberg Tribute to 8mm

[cinelicious]

This piece off JJ Abrams' SUPER 8 Movie Blu-Ray highlights the magic of the beloved 8mm/Super 8mm film formats. It discusses the history of the format, how it impacted the lives of the filmmakers, and how it is still a thriving format today. Shot and directed by M. David Melvin. HD Telecine, edit, color and VFX by Cinelicious.

Recommended for Super 8 beginners to enthusiasts!

http://vimeo.com/36052990

Featuring Interviews by:
JJ Abrams (Writer / Director / Producer - SUPER 8)
Steven Spielberg (Producer - SUPER 8)
Brian Burk (Producer - SUPER 8)
Larry Fong (DP - SUPER 8)
Paul Korver (Principal - Cinelicious http://cinelicious.tv)
Norwood Cheek (Founder - Flicker http://flickerla.com)
Dennis Murren (VFX Supervisor - SUPER 8)
Michael Giacchino (Composer - SUPER 8)
Joel Courtney (Actor "Joe Lamb" - SUPER 8)
Riley Griffiths (Actor "Charles Kaznyk" - SUPER 8)

[Nicholas Kovats]

Thanks for posting this, Paul!

That is one gorgeous precision scanner you happen to be standing in front of by the way. I appreciate the formats 'exposure' in the video.

However most of us on this forum are not exactly into scratchy home movie emulations. We are pushing the medium to the best of our experimental abilities. This is not a knock on Spielburg et al but I don't really identify with most of the admired limitations of the format as per the documentary.

How's business on the small format transfer side of things?

Cheers!

Nicholas
http://vimeo.com/35695252

[Andersens Tears]

I really enjoyed that! Thanks for the share!

[carllooper]

While the film plot was still a secret, ie. prior to the film's release, I wrote a satirical fictionalisation of the plot (as if I had access to the script) in which I said the kids end up falling in love with the monster. I was quite surprised when it actually happened (or something like that anyway).

The film did end up recreating a sense of what it was like being a teenager in the seventies shooting Super 8 film. I was just such a teenager in the seventies. And a Spielberg fan. I recall running away from home with a friend, riding a bicycle from Canberra to Sydney (took four days) to see the premiere of Spielberg's Close Encounters. But never got to see the film at that time because we were picked up by the police before we could do so. I shot countless hours of Super8 film back then.

I loved the bit about the kids shooting at the train station and timing it with the passing of the train - to get "good production value" and then the amplification of that same idea when the train crash unfolds - a massive special effects scene. And done very well. I read it as a way of framing the special effects as having their origin in a teenager's desire to give a film "production value" ie. beyond what you could otherwise afford. There is some irony in such as well. By the time you have a budget to give your film "production value" you are still using special effects or other techniques to make it look as though you had even more "production value". But Abrams is also, in a metaphorical sense, giving back to his teenagers (to himself) those "production values" he otherwise desired in his youth.

And I love that bit about the producer who says it's not the film. The film is unimportant. It's the girl he's after. That was such a refreshing and honest thing.

But it does eventually descend into formula and cliche. But not as bad I thought it might be.

[DonFito]

Great piece, thanks for sharing!

[cinelicious]

Thanks guys,
Glad you enjoyed it. It was fun to work on the project.

However most of us on this forum are not exactly into scratchy home movie emulations. We are pushing the medium to the best of our experimental abilities. This is not a knock on Spielburg et al but I don't really identify with most of the admired limitations of the format as per the documentary.

I think that when you're used to shooting 35mm like those guys are that Super 8mm is always going to feel grainy and used as a tool to suggest an earlier time. I also think that they only remember the transfers they were getting a long time ago. In fact they were all really shocked with how good Super 8mm looked transfered at HD with modern technology.

How's business on the small format transfer side of things?

Things are very good on the small format side Nick. We just updated the Small Format section of our site to reflect that:
http://cinelicious.tv/we-love-film/small-formats


Best,

Paul

[grainy]

charming - makes me want to see the Super 8 film now....
I wish this had been in circulation more during the film's big release.
G

[Nicholas Kovats]

Paul,

Thank you for being a small format conduit to the 35mm motion picture fiefdom! I and others appreciate it. Your website's small format section is looking good.

However I did happen to notice the absence of UltraPan8. It can be transferred on sprocket based scanners but it involves some extensive "crop and stitch" as I call it.

Cheers

Nicholas

[carllooper]

When Cinelicious say they can scan Super8 at 2K, on a Spirit, is that through optically projecting the width of the Super8 frame onto the 2K line sensor, or is it just through digitally scaling up what is otherwise a 1K scan?

Carl

[Andreas Wideroe]

The original Super8 gate that's supplied by http://www.dft-film.com/ is actually a modified 16mm gate with a Super8 baseplate/filmguide. The scanner zooms into the Super8 frame. This means that only about 1K of the sensor is used and the rest is upscaled. The image quality still looks great though as we've seen on many sample from Cinelicious and others.

Spectra Film and Video are currently getting a full sensor gate for their Spirit (custom made) - see here viewtopic.php?f=1&t=23024

There is also one installed in Vienna at http://www.synchrofilm.com/en/news/ (I think).

/Andreas

[carllooper]

The original Super8 gate that's supplied by http://www.dft-film.com/ is actually a modified 16mm gate with a Super8 baseplate/filmguide. The scanner zooms into the Super8 frame. This means that only about 1K of the sensor is used and the rest is upscaled. The image quality still looks great though as we've seen on many sample from Cinelicious and others

Yeah - that's what I thought. While the scans are probably just fine it is still very misleading. They should really say they do 1K scans of Super8 (or whatever res they do use: 0.8K?). Otherwise it would be no different from claiming a 2K scan for a system that scanned the Super8 width using, say, a 10 pixel sensor, and then digitally upscaling that to 2K. According to whatever logic they are employing, that too would be a "2K" scan. Except it isn't.

Here's some Regular8 that has been scanned at 2.5K, with a comparison against what it would look like if it was scanned at 0.8K and then digitally upscaled. As can be seen the 2.5K scan has more information with which to perform any enhancements one wanted to do, or just leaving it as is.



Carl