Upload some of your best SS8 stills into this thread

[goya]

nice stills.

[Lucas Lightfeat]

Hi Mattias,

I'm most impressed with your stills, and I'm wondering what camera you used? They seem extremely sharp shots, with wonderful contrast range for Kodachrome. I guess the conditions were perfect on that day or days: a Summery day, where the sky is bright, but the sun is a little covered, resulting in fewer blowouts in the whites. Did you underexpose? I would guess yes, but perhaps only by one third of a stop. Did you use an internal meter or external? Also, did you use a tape-measure for focussing, or did you just focus in the viewfinder?

Sorry for the barrage of questions - I am impressed with your results, so maybe you can help me make a film which also looks great. I'd love to see the film - is this possible?

Many thanks

Lucas Lightfeat

[mattias]

I'm most impressed with your stills

thanks. i (and my dp jens jonason) used a canon 814e and it was actually overcast, although rather thin so the light still had lots of direction. i'll have to check the camera report, but i think the first one was shot with the lens at about 10 mm to create a "normal" perspective, as was the fourth. the other two are both shot on full zoom or close to it to blur out the background. the aperture is 4 or 5.6 on all of them. this included a half stop underexposure for color and low grain. all focusing was done using tape.

/matt

[mattias]

I'd love to see the film - is this possible?

it's on the festival tour right now. give me the name of a festival near you and i'll submit it (is there a flicker in london?). i'll probably release it on vcd/dvd/vhs and possibly the internet this summer or fall...

/matt

[Guest]

In response to the first post, it looks like a painting.

[ulrichsd]

Hey everyone!

Cool to see eveyones shots. It amazes me how great the contrast of kodachrome can be. I've noticed that the majority of stuff people have put on this thread are outdoors shots. Does anyone have any *indoor* shots that have turned out more amazing than they could have expected? Just curious. I did notice Carlos had a few indoor shots but not on k40.

Scott

[Roy Brown]

Here are a couple of stills from my film "A Fathers Loss" Although this film is meant just for projecting, I made a video copy and pulled the stills of my Computer editor time line.
Camera: Canon 1014e
Film K40
Interior lighting-two Lowel 750 watt DP's




There is a lot of motion in the outdoor shot, so there is some blur but when this scene is being projected its very nice.

[Carlos 8mm]

Here are a couple of stills from my film "A Fathers Loss" Although this film is meant just for projecting, I made a video copy and pulled the stills of my Computer editor time line.
There is a lot of motion in the outdoor shot, so there is some blur but when this scene is being projected its very nice.

Roy,

Which video transfer did you use for this footage? (Homemade transer or proffesional transfer?) And what´s the video format (MINI DV, VHS, etc.?)
I can see in the pics that you show here some type of chromatic aberration (I think that is this). Possibly the projector used for this transfer haven´t a high quality projetion lens.

Just an observation.

Carlos.

[Scot McPhie]

There are variuos indoor K40 shots on these pages too

http://www.mango-a-gogo.com/inmyimage/photos.htm

- some are good some aren't - need plenty of light for indoor K40! - which we didn't always have

Scot M
http://www.mango-a-gogo.com

[Carlos 8mm]

Scott,

In My Image´s Page you wrote:
"In my opinion the video came out alot better than I was expecting it would (but maybe that's just in experience on my part) it has a clarity the Super 8 doesn't and a certain presence - but what it doesn't have is the texture and feel that the film has - when I look at the miniDV it looks like now to me - but when I look at the film it looks like it could be 1938 - or another world and time and place ~ which to me is more important. And of course it's not really comparing apples with apples because the film undergoes some image loss in the tranfer to video (be that miniDV or whatever)"

According you said the film was trasferred via Rank Cintel and recorded into Mini-DV. To obtain a Super 8 High- Quality transfer the system (Rank, telecine etc. ) must be able to reproduce 800-1000 lines at least. (the ideal could be a HD system an then transferred to a conventional HQ video format).

The S8 pics are fine, but like you said, can be a little bit better.
I really don´t know how many lines can reproduce RankCintel systems,
But I´m sure that the guys who transferred your film to video didn´t a good work. (Perhaps the Rank system used is obsolete) :?:

Carlos.

[Basstruc]

All Rank Cintel systems are obsolet since they changed there name for "Cintel" ten years ago. But I kind of agree with Carlos, the pics on your website seams a bit soft. Are you shure the focus on telecine was well made ?
Matt

[mattias]

Perhaps the Rank system used is obsolete

very likely. most of the ones used for super-8 are from the 70's or 80's and they don't even give perfect results with 16 mm. like i said, they produce great colors and contrast compared to film chain setups but the resolution is on svhs level at best and the registration isn't perfect either.

/matt

[Carlos 8mm]

All Rank Cintel systems are obsolet since they changed there name for "Cintel" ten years ago. Matt

I have seen many pics of S8 transfers maked by "Professional Services",
especially with color stock, and honestly I can say they don´t convince me. Spend hundred of bucks to obtain poor results...

Get a conderser lens, a good projector wih HQ lenses or buy a Roger´s Workprinter or CineMate, get a very good video camera and you´ll obtain best results.

P.S: Rank Cintel or others Professional Sistems capures the 100% of the film frame?

Carlos.

[mattias]

Get a conderser lens, a good projector wih HQ lenses or buy a Roger´s Workprinter or CineMate, get a very good video camera and you´ll obtain best results.

a good video camera and that other stuff costs as much as hours of hours of time in a professional bay, and you still won't get anywhere near the shadow detail and color depth that you get from something as obsolete as a mkIII. i'm really impressed by our host's, jukka's and roger's results but they do suffer in thoese areas imho.

P.S: Rank Cintel or others Professional Sistems capures the 100% of the film frame?

that would depend entirely on how they're set up. usually not since people want the same image as in the viewfinder most of the time rather than the "highest quality image".

/matt

[Kurt]

Here's a link to some stills from a music video project I'm working on at the moment. Scroll down to "Stills from Goin' for Drinks" to find them. Some of them are quite soft because of compression, but I think you can get an idea of what Tri-X can also look like using the Workprinter. Camera was a Canon 514 XL shooting at 18fps of course. I shot wide open a lot of the time so I got a mix of in and out of focus stuff (which I actually love for this project) but overall I was stunned by the sharpness of this little camera's lens. For anyone in the Austin TX area go see this band play live!

http://www.moonlighttowers.com/images.html

Kurt