Making a film

[a filmmaker]

First of all hands up as I have grown up in the glorious age of VHS not film. I have only seen a working film projector in old films on TV.

I knew nothing about Super 8 that is until September and since then I have been frantically searching everywhere for any information about Super 8.

I have found out that I will be buying a Bauer 715XL camera in the very near future. And have a Super Duper gate fitted to it to record a widescreen image. Proabably get a sound barney (though I am not sure) to deaden the camera noise or use a tie clip microphone.

I will add to the kit my Sharp (domestic) mini disc recorder. and get some tie clip microphones ( I have been told tie mics are good to keep the so called camera noise down) and a decent directional microphone.

I want to film a short story I wrote a while back - a thriller into a 20 minute film. A drama with actors, dialogue etc.

I am not sure what filmstock to use K40 or Pro 8. Pro8's package deal comes with teleceine etc. The Pro 8 option is attractive as it seems quick they do a Rank telecine etc for you. The K40 seems to be a good film everyone seems to say it's excellent - it's certainly cheap but it can take ages to process it 2/3 weeks and then telecine is a separate matter. I think I prefer a Rank to anything else which seems quite expensive.

I understand that the Vision 2 stock is great but can K40 perform well in say club scenes or dark scenes I don't wnt a grainy look. Since there is a lot of dark situations in my story. I need an experienced opinion.

I have looked into 16mm/Super 16 and it seems like a totally different ball game the equipment seems more expensive, the film processing and telecine seems complicated.

What I want to know is when filming K40 in the dark or in a club situation is it more grainy if so how can I avoid the grainydess.

Bill

[downix]

I've shot K40 in dark clubs. The end result is not great, I'll be honest. I could use maybe 10% of the film. V2 stock, especially the 500T, is the best bet. I've gotten great results using it in subdued lighting. I'd not go Pro8 tho, you'd actually get a better deal if I shoot on Kodak V2 500T, process it at Yale, and buy yourself a Workprinter to transfer it all yourself.

[christoph]

I understand that the Vision 2 stock is great but can K40 perform well in say club scenes or dark scenes I don't wnt a grainy look. Since there is a lot of dark situations in my story.

K40 won't really be grainy under dark situations.. it will just be, well, dark ;)
seriously, Kodachrome needs a lot of light.. if you have access to some decent lighting gear and somebody who has a experience in lighting club scenes there's no reason why K40 wouldn't perform well... if you just want to use ambient light then better forget about it, unless it's a *really* bright club. vision stock, even the 200T, will be a much better choice. however, it's also quite a bit more expensive in film, processing and telecine.

I have looked into 16mm/Super 16 and it seems like a totally different ball game the equipment seems more expensive, the film processing and telecine seems complicated.

it's actually less complicated than super8, but much more expensive... so yes, it's a totally different ball game and you should really do some homework before shelling out that much money.

good luck with your project
++ christoph ++

[sunrise]

If you are planning to shoot a 20 min film, you should make a setup and do a film stock test first to make shure you get the best look possible.

You can get really far on vision2 200T stock and an XL cam, even with very dark setups.

Unless you are a techie, you should consider anamorf instead of the duper format (my opinion).

good luck and keep us updated on the process!

michael

[schmeagan]

Unless you are a techie, you should consider anamorf instead of the duper format (my opinion).

michael

Hi. I'm just wondering why this is exactly. I am hoping to make a film with Super8, and was thinking that superduper8 was the easiest way to get a widescreen image seeing as I know nothing about anamorphic lenses, where to get them, etc.

Thanks!

Keagan Schopfer

[sunrise]

I do not know your model camera, so I do not know how diffucult the conversion to duper is or your possible choices of lenses. But anamorf can be obtained buy adding a lens in front of your excisting lens and does not require any messing with the cameras insides.

You also need to be able to scan the full duper frame, so before you do the conversion you should check with the post house you intend to use if they can do it.

I got my Iscorama 36 c-mount on ebay.


michael

[christoph]

Hi. I'm just wondering why this is exactly. I am hoping to make a film with Super8, and was thinking that superduper8 was the easiest way to get a widescreen image seeing as I know nothing about anamorphic lenses, where to get them, etc.

anamorphic has quite a few disadvantages:
- difficult framing (as you see everything squezzed)
- difficult focusing
- loss of sharpness
- anamorphic artifacts (this can be considered an advantage though ;)
- loss of light
- unsqueeze necessay in post

the big advantage is that you use the full frame for image information, specially if you go really wide (1:2.35).
for 16:9 (or 1:1.78) it's certainly easier to go superduper8 and the quality should be the same (or even better, depending on several factors).

++ christoph ++

[filmbuff]

Hi. I'm just wondering why this is exactly. I am hoping to make a film with Super8, and was thinking that superduper8 was the easiest way to get a widescreen image seeing as I know nothing about anamorphic lenses, where to get them, etc.

I recommend that you watch the movie 'Sleep Always' which was shot with Superduper8 modified cameras. Although the image looks great you'll see quite a bit of vignetting on the right side of the image at times. This is one drawback with widening your super 8 gate, the lens is not centered anymore. Zooming while filming is all goofed up as well.

[plutone]

So where are these super duper mods happening? Is everyone just doing it themselves or are the Sleep Always guys offering some service. It sounds pretty cool.

[christoph]

So where are these super duper mods happening? Is everyone just doing it themselves or are the Sleep Always guys offering some service. It sounds pretty cool.

afaik, they are offering a service for a reasonable price. most people just take a small file and enlarge the gate themselves though, the biggest problem is to find out which lenses (ie cameras) are suitable without showing any vinetting.

++ christoph ++

ps: search the archives before you try this with a nizo.

[S8W]

The mutilation of the camera gate has been discussed many times before on this forum in particular its name. I know filmmakers in the 1970's who used this, they simply filed the gate as the makers of 'Sleep Always' did.

It is a hit and miss thing especially if the viewfinder is not widened too. It seems silly not to use the extra space on the film where the sound stripe used to be, and I for one like the wider image.

I dont know if there is an anamorphic lens that could be used in conjunction with a Bauer 715 XL. Does anyone here know if there is one.

We have only just made mould from an existing gate and then widened the frame on the mould to produce a gate with a wide frame. We also widened the viewfinder frame of our 715XL which was fairly easy to do to allow for better framing. In general the 715 XL is good only slight vignetting at some focal lengths which is seen in the viewfinder so we can easily change focal settings to avoid it.