THE FUTURE OF SUPER 8

[PITIRRE]

I have a nightmare last night, soon there will be no more film and this include super 8 of course. Having seen more and more films made on video, even movies made with regular video cameras and then transfer the video to film is scary.

So far I haven't seen a movie shot completly on super 8 and projected on the big screen, if there any one please tell me. The advantage of video is big because for around $10.00 you can purchase a hour of mini dv, a tape that if you don't like the scene that you shot go back and do it again.

Super 8 have been used in several movies like JFK or ARMAGGEDON and this is proof that you can shot a good film on super 8 and projected. on the big screen, what I see is that the big hollywood players use super 8 like the format was use back in the 60's, an amateur home movie or to suggest a shaky dream sequence etc.

Super 8 has been succesful in been rediscover several years ago as a good format to shot music videos with the quality of film, and I think super 8 will need to go the next step, a format that can be use in the making of a movie that can be show in any big theater and distribute by a big company.
Some people may said, ok but super 8 has a lot of grain and can't be compare to big budget films, and that's ok but remember the movie
"OPEN WATER", it was shot with a regular video camera available right now to any person. We have to open our eyes, consumers video cameras are doing what super 8 has suppose to do first and I don't have nothing against video cameras because I have one. With the video technology that we have I am sure a movie shot on super 8 can transfer to video make the color corrections that need to be done eliminate grain is that is the case and much, much more.
I want to have a dream that when I open the newspaper on the entertaiment section it said "FILM SHOT ON SUPER 8 WON OSCAR FOR BEST PICTURE" or "SUPER 8: THE NEW FORMAT FOR HOLLYWOOD INDUSTRY" or better "SPIELBERG WILL SHOT NEXT MOVIE OF INDIANA JONES IN SUPER 8"

Thanks to all of you. [/b]

[FILM-THURSO]

Don't panic man! The industry is very much concerned with environmental issues and super 8 is certainly an answer that allows movies to continue to be shot on film giving all the hues of nature we've come to expect in cinema whilst being much nicer to planet earth. There is a lot of money being ploughed into the format because it has demonstrated that it is a major player in professional terms as well as the handy home shoot format. It's versatility as a film mastering format and flexability of the equipment are selling it well. There is always the possability of new machinery being made at some point. We the amateurs and low budget user have been first to spot it's virtues and Hollywood is catching on fast. The Supermag 400 answers to a demand for greater filming capacity from the small format whilst Kinotek supply sound film which Kodak may one day realise there is a market demand for. We've spotted the need for new equipment and Hollywood has spotted it too with Pro 8s range of new cameras whilst Beaulies have been re-run. Projectors will follow even though Classic Home Cinema didn't manage to get it of the ground with their magnificent machine (and it truely is).
When super 8 arrived, standard 8 was dead, when video arrived super 8 was dead, when DVD arrived VHS was dead, when CDs arrived vynal was dead- so far NOT!
All technology has it's place and what we see with each new thing is a bounce period where everyone and their granny goes and buys the stuff only to realise what they've been using for years does a better job.
New super 8 projectors and other gadgets are only are matter of time away.

[supermag400_inventor]

Unforturnately, you are absolutely correct my friend. All movies are soon going to be made using the HD video equipment and then we are all going to see film vanish from existance. Lets face it, film is expensive and video is cheaper. The results are clean, clear, crisp images that can be mastered directly on a PC Editing system, and no need to transfer it. The thing is that if you look at "Open Water" and look at the way it looked originally, it looked like a cheap porn video, without the sex. The reason it looks like film is it was transfered to film and optically remastered to make it look more rich and film like. That is a very expensive process that most of us can not afford. You can buy a DV movie look'a'like program that is suppose to make your video look like film. I'm not impressed with those.

It's a cultural thing. As we film buffs die out, the next generation of movie fans growing up will be much more ready to accept video movies as the norm. Then we'll all see the end of the movie theaters and the end of an era. Home theaters will be it.

I like the look of film. I prefer it. I think it preserves the illusion of reality that we need to have with our movies. If it looks too real, we tend to say it's not acceptable or believable. That is the essence of film.

God save film....and Super 8


Dave Sipmann
Inventor of the Supermag 400

[Scotness]

People are still driving cars from the 20's aren't they? You can even get 9.5mm film still if you want to. I think Super 8 will always be around I don't think it will ever die off - because there are enough people around who want to experiment with it - maybe the numbers will die down but the hobbyist/fanatic sector will keep it going - just like the old cars! And in an act of perverse irony that may well be due to modern technology not because of it - because the internet etc has made it easier for all those experimenters/fanatics to get together and this ultimately translates in to a small but not insignificant market and buying power. Witness all of us here on this forum!

Scot

[supermag400_inventor]

I'm actually hoping that your right, and infact Super 8 will find a whole new life with brand new film stocks and even sound film again. It's just a matter of all of us who like Super 8 around the world making all of those companies like Kodak and Fuji, that we will never give up on it.

What is really needed is a NEW super 8 camera that has all the best super 8 can offer. A real pro version of a Super 8 camera. One that can rival the professional 16mm cameras and even 35mm cameras.

Anyone got a few hundred thousand to spare? We could always invent one.

[thebrowniecameraguy]

Say what you want about Super 8, but lets look at it this way:

1. It takes a special cartridge for the film to run through. (Granted its cheap plastic, INCLUDING THE PRESSURE PLATE!)
2. It is 16mm slit and specially perforated. (Compared to Double Regular 8mm anyway.)
3. Sound film was tried for a decent amount of time; but, I guess Kodak decided it wasn't too cost effective. (EPA bullS*&T my ass!)
4. Thank god for Kodachrome, otherwise only 16mm (8mm's parent Ahaaa!) and 35mm would exsist today. (A guess)
5. There is probably a ratio of 10:1 regular 8mm cameras to Super 8mm cameras.
6. (Commercial Data) Regular 8mm has Dallas and JFK, Super 8 has? (Honestly I dont know :oops: (Really))
7. Super 8 has plastic cameras, regular 8mm has metal.
8. Yes, there is the flip over thing, but that makes it fun!
9. REGISTRATION, do I need to mention it?
10. If John Schwind can get Kodak to Re-Perf Kodachrome 40 16mm into Double 8mm, c'mon! And double super 8 has whaaaaaa?

Food for thought from a complete amature.

I dont know, from a home movie standpoint, regular 8mm is for me. Super 8mm I just dont use much.

Jordan

[alan doyle]

That fine human being and super 8 film maker Derek jarman,said to me about 10 years ago..that super 8 was history...and would be quickly taken over by the rise of tape...
well it has lasted longer,than the bean counters imagined..

i did some work on danny boyles horror film..28 days later..
festens dv dp anthony dodd mantel was the main cameraman.
as you probably know the film was shot on canon xl dv cameras..
during pre prod meeting,the director and dp viewed some of my super 8 and they loved it..
but you cannot beat the physics,of bad cartridge design and 50ft lengths..
instability,lab processing dirt..ageing cameras..
super 8 is great, a substitute for 16 or 35 it cannot and will never be..
technology moves apace,it will not be stopped.
will tape ever be organic, subtle and sexy like film who knows..
the time to worry about film is when,top commercials directors are shooting on hi def..
i hate kodak with a passion,they have completly screwed up in so many ways..
i have to use,kodak s8...but use fuji 16mm..
for the record danny boyles new film,has been shot on super 16.

[twotoneska]

Film isn't going anywhere, at least not anytime soon. When people as different as Steven Spielberg and Spike Lee are praising film left and right, and more and more cinematographers are realizing that film is a superior format to the current (and foreseeable future) High Definition technology, it has a good life span ahead of it.

This doesn't mean Kodak can rest on its laurels, though. They have continously worked against themselves and the filmmakers that support them. They do a great job at shooting themselves in the foot when it comes to customer service, research and development, and market analysis, but then again, they have never had a serious contender until now... ever.

There have already been something like 30 or more video formats, most of them completely out of date. Film is the same essential format that it has been for the last hundred years. Because of that, I think it has a lot of time ahead of it. It's also a better investment, since digital equipment is usually out of date, along with its resolution, within one to three years. When I started school, we had top of the line SD cameras with 3CCD chips. Within two years, 24P was released, and those cameras were essentially junk. Whereas, I can invest in an ARRI SR1 from the seventies, and the only thing that advances in technology is the film you put into it.

The vinyl LP to CD analogy is a perfect explanation of this. You can still find most major releases and a lot of independant releases on vinyl, but as MP3 technology has become a major contender, CD's will most likely go the way of the cassette tape and the 8 track, but we will still have vinyl, because there is a large enough group of people who want it.

[marc]

Pitirre,
You are probably right about one thing: You will likely never see it on the big screen as a "total movie" aquisition format. But it does look great on video!

[sarmoti]

We'll be dead before film is, back in the dawn of video tape people said film was dead... Truth is videotape will be in a few years. There is more film being shot around the world now than there was 15 years ago. Super 16 is an ideal match for high definition television and hype aside, HD camera systems are great for documentaries and some sitcoms but do not offer any practical benefits to people in the feature film and commercial industry.

Go to Kodak.com and request the "see the difference" DVD, you'll realize film is probably going to outlive us all. Watching this DVD you'll also realize that in many situations shooting HD to try and match film's quality will take you longer and cost you more than shooting on film.

I'm a proponent of digital video and HD adquisition for the proper situations but I have yet to see a film shot on a digital format for the big screen that I feel is even remotely in the neighborhood of a Best Cinematography award. We aren't too many years away though.

You can pick up a $6K S-16 Eclair NPR from the 60's with a decent lens load it with the latest Vision 2 stocks in it and produce HD images that look as good as just about anything a $200K HD camera made last year can capture. 5 years from now that 200K camera will be sold for a fraction of that. An HD camera from 10 years ago not only used to cost $300k+ but it will no longer work (unless you find a magical source for HD Saticon tubes at $30K a piece) and it's images look pretty crappy compared to the current cams. Not only that but the analog 1125 format is no longer in real use. When you average all the variables out the cost of film vs. high quality video (DV excluded of course) is not that drastic or even reverses itself.

[sarmoti]

Can I say something about open water and 28 days later??? When a damn top quality blowup from DV to Film is going to cost $50-$80K your final costs are in or above the neighborhood of shooting in S16 and blowing up to 35.

In the real world, of course, the filmmaker can finish his film and sell it on DV and let the distributor pay for the blowup but my point is that the result is much lower quality and the final cost is about equal or higher.

I think, for now, I'd rather shoot S16 do the cut on video and let the distributor conform the negative and finance the blowup. If there was a Varicam or Cinealta quality camera for $5K and Zeiss Digiprimes for $1500 and that investment would give me 20 years of use I'd probably be missing film but shooting what it makes sense to shoot in.

[Scotness]

i did some work on danny boyles horror film..28 days later..
festens dv dp anthony dodd mantel was the main cameraman.
as you probably know the film was shot on canon xl dv cameras..
during pre prod meeting,the director and dp viewed some of my super 8 and they loved it..
but you cannot beat the physics,of bad cartridge design and 50ft lengths..
instability,lab processing dirt..ageing cameras..

Well that kind of makes it official doesn't it - to think it could have been made on Super 8!

But I reckon oneday there will be a major cinematic hit that was shot on Super 8 - but it will have to be something that the look of Super 8 really fits. Best I've seen so far that way is The Year of the Horse - those images and that music - was great.

It'll happen - and then all the positive sides of Super 8 will come to the fore - ease and speed of loading, manuevarability of the cameras...

Scot

[PITIRRE]

Thanks to all for your excellent responses, it make my day, long live super 8.

SUPER 8 RULES

[munnin]

Pitirre,
You are probably right about one thing: You will likely never see it on the big screen as a "total movie" aquisition format. But it does look great on video!

apparentely you will if you want...

http://www.metrotimes.com/editorial/review.asp?id=87326

this movie was shot in 8mm and then blown up to 35mm :twisted:

[Angus]

I can only assume those people who actually believe that film will die either

a) Just bought a digital camera and the honeymoon period is over

b) Work for a manufacturer of digital media


Film is not going to die. There are far too many people using it, for a whole variety of reasons. When the camcorder craze died down, super 8 was still there in the background and has grown the last few years. Sure, you'll never see super 8 cameras in your local shops any more but the film is still available. I was in Jessops on New Oxford Street on Saturday and they had 25 cartridges of K40 on display, no doubt more in stock.

The analogy with those who drive old cars holds up too. Even if film were to purely be an enthusiasts medium and not a mass market item, there would be sufficient enthusiasts to keep most formats going.

Sadly super 8 will eventually be killed off by the cartridge. The day Big K stops making carts, super 8 dies. Other companies have looekd into making super 8 carts and given up because of the costs of tooling up. Should Big K stop and not sell their molds to another concern then super 8 dies overnight.

But reg 8 will live because of the simple 25' spools, ditto 16mm with it's 100' daylight spools and larger reels/pancakes.

Film won't die. Heck, 9.5mm hasn't died yet!