Super-8 look with 16mm

[jessh]

I just find this article rather amusing, so thought I would post the link up here for the enjoyment of all: http://www.cinematography.net/super8_look_with_16mm.htm

I havent actually read most of it yet, but the title is rather amusing.


~Jess

[rhcvatni]

Thats just about how stupid someone can get to me. I didn't bother reading the whole thing cause I couldn't stop laughing. He's got his reasons not to shoot super 8, but I'm sorry, I think it's stupid. If Oliver Stone could shoot super 8 for Natural Born Killers then this guy can shoot super 8 for whatever he's doing. The thread evolved into something similar to what we get here a lot, except we're trying to do the best with what we got, and he's trying to get what we get on a very bad day. And he actually makes it difficult for himself because he refuses to do whats easiest and most time and cost effective, and will ultimately provide him with the best result....... I'm sort of pissed off today. Maybe I'm taking it out on the wrong person

[paul 8]

hmmmm, idiots!!!!! cheap camera and a roll of k40. simple... cant see why they want 18fps either....would of thought people in the business would know how to shoot/source super 8.....

[mattias]

i don't see anything strange or wrong with it. he's shooting the rest of the commerical in 16mm and only a short scene has to look like super-8. involving another camera, another lab, another transfer house or at least another gate is obviously not what he wants to do, so in this case "just shooting s8" isn't easier or cheaper at all. the other case where i would totally understand it is if you're cutting the negative and striking a print, which is a lot less expensive and provides a lot more options if you do it in 16mm. oh well, maybe this is just my "pro" and "business" side talking too much. i do run my own production company after all... :-)

/matt