getting on your super 8 nerves

[Guest]

I thought this forum was on a website called Shooting 8MM. Film, that is. Who cares what goes on in the video world? If you do, go find another website devoted to it and have your fun. I (and I am sure many others who read this board) love film because of what it is and what can be done with it. I love tinkering with projectors and cameras and splicers etc. because it is a craft. It is a craft I enjoy. And the end product is something that will probably long outlive me. Until I go, I will shoot, edit and project film. Which one is better: film or video? Wrong question. Who cares as long as you enjoy the medium you are working in? I have been listening to arguments on the doom of 8mm film by the video gods for over twenty years. Stop trying to convince me, please. If you prefer the latest and greatest video gadget, go ahead and knock yourself out. And by the way, I have owned a mini-DV camera for over two years. It sits in its case until I want to transfer some of my film to video... :?

[S8 Booster!]

Agree completely.

Here a nice site for the DV Tifosis.

http://www.dv.com/

RGDS

[Pedro]

Finaly someone had the courage to say this. Thats what I was thinking about for a long time. What the hell have all these video discussions to do with SHOOTING 8MM. Sometimes I have the impression, that half of the threads are video related. Are there no specific forums for that? Shooting 8 mm should be related to FILM cameras, filmmaking, splicing and editing, projectors and projecting, soundtracks etc.
Pedro

[S8 Booster!]

Digis.

http://www.hyperzine.com/
http://pinnaclesys.com/
http://webboard.pinnaclesys.com/read_forums.asp?
http://www.adobe.com/
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/video-edit/join
http://www.videouniversity.com/filmfest.htm
http://webopedia.internet.com/TERM/N/Ni ... _pack.html
http://utopia.knoware.nl/users/unica/
http://www.dmc.no/
http://www.dmt.no/
http://www.ntua.gr/lurk/lurker.html
http://www.filmmag.com/fright.html
http://www.cyberfilmschool.com/
http://www.videouniversity.com/
http://www.videouniversity.com/resource.htm
http://www.incotrade.se/vidprog.html
http://www.gadgetguru.com./IDXMAIN.HTML
http://www.computervideo.net/
http://www.videonics.com/articles.html
http://www.popadom.demon.co.uk/vidhist
http://www.mikeshaw.co.uk/edit_general. ... techniques

RGDS

FW 190A-8MM RULES!

[Guest]

I understand your point of view. It's just that some developments outside of the world of super 8 will affect super 8 and it's future. There lies, for me, the relevance of this discussion. Besides, the same discussions appear regularly in 16mm groups as well, and I'm sure, affect 35mm filming people also. Even at Kodak they don't think, "hey, why should we care about video, after all.. film is our business". So personally I don't see the harm of discussing this in a super 8 group, it is/will be it's business as well, and since the response on this subject is quite high (also in other groups) I don't think I stand alone here.

Paul

[S8 Booster]

disagree completely.

It just that if S8 is to be exploited its full potential, its handled the way Pedro describes. By working on S8 as a FILM medium in the 1st place it moves into a different division/league of filmmaking. Editing & Soundwork on original material (The only film fomat to do so except for a few 16mm standoffs) is very unique and to do it in a proper manner some skill have to be developed.

As daft as the Video format is in the first place, the editing is boring whether you use tape gear or computer editing. You get a chance to trial and error 100 times or more until it fits.

Of course you learn things from that too and only your imagination sets the limits for what you can do.
But, its Oh, so boring and the result is flat dead video images that nobody ever wants to watch again. (usually)

How many of the video buffs watching this site regulary can with hand on their forehead say they regulary bring up their video home movies and watch it?

Right, none.

How many bring up their S8 projector regulary to watch their S8 movies.

Right, not to many that either but most likely a landslide more than the Video tribe do.

Show your flat dead colourless DV homevideos to your friends and see how long time it takes until they fall asleep, even when projected. They might politely keep an eye open.

Do the same with the S8 projected and they will ask for more.

Generaly speaking.


The craftmanship required in working soley on reversal film is somewhat demanding. It is not easy to get things going as with the video. When you master it to some degree the benfits are just so great compared to the V.

The discussion you bring up here is the same that hit S8 in the early ´80s when the trashmatic Video systems NEARLY killed the S8.

Personally I though too by the end of the ´90s and the Sound film went away that S8 would die. Many of my older die hard S8 friends never thought it would die but I was in doubt.

Now, a few years later it is apparent that the S8 will never die, "not on our time" as Chamberlain said? :? in 1939.

In my view the S8 seem to have regained a popularity (not domination) it haven´t had since the ´80s and the fact that Kodak seem to be serious in supplying the stock in the future a well with a commitment they haven´t had for many years (my impression).

In the past the S8 never got the acknowledgement it propably deserved because the 16mm were the next logical step for the more PRO purposes.

Now that the 16mm has "gone" to the videos the S8 is the only film format remaing for AMA/Semi level work. It seems that the S8 is accepted to some degree for more or less professional purposes in a way it never was 15 years ago.

This alone enhance the potential of S8 to new levels for those who wants it. In my local amateur film club many members were mislead to believe that the S8 would die. They put their S8s on the shelf and have since then wasted buckes of money on more or less unusable video outfits.

They are now bringing back thir S8 gear and wind up.

The way this topic is turning out leads in the same useless direction leading the history tryin to repat itself. Wast loads of money on basically useless half ready video formats that never are going to survive the S8.

Another stupid thing about video is the fact hat the video production reduces the moviemaking quality sverly due to the fact that it costs nothing to tape the endless sh*t that no one ever wants to watch later. Creativity & focus drops way down.


To prove this I will mention an anlogue thing. The now famous director (late) Rainer Werner Fassbinder sometimes ran out of both money and time near the end of his film productions. This meant that they ended up with one take scenes. Would you believe that everbody performed up to their best? Everybody including the actors agreed that the result of this was outstanding performances and filmmaking beuase they had to concentrate 150% to get things right on 1 take.

This is an analogue to the film vs video. Nobody get that concentrated when working with video that cost nothing to spend. This is one of the biggest disavantages together with the trash image quality & motion.

So turn on the S8 and let the 24P die.

DV or 24P gain nothing but travelling backwards.
No reason to travel backwards on 24P, its passé already.

Who on earth will spend kilo-bucks to buy 24P DV when they already have it on S8 for free?

[crimson]

wow!!!

you really got a big beef with video 8O
Why so defensive?

The point - many here work with both. Workprinter, that many of you bought and have used the serviced is dependant on video.
Many ask for video taps.
So, video is part of this forum.

S8 has been used to its full potential. Thats the problem. No more innovative stuff. Yes you get Workprinter and $100 pressure plate - but when was the last time you got a new lens, camera, projector, splicer and etc.
I have one of the greatest Super8 camera ever built ("piece of history" as Roger described it) the Leicina Special. If I bought the 24p DV cam will i throw it away. Hells No. Cos I dont feel threaten. My art is about me not about the technology I own.

Dont feel so threaten.

[Guest]

> How? I would really like to know how this is possible since you cannot put more information on video - is physcally limited by the format.

"video" isn't limited by the video format. it's limited by the the camera (ccd). film on video looks better than video for this very reason, as does hd bumped down...

> things like contrast, color and brightness are all format dependent

yes, but the translation of real world contrast to video signal contrast isn't. film compresses the real world contrast, while video clips it. this affects not only shadow and highlight detail, but also color fidelity and general sharpness.

/matt

[cameraguy]

We need someone to start a "film only" forum for those who shoot and finish on film.

[S8 Booster]

feels threatened here. I really do not care about that. I think I have dealth with both formats long enough (20 years) to see that the Video simply do not catch up in my time.

I have been into video back and forth (sufficiently) for commercial and home use and realize that the video as such is at a dead end of its potential, minor DV advancements or not.

Completely new technolology is required to take it further. Costs? Who pays? Not me.

As to the cam quality, there is more to THAT story unless you got hold of all the maintenace manuals around, Roger or not. Dumping your whatever it was S8 is your problem.


Personally I could not care less about the V vs S8 angle. It is just so misleading to focus->so->narrowly->towards->the->Video to say: Wow, the 24P is here, lets dump the S8 guys.

The S8 will never reach its limit potential if you let it live a life of its own. If you start to compare 35mm PRO filmmaking for commercial purpose vs S8 the S8 is at its dead end for sure but that was never the subject here I assume.

Have you ever watched a really good S8 projected with superb digital sound edits? Limits exploited for a start.

Haven´t even a problem with transferring the S8 to DV for computer edit if the final product is set to be video.

To me the joy is to project S8 reversal film on a big screen. Its close to free to do so.

To do that with DV you spend big bucks to project in the end. Colour is down, resoluton is down and it still offers contour effects in background on the images. Pale flat dead images at a high cost. Is that the goal? Boredom?

Have to add that I have been wide open to new technology always but when I see a light in the tunnel I know there is a steam train heading towards me.


No offending and personally I simply do not care about the V vs S8 issue really.

[Guest]

> How? I would really like to know how this is possible since you cannot put more information on video - is physcally limited by the format.

"video" isn't limited by the video format. it's limited by the the camera (ccd). film on video looks better than video for this very reason, as does hd bumped down...

> things like contrast, color and brightness are all format dependent

yes, but the translation of real world contrast to video signal contrast isn't. film compresses the real world contrast, while video clips it. this affects not only shadow and highlight detail, but also color fidelity and general sharpness.

/matt

1. Actually Matt that is only half true. Each video format has technical specs that is adhere to. DigiBeta for example is 2:1 compression - you will get an image that is already compressed no matter what CCD you use. CCD actually has nothing to do with formats. You can have a DVCam camera use the same CCD as less compressed format. There are some D1 cams and DigitBeta cams that have the exact same size CCD. However, since higher formats "tends" to have a better CCD then your statement is only half true. Sony for example often uses the same CCD in DVCam and their other ENG cams. You can have two cameras that uses 4:1:1 and 4:2:2 colors (I am in NTSC land) with the same CCD. More than likely 422 has better image. Again format specs I thinks plays a bigger role than the CCD.

2. I understand and agree with that. but my particular concern is if the S8 film brings a particular "beautifully compressed" image to a video format (remember we are talking about S8 projected form a DV transfer) but those images are illegal (aka clipped) then how big is that difference? Especially if we are talking about a film stock that is several decades old. Yes you might be able to say its K40 but are you actually seeing K40 colors or is it video colors "enhanced" by the idiosyncratic quality of film (grain, 24fps, etc). Yes I agree that some of the compression is preserved but 2-3, 4 times better??

[Guest]

If is a video the only 24p advantage is to make copies easily in any system format (ntsc/pal) and your edit house must have to be compatible with that new technology.

And my ntsc television can't show my new DV 24p video shooting

Not quite correct. The whole beauty of the 24P miniDV is that it works on a standard 30fps timebase, just like 24fps film transferred to video. See my explanation above of how the Panasonic 24P works.

Roger

So to show in e.g in my television it is 30fps, not the real 24p.

[mattias]

Again format specs I thinks plays a bigger role than the CCD.

sorry, but you're wrong. shoot with an old vhs camera and tape it on digibeta. it will look like shit. now try a broadcast camera and a vhs deck. it will look great.

you're right that high end cameras have better ccd's, but that's not really relevant for the comparison with s8 transferred to video, right?

my particular concern is if the S8 film brings a particular "beautifully compressed" image to a video format (remember we are talking about S8 projected form a DV transfer) but those images are illegal (aka clipped) then how big is that difference?

that's not how it works. the contrast of film isn't that much higher than the contrast of video, even though the contrast range it can *capture* is a lot higher. that's what compression is, and it's preserved even on video. there might be some clipping taking place in the transfer, even if modern telecine machines use further compression instead, but it's far less than had you used a ccd to capture the scene to begin with.

/matt (now with some hang of the quoting function)

[Guest]

s8booster said:

This is an analogue to the film vs video. Nobody get that concentrated when working with video that cost nothing to spend. This is one of the biggest disavantages together with the trash image quality & motion.

As if David Lynch's Twin Peaks (recorded on video) couldn't get him self concentrated during the recordings. Same goes for other films originated on video. It's not technology only which leads to craftmanship, and as if everything is boring just because it's recorded on video. I think your overexaggerating things here. Oh well, I like both formats. Yes I like super 8 more, especially when projected. I like the whole craftmanship of working with super 8 more. I like everything about it more. But I sometimes fear it's future. That's why I keep an eye on other ways of production and on developments. And besides it isn't all that bad, video, not to me.

Paul

[MovieStuff]

As if David Lynch's Twin Peaks (recorded on video) couldn't get him self concentrated during the recordings. Same goes for other films originated on video.

Hi, Paul!

Twin Peaks was shot on film, not video, but I understand what you are saying.

Roger