***PRO8mm 2005 SHOWREEL Review***

[Santo]

Just got this popped through my mailslot and I've watched it a couple of times.

I don't know about all this other conjecture and discussion on Pro8's business practices and if their transfer equipment is "good enough" and everything -- and prices, well they are just plain too high -- but I do know this:

I was stunned watching the incredible sharpness and clarity and grainlessness of the new Vision2 stocks presented on this new disk. There are images which could only have been the 100t and what can you say? Certainly there are some of the new shots likely done with the 500t which exhibit granularity, but they're still really sharp.

There's a mix of the "degraded Hollywood" look shots we've seen before, some grainy shots obviously made with the really fast exr stocks -- which looks cool, too. But have a look for the shots of the lillypads and a seperate section with the frogs. And the high contrast b and w motocross section. Though it's cliched to say so, the new negative super 8 stocks really do look as good as 16mm (in the classic 60's - 80's films shot with it). For example, EVIL DEAD could certainly have been shot on this new Vision2 super 8 negative. No question about it -- I just put it in the DVD player and had a look at a few minutes -- this new super 8 stuff is right up to that level image quality-wise. In fact, the new 100t is even better. Better colour, less grain.

I would highly recommend anybody order this video to have a look for themselves. Then when you read about somebody downplaying the new negatives vs. K40 when it comes to grain issues -- it's laughable! Also, it's a real eye-opener with regards to how good even Pro8's now slightly less than state-of-the-art transfer system really is. I would be very pleased to get transfers as good as this on my next project.

I had been curious since seeing Daniel's single frame of Vision2 100t super 8 in motion looks like. It is startlingly sharp, appears to be shot on a larger film gauge, and is grainless on this regular definition DVD sample.

Now, if only Kodak would release V2 100t themselves on super 8 so we could all enjoy the ultimate super8 stock at a more realistic price.

[twotoneska]

Keep in mind, though, that they will always put the best of the best on a show reel.

I agree fully on the negative issue, though. You would think Kodak would get to putting their own stocks together, since it is obvious that Pro8 has sparked interest in the others... But then again, Kodak seems to always be behind the rest of the world when it comes to Super 8.

[mattias]

Then when you read about somebody downplaying the new negatives vs. K40 when it comes to grain issues -- it's laughable!

why? downplaying is of course stupid, i'd chose negative over reversal most days of the week and if i don't it's most likely for budget reasons, but k40 does have lower grain. there's no question about that.

/matt

[Santo]

Request this free demo reel and see for yourself.

[mattias]

i don't have to, i've shot them myself. correctly exposed k40 super 8 is even less grainy than vision2 500t in 16mm. it's also not even close to as sharp, very sensitive to blowouts, has rather unnatural colors, and so on, but you still can't accuse it of being grainy.

/matt

[reflex]

it's also not even close to as sharp, very sensitive to blowouts, has rather unnatural colors, and so on...

Are we talking about you or Kodachrome?

Couldn't resist.

[mattias]

Are we talking about you or Kodachrome?

i don't get it, honestly. sorry. do people generally laugh at your jokes?

/matt

[Alex]

Keep in mind, though, that they will always put the best of the best on a show reel.

Nothing wrong with that. As long as all the shots are done in Super-8 and there are no 16mm mix-ins.

[Santo]

i don't have to, i've shot them myself. correctly exposed k40 super 8 is even less grainy than vision2 500t in 16mm.

Hmmm...k40 super 8 is even less grainy than 500 speed film in 16mm format. Okay. Hardly a way to accurately judge how 100 speed is going to compare in super8 form. In fact, how can you even imagine it is? It is difficult to even estimate how grainy V2 200t is in super 8 without seeing, let alone jump all the way down to 100 speed and guestimate like that. There is a really big difference between what must be the new V2 500 shots on this reel and the V2 100 or even 200. Huge.

but you still can't accuse it of being grainy.

Chopping up the clips that are obviously from V2 100t from this show reel disk (the finest grain images, anyway) and editing them and playing against any transfered K40 I have access to, including your short, demonstrate noticeable touches of grain in both, with the finest grain negatives showing no more, and perhaps less.

It's revolutionary compared to the old Vision stocks once it's taken down to super 8 size. As has been remarked on here before, the V2 500t super 8 appears like the old Vision 200 did. This 100 stuff is fantastic from what I'm seeing and takes it to another level. Pretty amazing in the images I cite. I wish I could see some more.

[mattias]

Hmmm...k40 super 8 is even less grainy than 500 speed film in 16mm format. Okay. Hardly a way to accurately judge how 100 speed is going to compare in super8 form.

that wasn't my intent either. there's nothing else in that sentence but the literal meaning.

Chopping up the clips that are obviously from V2 100t from this show reel disk (the finest grain images, anyway) and editing them and playing against any transfered K40 I have access to, including your short

my short is a very bad example. it was transferred as a one-light on an mk3. most of the grain you see is actually video noise brought out by color correction as well as what i think is dust on the crt. not that this hurt, it sort of added to the nostalgic feel of the film, but it's nothing i'm proud of from a technical point of view. look at all those great northwestern snowboarding movies that seem to pop up here on a monthly basis instead.

This 100 stuff is fantastic from what I'm seeing and takes it to another level.

you're most likely correct (i haven't seen the reel and on the site they only have the old one (which sucks btw)) but i have never questioned that either. i agreed there's no reason to downplay negative due to the grain, but it sounded like you were trying to downplay k40 for the same reason.

/matt

[Roy Brown]

I just received the 2005 showreel and while I thought there were some very nice shots, I felt the demo was poorly done. 99% of everything was handheld and shaky. I can see were handheld would be appropiate in the concert and wedding shots but it would have been nice to see some scenes where the camera is steady. It would have also been helpful if they had filmed some scenes with a basic light kit. I mean who wants to spend hundreds of dollars to shoot some handheld shots of flowers!! The public service piece was pretty good. I thought the DVD Image quality was average but I wonder what compression they used. Anyway Kudos for Pro8mm for sending the DVD quickly and all in all I enjoyed it. I am a big fan of Kodachrome and I suspect that in the outdoor shots it would compare very favorably to the negative stocks at a much lower price. Of course its wonderful to have the negative stocks as options. The look of the Vision 2 200 asa was especially appealing for me and it would be great to pop in a cartridge of the Vision 2 500 asa and film in available light nearly as well as video. Well thats my 2 cents worth