New K40 cartridge free-flutter... Are we sure?

Post by **Ugo** » Tue Feb 18, 2003 8:31 pm

I shot four k40 cartridges. Two of these are ok. The others are "jumping". Kodak Italy says the stock I'm using (3/2004; cod: 3631 1724) is free-defect. But I'm afraid. I think the "jumping problem" isn't solved.
Has someone an opinion about this?

Post by **S8 Booster** » Tue Feb 18, 2003 8:51 pm

> This has been looked into by them and all cartridges
> numbered 3631 7768 onwards should be free of this
> problem.

Seems like your cartridges are of the bad numbers.

Check more here: http://www.8mm.filmshooting.com/scripts ... cartrdiges

R

Post by **Ugo** » Tue Feb 18, 2003 11:56 pm

Thank you S8 booster,
the problem is that Kodak Italy has a list of the right stock (free-defect). They say my number is right...
But I remember I have read on this forum cartridges numbered 3631 7768 onwards are free-defect.
I'll buy the next stock from Wittner in Germany. I'm sure he has a fine working stock...(I hope...)
Greeetings from Italy!
Ugo

Post by **Lucas Lightfeat** » Wed Feb 19, 2003 1:33 am

Hi guys - some clarification,

When I returned my bad numbered stock to Kodak UK, who are normally pretty cool, they sent me replacement stock numbered 3631 1118 and then 3631 1120 - both expiring 03/2004. When I told them they had replaced my stock with dodgy numbered stock, I was told not to worry - that the numbers have gone full circle and are back down in the one thousands again! :?

Question: Is the 3631 a number that's always been there on the S8 K40?

Scary though, that people are having these problems. Very scary! This means that Kodak may need to be made aware AGAIN that their stock is shit and in need of a recall.

Oh, mercy!

Lucas

Post by **S8 Booster** » Wed Feb 19, 2003 5:42 am

Hmmmm....?

Might be that the series have rounded up. Anybody performed the not fool proof "RUB" test?

Anyway, how comes this into play: http://kodak.com/global/en/service/tib/tib5211.shtml ?

Some related linx:
http://www.8mm.filmshooting.com/scripts ... +numbering

R

Post by **Lucas Lightfeat** » Wed Feb 19, 2003 1:38 pm

But that's even more confusing....the numbers are in two sets of four, not a set of three and a set of six :?

If the numbers have gone around, how is it that the first set of four numbers are the same?

This is ridiculously confusing.

Lucas

Post by **Ugo** » Wed Feb 19, 2003 2:54 pm

These codes aren't important for our problem (I think....)
On the side of yellow you find:
---------------------------------------------------
Process before
traiter avant
zu entwicklen bis
revelar antes de
_______________________________________
03/2004 (or other date)

3631 1724 (or other code)
_______________________________________
[/img]CAT 505 3335

-------------------------------------------------------

Well: the "Batch Number Changes" are about the CAT code

Old: YYY ZZZZ
505 3335

New: YYY ZZZZZZ
505 ??3335

Anyway there is a big confusion on these codes. Example (from Kodak catalogue):
Cat 524 3456 is the negative vision 200 T code
Cat 524 2987 is the Ektachrome code. So the emulsion numer is the same!!!
This is a typical italian way of life! Is the Kodak an italian company??? :o
Ugo

Post by **S8 Booster** » Wed Feb 19, 2003 3:20 pm

Confusion complete.

Download this new product catalog and go to the last page. Super8 K40. No number matches like CAT No is 510 9294. Mightbe for batch sales only though? Over to the RUB test?

The technical info over is from Oct 2002. Maybe the "new" cartridges not yet into shops?

http://kodak.com/US/plugins/acrobat/en/ ... lorRev.pdf

R

mIke · Post by **mIke** » Wed Feb 19, 2003 4:21 pm

Hi everyone!

I can confirm the kind of cart' exchange Lucas reported. I send a couple of 3/2004 cart's (had a jamming one - 1 out of 3) to Kodak and got back a 2/2003 batch replacement. Furthermore they (Kodak official) stated the critical expiry dead line is 2003 and any 2004 stuff would work normally.
Also if Kodak (Switzerland) receives a jamming cartridge which film inside has - by this reason - then been torn by hand they like to call it a >damage caused by the camera<.
No comment.

Post by **Lucas Lightfeat** » Wed Feb 19, 2003 8:44 pm

OK, so all that this does is take us back a few posts to whether Kodak has sorted out it's problem as it thought it had. I hear many reports on this forum of jitter in good number carts. I've just shot a roll of K40 that sounded at times like it was going through a blender and I'm worried.

Lucas

mIke · Post by **mIke** » Wed Feb 19, 2003 9:09 pm

Correction

*************************
I send a couple of 3/2004 cart's (had a
jamming one - 1 out of 3) to Kodak and got back a 2/2004 batch replacement.
***************************

I currently run the "new" replacement batch. After all I have one month less time to send the film in. I' ll tell you if problems should arise.

Best. Mike

Post by **kenasehc** » Fri Feb 21, 2003 6:25 am

Many of the posts above are beyond me, but I just received 4 k40 rolls in the mail and at least one is jittery (I'm too scared to look at the other 3). I had purchased these over the telephone DIRECTLY from Kodak in NY in late Jan 2003, exp. date in 2004, so they're supposed to be the new batch. I'm waiting on more, some that were purchased in same order and some that were purchased through Kodak in Hollywood a week later. I am also pretty sure they all had textured sides.

I shot this for student film and cannot reshoot because of time and money. I can and WILL complain to Kodak, but I can't send them my reels and replacements will help but not fix my movie. I'm wondering if perhaps the telecine house I send this stuff to will be able to do anything about it (without depleting my savings). I'm also going to edit this non-linear, so I might have to go in frame by frame and correct this stuff. Anyone had any experience in such tasks?

Post by **jessh** » Fri Feb 21, 2003 7:58 am

kenasehc wrote:I'm also going to edit this non-linear, so I might have to go in frame by frame and correct this stuff. Anyone had any experience in such tasks?

this software: http://home.bip.net/gunnart/video/deshaker.htm combined with virtualdub(http://www.virtualdub.org/) can hopefully help solve your problem. I haven't used it myself, but it is designed to stabilize shaky footage, so it should be able to atleast somewhat correct some of your footage. Plus it is free.

Doing this with any software will result in some loss in resolution, image area and part of your frame(hopefully you didnt frame to tightly), but may be able to almost totally fix the problem, depending on how severe it is.

Good Luck

~Jess

Post by **kenasehc** » Fri Feb 21, 2003 4:23 pm

I'll be using Final Cut Pro, which I'm yet to actually learn, but I know Adobe Premiere very well, and have done some image correction in it before by exporting to .flm and then using Photoshop to quickly fix problems (like boom mics in frame).

This looks like my best solution, although most of my framings are very tight, so what I might end up doing is matting the frame to a 1.37:1 or even as far as 1.66:1 to compensate. I'm not even adverse to side mattings; something tells me the nature of the film would fit with the odd AR. This won't be for a few months, so I'm open to other suggestions in the meantime.

Post by **Lucas Lightfeat** » Fri Feb 21, 2003 5:14 pm

I'm really depressed about this. I was planning to shoot a film soon. Now I feel like giving up on Super8 altogether. It hardly makes me feel it's worthwhile making an effort to make a good film if it's going to look like shit however I do it due to Kodak's neglegence. I have a test film to send off, at it sounded like shit running through the camera

Lucas

Filmshooting

New K40 cartridge free-flutter... Are we sure?

New K40 cartridge free-flutter... Are we sure?

Ugo

Re: New K40 cartridge free-flutter... Are we sure?

jitter

Re: jitter