Super 8 advertising in today's world?

[mattias]

i agree with guest. film *is* dead if we're talking large scale amateur use, and super8 *is* dead if we're talking professional filmmaking. and film *is* in fact losing ground fast in still photography, among professionals as well as amateurs. if you had read guest's post carefully you would have seen that there was a clear point made that super8 is a great format for enthusiasts, but just because you love super8 it doesn't mean it's right for everyone or that kodak are stupid if they don't advertise. to me those who suggest that everyone should shoot super8 are almost as stupid as those who suggest that nobody should...

/matt

[Carlos 8mm]

My grandfather was a Photographer. My aunt Ana was too.
Still I conserve beautiful originals 10 x13 plates of glass or celluloid from photos that my grandfather took. And beautiful paper positives too. It´s a valious piece of Villa María and Villa Nueva´s history. (Both cities are separarted by a river.)
Always in my family exists photography & cinema (Our first movie camera was a Pathe 9,5 mm Motocamera in the mid 1930´s)

I love capture the life with photographic systems, like you.

Recently I was whatching old 16 mm (and two beautiful 35 mm filmed in the 1920´s) documentary films of my city, And just can say guys, those B&W images projected have a beauty and feeling that none of HD video systems can´t give.

And I agree with you, guys, when you say that vinyl gives best sound quality than CD. But the problem with vinyl discs is that you need a very sofisticated (and expensive) equipment to listen without sound distortion.
"Good is expensive"

My fear about HD Video thechnology is the fact that it improves every day. To preserve the life of phothography & motion picture films, we need more sensitive, sharper and grainless emulsions in order to be always several steps ahead the digital video. Always.

Unlike the film formats, video formats are very rigid (just remember we have since more than 50 years ago 525 and 625 lines video systems).
This type of limitations "plays in our team".

Carlos.

[S8 Booster]

Disagree completely that DIGI has or will catch up in image quality forseeable future even though PRO´s might prefer it over film for convenience.

Check again: http://www.8mm.filmshooting.com/scripts ... ight=nikon

http://medfmt.8k.com/mf/filmwins.html

National Geographic Rates Film 400% better than latest Nikon D1X Digital

Erwin Puts, noted Leica lens tester and author, noted in PN014 of his APEMC newsletter (dated 18 Aug 2002) that National Geographic rates the Nikon D1X images for 1/2 page images, while film (slides) are still useful for a double page spread, a 4:1 difference at their quality standards. Mr. Puts notes that this corresponds with his own tests, confirming National Geographic's standards. While slides can often achieve resolutions of 100-120 lpmm (at least, with Leica lenses , most digital cameras run in the 30 to 40 lpmm resolution range. This difference is inherent in digital cameras which require anti-aliasing filters (which are low pass filters) to reduce the high frequency data which contains fine contrast and high resolution data from the lens.

R

[S8 Booster]

And: http://clarkvision.com/imagedetail/film ... gital.html
and: http://clarkvision.com/imagedetail/scan ... #testarea2

R

[mattias]

when it comes to image quality which is "better" isn't very interesting while what's "good enough" is. as soon as digital imaging is good enough to not make the extra hassle and expense of film worthwhile film is dead. for the enthusiasts this will take a long time, but for amateurs it has already happened and for the pros it's happening as we speak. i honestly don't understand how anyone can fail to see this, and even less how anyone can take it as far as to ask those who don't to fuck off.

/matt

[Angus]

And I agree with you, guys, when you say that vinyl gives best sound quality than CD. But the problem with vinyl discs is that you need a very sofisticated (and expensive) equipment to listen without sound distortion.
"Good is expensive"

I have just one line of text for you.

Systemdek IIx900



Bought mine in 1991 and proceeded to replace my CDs with vinyl (where possible) because the CDs were *totally* un-linstenabe compared with the vinyl.

I have never been satisfied with the images from the digital cameras I have borrowed, for one thing show me a digi that can do proper, detailed, close up (<1 inch) technical work! But the contrast and colours are always lacking - as Mr. Clark says in his excellent article.

[S8 Booster]

Digital sound systems will be better:
This has the capacity it S+P do not screw it up again.:
http://www.superaudio-cd.com/general_info.html
http://www.superaudio-cd.com/


For vinyl I´d definately go for linear tracking stuff.
Even battered records will sound almost as good as new: (My experience)

This somewhat extreme:


http://www.musicalsurroundings.com/clea ... inear.html



More realistic:



R

[Carlos 8mm]

Aaah, Groove Linear Reading!

No tone arm distortion.

Beautiful devices.

Carlos

[Angus]

My baby 'cept mine is all black.

To be honest I don't find linear tracking tt's are any better. I'd only ever ditch the Systemdek if I were able to afford something really esoteric.

And to keep on topic, my favourite S8 camera...

[/img]

[AziTheGreat]

Film is losing ground to video on many fronts. That's one if the reasons, in my opinion, that Kodak is still making S8 film stock: 16 and 35mm are often too expensive for the enthusiast filmmaker, and if it weren't for S8, many of them would use video. Kodak has S8 out there to hook students and enthusiasts on film, with the hope they they'll keep on shooting film.

Things have changed since the era when S8 was a home movie format. Today, memories are recorded in volume; you're not talking about buying a few rolls of film for your vacation (perhaps 96 exposures), but rather a memory stick that holds 960 exposures. And instead of a few 3-minute carts of K40, you have a 6 hour VHS tape. S8 is, in my opinion, thoroughly incompatible with the mentality of today's home video shooters.

As far as advertising the format to prospective filmmakers, I think you are absolutely right. But I'm afraid that S8 really has no place on the average person's family vacation. Advertising to that market would likely be a waste.

[mattias]

well put azi. all sad but true.

/matt

[Patrick]

I'm tending to agree that advertising for the family home movie shooters probably would be futile. They'd probably prefer the convenience of instant playback, longer recording times and the ease of recording sound with no fuss. However, I was at an indoor sunday market a year ago where this guy has a super 8 projector set up at his stall projecting films. People walking past often take an interest and stop by. A young couple also stopped by. They had just previously exposed and had developed a super 8 film (their first). The guy at the stall screened it on his projector. The resulting footage was very much home movie - showing both the couple (parents) with their baby. The question is I wonder - why did they choose to get into super 8 whereas most couples nowadays would buy a video camera?

I guess super 8 might appeal to families who have a low income. Video cameras are expensive and sometimes super 8 cameras can be had for next to nothing.

One of the above threads read that there is a fear that digital video may improve in technology so much that it could supercede film. Like many people, I find this hard to believe. However, I was talking to this guy who runs his own private theartre - showing old movies. He is a projectionist and has done just about all formats - 16mm, 35mm and DVD projection. He said that there is a type of DVD player in existence - I cannot remember the name of it - which costs thousands of dollars. It is a specially designed projection DVD system for screen very high resolution images on a large screen in a theartre setting.

There was a premiere at a cinema some time ago - featuring this state of the art DVD player/projector. The people attending were apparently expecting to laugh at this machine's performance and ridicule it. Though to quote this guy's own words: 'It left 35mm for dead.' According to the viewing audience - it was not only equal to but had higher resolution than 35mm movie film. I really find this hard to believe. I cannot believe this until I actually see it for myself. How on earth can a medium like video which uses pixels etc possibly compete with 35mm film on a big screen? All of the DVD players that I have seen myself in smallish theartres look crap.

[ericMartinJarvies]

hello,

i think the best way to educate people about super8 is to show them super8. everyone has a dvd player these days, so why not offer a dvd on this site that shows the top super8 cameras from each manufacturer(of their time, and of today's opinion) in action, shooting film, processing it, transferring it, editing it, and delivering it. i will make a standing offer to everyone on this site in a new post/thread ... go back to the main menu and look for: I WILL PAY FOR A SUPER8 COMPARISON PRODUCTION! who's interested?

[Roget]

I think one of the obvious reasons Super-8 is more alive and more well than it was even 5 years ago can be found right here. And in other enthusiast's websites. The internet has given anyone with an offbeat, niche hobby a voice and a convienient way to communicate with the few others who share his or her interest.

Combine this free PR with the fact that keeping Super-8 going costs Kodak next to nothing in R&D (how long has K40 been the same emulsion?), and you've got a format that's got a few years left in it.

Not to mention, heaven forbid, the desktop video revolution, which has enhanced our creative potential 1000%. Telecined Super-8 edited in a non-linear system -- to me, this is the stuff dreams are made of. I love shooting film, from Super-8 to 4x5 sheets, because it's aesthetically pleasing, and because it takes a fair amount of skill to do it right. The sheer amount of labor (mental & physical) just to get the optimum exposure is a breath of fresh air in today's instant-on, instant-everything world.

If Kodak had to spend even $1 million/year in advertising to keep the format alive, I can assure you that all of us who cherish film, would lose a cherished friend.

For most of us, Super-8 is the only chance we get to shoot real motion picture film. Admit it, even moving up to 16mm would break most of our banks (and few hobbies are worth having to take a second job to support!).

At this moment in history, I think we Super-8 freaks have a wonderful thing going. The ability to take real film and edit it on non-linear system back in our spare bedroom or den or walk-in closet, and make our own little mini epics complete with surround sound, if we desire. And, we can shoot "home movies" and capture these times in a format that will last for more than the 10 or 20 years video gives you.

Don't forget to project them for your kids!

Roget

[ericMartinJarvies]

nicely put roget.