Kodak's current view on Vision 2 50D and Ektachrome 100D?

[Angus]

I would be happier if the Kahl Ut18 or of course 100D were available more easily....to order from Super8 France or from Wittner I need to send a fax and that is becoming more difficult (I don't even own a modem any more!)*



*actually there's probably one in my laptop.

[T-Scan]

I shot 2 rolls of 100D recently notched for 160ASA in my Nizo 481Macro... I set my filter switch on daylight (ASA rating drops to 100, still no filter) and the images were exposed just fine.

[Jim Carlile]

Uh Jim... you use the 160 but without the 85-filter notch, it exposes correctly, at 100. 100D is 100 Daylight, it does not need the 85-filter.

and

yeah, the 160t/100d notch will work fine. we've been over this a million times and it seems like jim doesn't have a camera that reads the filter notch, which does present a problem, but the rest of us will get the correct reading of 100d just as we would with v2 200t if it was notched as 160t.

You guys have a fantastic knack for completely missing the point, as well as holding two contradictory explanations in mind at the same time.

I could care less what most specialized users could do, or know what to do. I am merely stating what KODAK can do given what THEY know about the super 8 system and the general user..

There's no way in the world that they are going to release a DAYLIGHT super 8 film with a filter notch! Or ignore the consequences of the SMPTE notch standards with a wierd daylight film that has an unusual ASA speed that most newer cameras cannot read correctly.

What planet are you guys living on?

Not only that, but if people think they have problems with the 64T notch size, the 100D is a much more insoluble dilemma for most people-- to both deal with and to understand.

And hey Mattias-- last week you tried to argue with me about what John Pytlak stated was the reason for Kodak's VISION 200 notch decisions-- so what credibility do YOU have? You have no idea why Kodak does what they do, obviously.

And when it's explained to you, first you deny it, then you want to argue about it! Their reasons make perfect sense.

Bottom Line: among every other reason regarding potential demand, or whatever-- the technical problems of providing a daylight 100 ASA stock vis a vis the super 8 system makes an official release of 100D very unlikely. That's all that matters--not what some people can do to tweak the film cartridge or compensate for daylight film.

[Jim Carlile]

I shot 2 rolls of 100D recently notched for 160ASA in my Nizo 481Macro... I set my filter switch on daylight (ASA rating drops to 100, still no filter) and the images were exposed just fine.

That's because your camera is obviously SMPTE compliant. That's great-- that's what is supposed to happen.

But most newer XL cameras are not. So they'll expose the film at ASA 160. That's 2/3 stop underexposed. In low light situations, that could be disastrous for the general user who doesn't know what's going on.

Kodak has to factor that in. With 64T, the speed notch is off for many cameras, but at least the film is overexposed. That's preferable.

[downix]

Hrm? Let me see:

Kodak notches it for 160, but doesn't put in the filter notch, and you get 100 speed, no filter.

Seems pretty straightforward to me, so pardon me if I'm confused.

[Jim Carlile]

Hrm? Let me see:

Kodak notches it for 160, but doesn't put in the filter notch, and you get 100 speed, no filter.

Seems pretty straightforward to me, so pardon me if I'm confused.

Only on some cameras. But not all of them. In fact, a huge number of XL cameras made in the late 70's will read the ASA 160 speed notch as ASA 160, no matter what.

That's the problem. Kodak has to think about every user. The same thing with Tri-X. The reason for this is because in the early 70's, Kodak came out with their 'G' film. It was both daylight and tungsten, speed-notched for 250, but with no filter notch, because using the filter would have cut down on the effective film speed.

So....most older SMPTE cameras would improperly rate the film at ASA 100. In order to combat this, manufacturers came up with non SMPTE cameras that could read these films at the higher speed.

It's all confusing, but it's a problem that Kodak has to deal with. If they put a filter notch in E100D, and speed-notch it at 160 ASA, then inevitably, many users will ruin the film by sliding the filter switch to 'daylight.'

They have to take this into consideration-- it's easy to say, "just put a filter notch in the cartridge"-- but imagine the complaints.

[super8man]

Jim's right...nuff said. :!:

And it is kind of funny imagining even maintaining support for HARDWARE that was last produced MORE THAN 25 years ago...think about the last time a computer software manufacturer supported anything past the beta testers...not very many.

Bottom line, to stay alive in this hobby, you need multiple cameras AND filmstock formats (single 8, regular 8, super 8) to keep your filmmaking endeavours going in this day and age...

Mike

[Angus]

Kodak has to factor that in. With 64T, the speed notch is off for many cameras, but at least the film is overexposed. That's preferable.

Really?

[Lunar07]

Hrm? Let me see:

Kodak notches it for 160, but doesn't put in the filter notch, and you get 100 speed, no filter.

Seems pretty straightforward to me, so pardon me if I'm confused.

Only on some cameras. But not all of them. In fact, a huge number of XL cameras made in the late 70's will read the ASA 160 speed notch as ASA 160, no matter what.
[.............................................]

It is no problem if you know what you are doing, and if you know your camera well.
Even on the non-smpte cameras with no filter pin, yes the user has to move filter switch to B, and adjust the exposure manually. No manual exposure, then get a new camera. Why is the assumption that a Super8 user is clueless? This is phtography, and if a user is not willing to understand what ASA is, then they should not be in thi business. If a user is not willing to understand how to manipulate exposure, then maybe they should move to video.
Kodak already knows that this is a niche market. Even with E64T, they knew it. And they already know that to get to Super8, a user should know a thing or two about exposure.
Maybe it is time to retire these fully automatic cameras, and start using something that allows for manual manipulation or at least -/+ correction.
The greatest thing that is hurting Super8 is not the notch system, and the non-smpte cameras - it is the users themselves who insist on undervaluing this format. The users who are so spoiled, they want everything done for them. Think about it Jim!

[Lunar07]

Jim's right...nuff said. :!:

And it is kind of funny imagining even maintaining support for HARDWARE that was last produced MORE THAN 25 years ago...think about the last time a computer software manufacturer supported anything past the beta testers...not very many.

Bottom line, to stay alive in this hobby, you need multiple cameras AND filmstock formats (single 8, regular 8, super 8) to keep your filmmaking endeavours going in this day and age...

Mike

But also we should be more selective in what we buy. The advantage with Super8 is that it is so easy to buy a camera for a dollar. The disadvantage of Super8 is that it is ALSO easy to buy a camera for a dollar. Maybe it is time (with E64T notching and some future 100D notch) to be more selective in what we buy, so that all these 40/160 TTL metering camera with no manual exposure can be relegated to the trash bin once and for all.

[Will2]

Jim has a very good point, Kodak will have to keep those compatibility issues in mind.

But, with Super 8's migration to the Pro Cinematography side of Kodak, there could be a chance... although much slimmer than I used to think thanks to Jim.

[Muckymuck]

I would have thought that with Super 8 being part of Kodak's pro cinematography line, film speeds and cartridge notching for auto would be a secondary consideration as most pro's will be using external metering and manual exposure? Just my 2d worth...

[mattias]

I am merely stating what KODAK can do given what THEY know about the super 8 system and the general user..

i'm sure they know that 100d is the third most supported speed after 40t and 160t (tied with 25d). more cameras support 100d than 64t. if you have a 40t/160t only camera, which must include you since you're always making a fuzz about it, then you're equally fucked with both 64t and 100d so nothing will be worse. [EDIT: i see now that you've realized that and claim that 2/3 overexposure is better than vice versa. for the record i disagree]

There's no way in the world that they are going to release a DAYLIGHT super 8 film with a filter notch!

well, they do release tungsten film without one, so i wouldn't completely rule it out, but i never suggested they would, did i?

Or ignore the consequences of the SMPTE notch standards with a wierd daylight film that has an unusual ASA speed that most newer cameras cannot read correctly.

100d is an smpte standard notching, readable by most cameras. what's the problem?

as for the rest of your post, you're really starting to piss me off. i talk to kodak pretty much every week, like all professional filmmakers do, and now you're saying that a slot car collector's interpretation of a kodak pr guy's post on a web board is more credible? that's funny.

(please don't start a flame war over that until you've addressed the points above, ok?)

/matt

[T-Scan]

Well if there are cameras out there that can't expose 100D correctly, then what other current stocks do they expose correctly? Almost everything offered today is off beat from the 40/160 era... it's just that most cameras are more easily tricked, or more versitile than some others.

Even on more versitile cameras, some stocks leave you having to manually compensate. Thats just the way it is now if we want to keep shooting newer and better stocks.

[super8man]

as for the rest of your post, you're really starting to piss me off. i talk to kodak pretty much every week, like all professional filmmakers do, and now you're saying that a slot car collector's interpretation of a kodak pr guy's post on a web board is more credible? that's funny.

(please don't start a flame war over that until you've addressed the points above, ok?)

/matt

Resorting to ad hominem argument tactics are we?