E64 Results

[sarmoti]

I guess, but but it's still better than the other option... No S8 color reversal at all, don't you think?

[T-Scan]

I still don't accept the amature camera excuse. I own a few cameras that cost $25 that recognize 64T. I mean, are we talking about homeless people trying to shoot film or what? If your shooting film at $15 per cart, or shooting film period... you can afford more than a $10 camera, or at least have the knowlege to compensate. I have not had any swirling blue grains on my 64T. That symptom was present on the pre production carts before they made some adjustments, but my films have all had a nice grain texture.

[sarmoti]

I mean, are we talking about homeless people trying to shoot film or what?

I think that if we had a classic quote gallery, that one would be near the top... some funny S#!%!

[Arislan]

Seconded.

[matt5791]

I mean, are we talking about homeless people trying to shoot film or what?

I think that if we had a classic quote gallery, that one would be near the top... some funny S#!%!

Agree.

I am going to be shooting some 64t in February for the first time - I was going to use V2 200T, but I like the sound of the "modern look" and better exposure latitude than K40 so I am going to give it a go.

Will be using a Beaulieu 4008 with the Angenieux 8-64 lens - anyone shot 64T with this lens yet?

Matt

[Angus]

I still don't accept the amature camera excuse. I own a few cameras that cost $25 that recognize 64T..

The vast majority of super 8 cameras produced cannot recognise 64T, and that includes some high end models such as the Elmo 1012 s-xl, often grouped as one of the top 3 super 8 cameras of all time.

[Angus]

I am going to be shooting some 64t in February for the first time - I was going to use V2 200T, but I like the sound of the "modern look" and better exposure latitude than K40 so I am going to give it a go.

I would imagine 200T has greater latitude and looks more "modern" (whatever that means) than 64T...or any reversal film.

[tlatosmd]

I still don't accept the amature camera excuse. I own a few cameras that cost $25 that recognize 64T. I mean, are we talking about homeless people trying to shoot film or what? If your shooting film at $15 per cart, or shooting film period... you can afford more than a $10 camera, or at least have the knowlege to compensate. I have not had any swirling blue grains on my 64T. That symptom was present on the pre production carts before they made some adjustments, but my films have all had a nice grain texture.

Its color temperature was yet another issue with 64T in addition to grain, yet not identical T-Scan. Plus, the right daylight filter doesn't interfere with graininess as much as to add significantly to 64T's existing grain.

It has less contrast, that's why it might appear more realistic to people who have been at the set, not because of it's over-saturated colors. Those who haven't been there see multi-colored grain and vintage, over-saturated colors.

Most cameras can't read it properly, so it was no try for the amateur market, and that's also how Kodak announced it, as a step into the pro direction. However, the resulting image is technically inferior except for latitude, widening the gap between S8 and 16mm that had almost become non-existant due to K40 and modern digital transfers.

I'm not saying bring back K40. Big K, for their own unspoken reasons, have decided not to, closing down even their very last own lab.

However, 64T was the same strategy they'd used with 7240. They simply looked up what hardly popular stocks had remained left unsold in their 35mm department, and thought they could get rid of it by cutting it into S8, for that small-gauge crowd that would be thankful for anything at all, especially with K40 gone.

64T was the closest non-Kodachrome emulsion ever to K40 without research and development? Geez, there've been lots of compatible 40 and 160ASA emulsions with better results than 64T, such as Ektachrome160 or Ektachrome40, in S8 and by Kodak alone. There were two or three-digit other 40ASA S8 emulsions with the E6 process by other companies even though they were selling far less than Kodak ever did.

And you still think sacrificing all that in the name of some latitude without giving a proper replacement is worth it? How viable can S8 ever be without a proper replacement for its best-selling stock ever? All the negative stocks together don't make up the sales volumes K40 has had, and 64T can't add much if it requires special, rare cams on the one hand and shows amateur results on the other.

And don't tell us about what it looks like projected. Heck, we've reached a level where TV and computer screen appearance due to telecining & NLE means much more for S8 sales than anything else.

[MovieStuff]

I still don't accept the amature camera excuse.

It's not an "excuse" but, rather, a consideration regarding the type of people often shooting super 8, many of which don't really understand how f-stops work and how to compensate. While I agree that shooting the new E64T is very doable and I like the results, to say that they can simply go buy another camera that will work for E64T presumes that these people would know what to look for. It is very clear from many discussions on this very forum that many would not, even if you or I do.

Roger

[John_Pytlak]

Kodak introduced this stock for amateurs. But they introduced a stock that does not work with lots and lots of amateur cameras. So the frustrations can be understood. The beauty of S8 is that you have cameras that can shoot film on auto pilot. Point and let the camera determine the exposure. Kodak play games with the words "amateur" and "pro" and use them in relative ways that fit their strategies.
Is E64T amateur or pro format? Kodak says it is for the amateur crowd. But it is clear that the ASA and balance prevents it from being used in an amateur camera. How can we blame the K40 crowd after that?

All of the Super-8 films are now products in the Kodak Entertainment Imaging (PROFESSIONAL motion picture) catalog. Although "amateurs" may use them, the products are intended to support PROFESSIONAL filmmaking. In the case of E64T, the intent is to provide a reversal film having a different "look" than color negative film, and to provide filmaking students (who will hopefully become professional filmmakers) a color film and process convenient for basic filmmaking courses.

Standard SMPTE 166 provides for notching cartridges for an EI-64 tungsten balance film. To save costs, some cameras do not recognize all film speeds allowed by the SMPTE standard.

[super8man]

I think that should read MOST cameras do not invoke all the settings put forth in SMPTE 166...including the Bauer 715XLS with the Angenieux 6-90mm - a "professional" camera if ever there was one.

I would put forth that the real reason most cameras only meter those two film speeds is due to the camera manufacturers at the time KNEW that the only game in town was Kodak with their K40 and their E160/Tri-X filmstocks. The other films available were novelties or not widely available.

So, in that light, it was not for cost cutting in the classic sense, but more likely it would have been wasteful to bother including settings for films that were not likely to be available in any given market (think global here).

That's why only the early cameras (developed prior to 1975ish) have the chance of reading anything other than 40/160.

The fact that later cameras only read those setting has NOTHING TO DO WITH PROFESSIONALISM. Last time I checked, a Brownie camera in the hands of a professional can be considered the professional camera of choice. Same with super 8. The film is not professional, the people are in their pursuit. And that doesn't mean they get paid either.

No, the loss of K40 will go down as the single biggest death nell of super 8 period. Before this, video was the single biggest reason for the demise.

Interestingly, I believe Roger's Workprinter invention will go down as the one invention that actually REJUVENATED K40 sales. It goes without saying, but I shall, that websites such as this one and mine amongst others are also responsible for maintaining Kodak's sales in super 8 generally.

I remain optimistic but not silly about super 8.

Best,
Mike

[audadvnc]

I would imagine 200T has greater latitude and looks more "modern" (whatever that means) than 64T...or any reversal film.

I don't think that "modern" should be a very big consideration for Kodak or users. The process and format differences between negative and reversal stocks are merely practical, like comparing a wrench versus a pair of pliers - similar but not the same. They're tools; use them as appropriate.

As for "blue" E64T shot with 85 filters, that's like complaining that your drip coffee pot clogs up when you use ultra-fine ground espresso. Don't bash the stock if you refuse to filter it correctly.

Another retort:

... bring back K40. Big K, for their own unspoken reasons, have decided not to...

But Big K as represented by John P has stated its reasoning over and over. Some people just refuse to listen.

And -

I think that should read MOST cameras do not invoke all the settings put forth in SMPTE 166...including the Bauer 715XLS with the Angenieux 6-90mm - a "professional" camera if ever there was one.

Well, Bauer stupidly wired their otherwise excellent S715XL for 40/160. The modification is dead simple for anyone who knows which end of a soldering iron to hold. I've posted that very mod on the Super8Wiki site. Modify your cameras, don't blame Kodak for your camera's shortcomings.

[super8man]

I politely disagree with the idea of Bauer (or anyone else) being stupid about the 40/160 deal...it is just like saying a car manufacturer is stupid for not making their cars run not only gasoline but also on:

hydrogen,

CNG (compressed natual gas),

LPG (propane),

E85 (ethanol at 85%),

M85 (methanol at 85%) and oh,

let's throw in electricity.

No, that is smart business designing cameras for the most commercially viable film stock...once again, wrong assumptions lead to wrong conclusions. just like the idea of WMD in Iraq. Don't feel bad, mistakes are made at all levels.

Cheers,
mike

[audadvnc]

A pro camera? I dunno. More likely one for the well heeled amateur.

So K40 and VNF 160 were the only S8 stocks available at the time? Sounds like everybody was planning for the imminent demise of the format before they even went into production with the S709/715XL. And, of course, both cameras can be operated in manual exposure mode, so the issue is by now moot.

[super8man]

Hmmm, I like that term: Well heeled amateur. I'll give youh the short sighted argument...but still, I would have loved to been a fly on the wall to listen to the design team's discussions.