super 8 or video

[PITIRRE]

I'm pro super 8 for a long time, but with the affordable video cameras in the market right now and software that make that film look. Do you guys think that for example doing a one hour documentary, is better to shoot on video or film if your proyect is for the small screen?
I know that camcorders right know came with 24p, 3 ccd's for just less than $700.00. Is my opinion that super 8 is good for small proyects like short films or experimental ones. Any thoughts?

[Ektagraphic]

I would go for super 8 because of its magic and qualities. I would love to see a really nice short film done on super 8. I think it may grab peoples attention.

[metaT8]

You can't imitate what happens in the lens.
I know there are tons of pug-ins that emulate the emulsion of film and many who introduce fake artifacts. IMHO Fake Film tricks just look cheesy. I can usually spot them a mile away. There are some which, when used tastefully, can be a valuable creative tool.

Use the right tool for the job. Video has come a long way in the past 10 years and now with these really small 35mm lens attachments some pretty mazing images can be captured on very affordable cameras.

But don't use those "antique film effects" It just belittles the medium and confuses the true potential of Super8.

my 2 cent

m

[Angus]

If you want it to look like film, then shoot film.

Video has come on leaps and bounds and there really are some nice video cameras out there these days and even HD isn't too expensive now...but it still cannot be made to look and feel like film.

[PITIRRE]

Thank you guys for the imput.

[vidwerk]

I guess it also boils down to your budget. Documentary shoot to edit ratios can be about 20:1 which is a lot of film, and a longer final duration will only multiply that. If it's budget that is a concern, why not shoot all the interviews on 24p video(maybe with a high shutter speed) and all the B-roll on super 8.

vidwerk.

[BK]

Depends on the look you want in your project, some works well with the look of HD video, such as present day reality stuff, while film is great with historical, narrative pieces, or when you want a "organic" or "romantic" feel to the whole thing. And you can mix the two, I have seen documentaries on tv that uses both mediums together effectively.

Personally I don't think it really matters that much for the small screen whether it was shot on whatever, if you have a good story that's been put together well with great camerawork and editing that can hold the people's attention from beginning to end.

The major drawback with super 8 I find is recording sync sound, and the short 3 mins shooting time with the 50ft cart. ( Wish Kodak still makes the 200ft sound carts.) For anything really serious and with a decent budget one would consider shooting S16 instead.

Bill