npcoombs wrote:Why not shoot it on the a-minima: same size and noise as a super-8 but much better final product.
that's an idea, but doesn't that require a lot of loading too? i never loaded one so i don't know how long it takes, but since it's only 200' there's a lot of changing spools?
do you know how much they cost to rent per week? they're not listed in any of the swedish catalogs even though i know some houses have them. probably more than buying and syncing a canon?
also i'm not sure if the product would be "better", since the whole reason for shooting film for this project would be to create a unique and "artsy" look. i'm not ruling out anything at this point though.
/matt
Those little 200ft magazines are quite quick to load if they are all reeled up in advance.
Rate card prices for the a-minima in the UK are high. But I guess as it is often used as a b-cam by productions, it is more likely to be lying idle with more wiggle room for cutting a deal.
16mm can look however you want it to look, grainy as fuck or tight as 35mm, IMO its nice to be able to have a sharper end product than super-8 would ever allow.
... the minima is different to load than normal daylight spools. For one thing the rolls have to be spooled emulsion side out rather than base side out like normal daylight rolls. In addition you have to load it with a twist in the film. Like any camera system it requires a bit of practice before you get fast at it.
I was shown how to load it but I have yet to operate the a-minima. It seems like it would be a nice option for the project you describe.
Here in Seattle the A-minima rents for 750.00/wk with 2 mags (not including optics)
Seems like the Ikonoskop with the 9.5mm would be a good option too. That camera with optics rents for 450.00/wk here..
steve hyde wrote:... the minima is different to load than normal daylight spools.
Seems like the Ikonoskop with the 9.5mm would be a good option too. That camera with optics rents for 450.00/wk here..
Steve
The Ikonoskop would be fantastic for extreme guerilla shooting because of its size, but being limited to 9.5 and being unsure of your framing would get tired rather fast. The 100' loads would also slow the shoot, but it might work really well for club scenes and unpermitted shooting in awkward places.
The A-Minima is a nice compromise: 200' loads make a surprisingly big difference when you've been shooting S8 for a while, especially if you have two or three magazines on hand. The magazines are easy to load as long as you remember to flip the takeup spool as you load it into the mag. Easy to focus, sync sound is possible as long as your sound person is careful and you're not in an enclosed space that bounces back the camera noise.
Haven't the time right now to read all the posts, so sorry if this is redundant. Like Roger suggested, maybe using DS-8mm would be a viable option if the film were to be shot on 100D. 100D can be pushed to 200ASA with great results so it can be used indoors with the right lighting. A DS-8mm camera could be the main camera with your 814 for additional photography. Could even mix in 64T for cetain dreamy scenes. Just a thought. I find the lack of negative stock right now in DS-8mm a great loss...
....the reason I would never shoot a feature exclusively on super 8 is because it is too hard on the eyes for long periods of time. There is just too much movement going on with grain and what not. This is the great strength of super 8 and also its great weakness. I have to say I think a filmmaker is asking a lot of an audience when they ask that they watch super 8 for 90 minutes. I love super 8 - obviously - that is why I used it in my recent project, but honestly looking at super 8 for too long is too much for my eyeballs- especially on the big screen..
so there is my argument against doing it exclusively on super 8.
Personally if I was going to make a feature exclusively on Super 8, I would look to Ingmar Bergman's "Persona" for visual ideas, because I think modern super 8 negatives and telecine technologies are perfect for that kind of tight portrait photography. And the grain takes care of skin blemishes and what not. I'd like to see someone make a super 8 feature like that.... Two beautiful women - one speaking character - and lots of visual expressions of sexuality and the female body... That would hold me for 90 minutes.
believe it or not but persona is a major inspiration for this film.
as for grainy features i sort of like them. if you've seen one of my favorite films, fucking åmål by lukas moodysson, it was shot on 16mm 7250 which is one of the grainest stocks even made, and a constantly panning and zooming though not handheld camera. i love it, and even saw on some really big screens. it's only 1h25 though.
oh, and i just watched al dente again, which proves that the vision stocks aren't that grainy at all compared to the reversals. on stills they look similar but the "dancing" is far far less.
I know I'm late to the party and I will say up front that I only skimmed the postings.
Here are my thoughts.
No-No and No. There was a time back in about 98/99 that I was trying to figure out the best way of shooting a modern film on S8. At the time the constraints and the look seemed great. Who cared if it was Tri-X?? It was what needed to be done.
Then I slowly saw through the haze of everything and it just started to loose its appeal and shine.
Noisy camera, lack of film choices, lack or proper xfer(at the time), lack of lenses....The list goes on.
It just seems like S8 is great but not for 90 to 120 minutes.
Look at modern S8 based long form films. They drive you nuts half way in you are trying to figure out if your eyes went out of focus or if it is the film.
mattias wrote:believe it or not but persona is a major inspiration for this film.
as for grainy features i sort of like them. if you've seen one of my favorite films, fucking åmål by lukas moodysson, it was shot on 16mm 7250 which is one of the grainest stocks even made, and a constantly panning and zooming though not handheld camera. i love it, and even saw on some really big screens. it's only 1h25 though.
oh, and i just watched al dente again, which proves that the vision stocks aren't that grainy at all compared to the reversals. on stills they look similar but the "dancing" is far far less.
/matt
...yeah, I believe it. That is cool. I'd love to see you tackle a project like that - working in a very controlled set with lots of focus on a single subject. Some kind of universal - timeless location - but like Bergman's a single location without a lot of jumping around.
It's a great model for a first feature because you don't want to be running around to different locations and dealing with logistical problems. Much better I think to lock yourself and your collaborators into a studio space with a few boxes of film and just start developing a theme. Bergman's was Jealousy - but I suppose you could grab any human emotion and start exploring it in audio-visual ways....not to mention in color too..
oh, i already have a theme, in fact i have an entire treatment (screenplay will be written on location) and an entire team, and an antire schedule. it's "just" the shooting format and some negotiating that has to be done. i will definitely not shoot in a studio, but faces are the main storytelling device, and the who is who and why and when and whatever theme is shared, and dreams, or are they? the location is different and the main premise of course. ;-)
steve hyde wrote:
...yeah, I believe it. That is cool. I'd love to see you tackle a project like that - working in a very controlled set with lots of focus on a single subject. Some kind of universal - timeless location - but like Bergman's a single location without a lot of jumping around.
Have you seen any of Matt's films?!
I'm not sure what he has up his sleeve but going by the current filmography I wouldn't expect a deep-focus, long-take, black and white film delving into existential trauma.
