8mm Forum


  
my profile | my password | search | faq | register | forum home
  next oldest topic   next newest topic
» 8mm Forum   » 8mm Forum   » Mark Sylvesters Bootlace Forum (Page 2)

 - UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!  
This topic comprises 2 pages: 1  2 
 
Author Topic: Mark Sylvesters Bootlace Forum
Tom Photiou
Film God

Posts: 4837
From: Plymouth U.K
Registered: Dec 2003


 - posted July 16, 2004 12:28 PM      Profile for Tom Photiou   Email Tom Photiou   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
Hello Sir Kieth, i do have to say as good some of these electronic projected images are,i agree there can be no way that the picture can be as good as 35mm. If that was the case why would there be a market for machines costing 10G upward?
I'm not knocking this medium but the cinema trade would do away with film tommorow if they could match the 35mm image and save money and not lose the quality. [Wink]

 |  IP: Logged

Mark Todd
Film God

Posts: 3846
From: UK
Registered: Aug 2003


 - posted July 16, 2004 03:19 PM      Profile for Mark Todd   Email Mark Todd   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
They are about to with a very affordable sony on the horizon.
On the 35mm the good DVd projectors now really will give you an experiance like 35mm in the home now, as I mentioned my friends £500 new one is awesome.
And we both have the benifit of doing the two side by said and sadly its no contest, rich lovely almost 3 images, no fade, no warp, vinegar, lines,blue or green bias or excessive grain etc but I can live with that.
Give it a try tom and still enjoy your film, if you see a VP properly set up and run, quite simple to do you will be amazed.
Best Mark.
best Mark.

 |  IP: Logged

John Clancy
Phenomenal Film Handler

Posts: 1954
From: Cornwall
Registered: Jun 2003


 - posted July 19, 2004 03:18 AM      Profile for John Clancy   Author's Homepage   Email John Clancy   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
Some of us do run video and film side by side Mark and there really is no comparison. Film wins hands down all the time. Could there be something wrong with your film setup? Perhaps the back of the lens has a layer of muck or perhaps you're just watching sub-standard prints?

Derann are selling an excellent cheapo LCD Sony for £799 (or at least they were at the open day) but there is no way it can be compared to modern Super 8 prints so the thought of it being in any way comparable to 16mm or even 35mm is just laughable. Others probably think it can compete with film which doesn't make much sense to me. However, I have had this discussion with others in the past and there is generally an explanation - in one case the poor chap hadn't had his eyes tested for years and was using glasses which reduced everything to the same poor level.

The Odeon Leicester Square had a bad experience with their first video projector. I haven't seen the second attempt but when you consider the vast sums of money involved it seems like a major waste of money when the 35mm machines have been in place for decades. All the distributors want to do is pass the costs onto the cinemas rather than having to pay for printing themselves. Smaller cinemas will have to purchase second hand and rejected video projectors from the bigger cinemas which doesn't bode well for image quality. Regular upgrades in machinery will undoubtedly be ongoing unlike with film projectors.

--------------------
British Film Collectors Convention home page www.bfcc.biz. The site is for the whole of the film collecting hobby and not just the BFCC.

 |  IP: Logged

Tom Mc Kenzie
Film Handler

Posts: 34
From: United Kingdom
Registered: Jul 2004


 - posted July 19, 2004 05:44 AM      Profile for Tom Mc Kenzie   Email Tom Mc Kenzie   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
I know this is a hot subject between forum members from reading previous postings but film does have a special magic about it that new technology can never replace.

Big Elmo lover

 |  IP: Logged

Rob Young.
Phenomenal Film Handler

Posts: 1633
From: Cheshire, U.K.
Registered: Dec 2003


 - posted July 19, 2004 05:57 AM      Profile for Rob Young.     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
I think the current film vs. video issue is all a bit worrying, because unlike in the past when we were just taking about home set-ups, it's now an issue that threatens main stream cinema.

I've spent a small fortune on DLP, Dolby Digital and literally hundreds of DVDs, simply because I couldn't get the material on 8 or 16mm and wanted above all to experience the films in a "cinema" enviroment, rather than on a TV. But the fact remains that a good 8mm print is so much more involving than DLP projection, with better definition, contrast and colour. True, not all 8mm prints are good. And there's the first problem; comparing an older, dodgy 8mm to a new cleaned-up DVD version is misleading and an unfair comparison of formats. But then there is the delight of finding an old 8mm title at a convention or on a list which holds no promise quality wise and turns out to be a gem, or fixing a problem with a print by re-recording the sound or finding a replacement reel, etc. All part of the fun of collecting real film which, frankly, is much a more enjoyable experience than popping into HMV for a cheap disc.

But then I've popped into HMV for several hundred discs over the last few years! It's convenient to see the latest release at home, or a classic movie with a decent image; but I've always taken comfort from the fact that "real" film is still out there, that a good 8mm copy is the definitive version, or that, when there's time, we can go to the real cinema and see the sparkling quality that only 35mm can manage. And that's the real problem which is starting to worry me; just how much longer is 35mm going to survive?

I've seen several DLP presentations at various cinemas. The first, "Toy Story 2" several years ago looked OK, but then at the same time you couldn't help but be aware that it was a bit of a cheat; there really isn't any contrast challenge in an image like that and the colours are over-emphasised, so the overall impression was alright. The I saw "Mission to Mars". Again, to start with, it looked alright; definition seemed OK with no obvious "video" problems. Maybe the hype was right. Sadly, no. After only a few minutes it became painfully obvious that the contrast was poor; dark scenes held no depth or detail, the kind of image that you go to the real cinema for was not in evidence. Worse, colours looked pale and every now and then the whole image flickered as if from a hand-cranked toy.

Latest examples, such as "Finding Nemo" at the Odeon Leicester Square were the same. "Pirates of the Caribbean" was the almost the last straw for me. In this case, no warning was given that the film was presented using DLP, unlike previous venues which had proudly announced it. I thought I had payed my £11 to see real film. For me, it was awful, no contrast, poor colour and no life to it. But worryingly, the people I was with didn't seem to mind. And that really bothered me. That problem was it did look OK. But just OK and nothing more. Had everyone been treated to a comparison with film, film would have won hands down. Such is the march of technology.

As we all know, many technological advances are commercially driven and there has never been a better example. Staff at the cinema told me of the nightmare day spent downloading "Pirates" from satellite. It made me shudder; the reality of distributors downloading movies into cinemas is here. The fact the it took all day and was frought with problems made me chuckle, but the sad fact is that it works and any problems will soon be iron out.

When I go to the cinema now, I pay my £11 for the best seats in the house and I don't know whether or not I'm paying for a real film show or for video projection. The future is here and it is not an improvement.

Of course, technology will improve and I'd be the first to welcome a commercial electronic medium which really is better than film, certainly the single-handed projectionist who runs 12 screens at my local multiplex would! But that improvement in quality isn't yet. So thank goodness I've still got my reels of film to play with.

Sorry for going on; end of essay. But I do feel strongly about this change and I think that us 8mm film addicts should resist it as long as possible. Sure, enjoy video projection. It's here and it would be foolish not to, but please don't let us convince ourselves that it's better. Infact, on the contrary, complain and insist that it isn't or we may find ourselves with a film-free future all too soon.

 |  IP: Logged

Paul Adsett
Film God

Posts: 5003
From: USA
Registered: Jun 2003


 - posted July 19, 2004 09:07 AM      Profile for Paul Adsett     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
I could not agree more, Rob. Yes, many collectors have now got onto the video projection banwagon and, in fact, many immediately sell off their old cine equipment and films ( or sell their cine equipment and films to fund the video projector purchase), which seems to me a big mistake. I would think that most collectors would later regret doing that, after the novelty of the new video projector wears off a little bit. I am just about to get my first video projector, to supplement some of my S8 shows, and I don't care how wonderful the picture is, I will never sell my 8mm projectors, or any of my film collection. Last night I treated the family to a repeat showing of "Grease", and was struck yet again how fantastic top notch S8 film prints, in genuine CinemaScope and belting Dolby Stereo sound, can be. On my 8ft wide scope screen, it was truly a theatrical experience, it literally left nothing to be desired in terms of visual and sound impact. You are pulled into the picture and sound, and forget it's just little old super 8. Similarly, even the older 4:3 films, the silent Chaplins and L&H'S, somehow have more atmosphere when projected as film, with the chatter of the projector. Children particulary love this, as they have grown up on the video cassette which they now take for granted, and are enthralled when they first encounter the magic of the opto-mechanical projector. If you don't believe me, turn a child loose with a little Pathe Ace, and watch their eyes light up as they crank the handle. Add to that the shear beauty and pride of ownership which is bestowed by the posession and display of superb cine projectors like the GS1200, Bolex 18-5, Eumig 938, B+H Filmo's etc. These are all genuine pieces of design art, engineering excellence and beauty, the likes of which will never be seen again. As for the films themselves, they should be purchase, treasured, and shown for as long as they can be maintained.
I am going to follow Mark Sylvester's advice and enjoy the best of both worlds, film and video, for what qualities they both uniquely have to offer.
Abandon Super 8 cine? No way! It's way too much fun!

--------------------
The best of all worlds- 8mm, super 8mm, 9.5mm, and HD Digital Projection,
Elmo GS1200 f1.0 2-blade
Eumig S938 Stereo f1.0 Ektar
Panasonic PT-AE4000U digital pj

 |  IP: Logged

Mark Todd
Film God

Posts: 3846
From: UK
Registered: Aug 2003


 - posted July 19, 2004 10:40 AM      Profile for Mark Todd   Email Mark Todd   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
I have to aggree on the modern derann prints that are if anything better than most 16mm too when they get the colour blance right at the labs.
I really do appreciate the great fun( albeit with many pit falls, ) film can give you, there is a certain quality and feel really good film can get you VP will not.You can`t really put your finger on it.
As I say I think I/ we need both, VP more with a view to keeping an audience entertained with up to date stuff.
For me personally its more about VP taking the uncertainties out of film collecting and watching and I aggree with davids point its a price thing too.
But I don`t think we need to be afraid of VP either, film will always be around and I`m the first to accept my VP does at times sit there idle while I`m in the throes of filmie doings and I doubt I could ever loose the film bug, hec I`ve tried at the good womans behest many times, it just didn`t work as Derrans or Perry`s list etc hit the door mat.
She always knew I`d ordered a film as I unknowingly( maybe guiltily) used to hum the theme tune, a big givaway.
Anyway lets all enjoy watching that great big screen film up there anywhich way we all enjoy.
Best Mark.

 |  IP: Logged

David Park
Master Film Handler

Posts: 346
From: UK
Registered: Nov 2003


 - posted July 19, 2004 02:38 PM      Profile for David Park   Email David Park   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
Please not lets fall out over formats.
For a DVD I pay £10 to 15 for a film, also get trailer, edited out scenes and maybe production documentary film etc. and 5 track digital sound.
For one of your Deran S8 films in stereo analogue Prologic sound, what is the cost please?
I did not know the commercial cinemas used video projectors for films in place of 35mm film. ( I knew of course they can have video projectors for closed circuit TV of concerts etc.)
When in use at home my video projector gives a picture of 7 ft approx wide. It's big for my small room.
On the occasions I've visited my local multiplex's I find the screen is too large for the cinema size and the print is not of sufficient quaulity to give quaulity pictures. Indeed these screens are as large as the ones used in the 60's for 70mm prints.
Thus my at home with my DVD I get as good a picture as at the cinema.

--------------------
Regards,
David

 |  IP: Logged

Mark Todd
Film God

Posts: 3846
From: UK
Registered: Aug 2003


 - posted July 19, 2004 02:49 PM      Profile for Mark Todd   Email Mark Todd   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
Hi David I still have a bulb here for you, its a johnny come lately and bad memory situation I`m afraid, and I don`t like Post offices.Anyway your still more than welcome to it as a spare so I`ll try to get it off this week as got a couple of ebay bits and another to get off too..
best Mark.

 |  IP: Logged

David Park
Master Film Handler

Posts: 346
From: UK
Registered: Nov 2003


 - posted July 19, 2004 05:00 PM      Profile for David Park   Email David Park   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
No problem Mark.
Thankyou.

--------------------
Regards,
David

 |  IP: Logged

John Clancy
Phenomenal Film Handler

Posts: 1954
From: Cornwall
Registered: Jun 2003


 - posted August 05, 2004 01:40 AM      Profile for John Clancy   Author's Homepage   Email John Clancy   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
Keith Wilton's PC is still kaput so he asked me to post the following in response to Paul's question much earlier in this thread:-

Standard 8mm = 380 lines resolution
Super 8 = 600 lines resolution

However, these figures are for Kodachrome which is a very fine grain definition camera stock. Super 8 printing stock will be of a lower definition. With film, the information which stores the information is a random position with each frame. This of course, is not the case with video formats.

--------------------
British Film Collectors Convention home page www.bfcc.biz. The site is for the whole of the film collecting hobby and not just the BFCC.

 |  IP: Logged



All times are Central
This topic comprises 2 pages: 1  2 
 
   Close Topic    Move Topic    Delete Topic    next oldest topic   next newest topic
 - Printer-friendly view of this topic
Hop To:

Visit www.film-tech.com for free equipment manual downloads. Copyright 2003-2019 Film-Tech Cinema Systems LLC

Powered by Infopop Corporation
UBB.classicTM 6.3.1.2