|
Author
|
Topic: Pro8mm now beta testing new 100D color reversal film
|
|
|
Raleigh M. Christopher
Expert Film Handler
Posts: 130
From: New York, NY, USA
Registered: Jan 2016
|
posted July 01, 2016 05:19 PM
My father shot Super 8mm home movies up until 1988. In 1990 he bought an RCA VHS camcorder (which had been on the market for some time - by then the 1/4 inch or "Video8" format was taking over). He used that VHS once or twice and never again. And the tapes? He has no idea where they are. A VHS VCR I bought for my parents (to go along with their DVD player) in the early 2000's is on a shelf in the Garage. However, all the Super 8mm home movies, as well as the Super 8mm projector were stored in a box, easily found, and the projector still works perfectly. The films, the oldest taken around 1962 (the only movie on Regular 8, all the rest in the collection are Super 8) look great. Clear picture, no color fade, not even many scratches.
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
Sonny Young
Junior
Posts: 15
From: Astoria, NY, USA
Registered: Nov 2003
|
posted July 01, 2016 11:30 PM
quote:
Society has been going through a highly overrated Digital mania, that I think is slowly subsiding.
Raleigh, I've been following your comments across different threads and I'm compelled to say that you are truly out of touch with what's going on in the world of filmmaking. It's one thing to love and project physical film, as we all do here, but you really must educate yourself on the current technology before making sweeping statements like this.
I've been a filmmaker and film teacher for over 30 years in both 16mm and 35mm (which I dearly love) and was in the midst of the digital revolution as it moved from garbage video to the amazing digital formats we have today. Contemporary digital cameras are not only inexpensive, but provide mind boggling HD definition. Look up the RedOne and the ridiculously inexpensive BlackMagic. These cameras record in lossless RAW with with a staggering 13 stop exposure range (you can add all the grain you want if that makes you happy). Up to 4K horizontal lines of resolution with all kinds of frame rates. They accept film camera lenses from Arriflex and even the old Bolex and Schneider lens, which are amazing. They record sound, of course. There is no film or tape, but rather postage stamp cards that can be popped in your reader for editing, which is whole other amazing technology.
Kodak has been pulling stunts like this new super 8 camera for years, trying to convince people that analog film is better--more beautiful, pleasing to the eye, higher definition, etc. They have no choice, they are in the film business, and quite frankly, missed the digital boat when they had the chance. They come to our schools with all this hogwash, yet discontinue film stocks one after another because they don't sell. They survived bankruptcy a few years ago only because they sold off a bunch of failed ventures and intellectual property. No one is going to spend $80 for three minutes worth of soundless footage except some crazy artists and baby boomers that have fond memories of making movies back in the'70s.
I don't want to debate you on this, like that analog vs digital thread with Tom. This hobby is about nostalgia and its a bit of an isolation bubble. The current world of filmmaking and distribution is very different. There are some filmmakers on this forum and I'm sure they know what I'm talking about.
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
Raleigh M. Christopher
Expert Film Handler
Posts: 130
From: New York, NY, USA
Registered: Jan 2016
|
posted July 02, 2016 05:57 AM
Sonny, the point is, I don't like digital video and think it is garbage. I know about the Red One, and I don't care. They can push it up to 124K, I don't like it, and think it is inferior to real film for many different reasons. It's still video and it's not film. It's not all about just picture quality.
No I am not out of touch. IMO digital video looks like shit. It's very harsh,cold, and plasticky looking, and it's completely soulless. The funny thing is, it's all about money. It's supposedly "cheaper" and yet it's actually nothing more than a MONEY PIT, in the long run. A never ending cycle of upgrade after upgrade, and back up after back up after back up. Yet the Bolex H16 made in 1965 retains it's value and is still just as functional today, as it was then. The same cannot be said for a digital video camera bought 10-15 years ago, they are already out of date.
Digital video has it's uses, but as I said before, I prefer my CINEMA to be FILM.
Don't make sweeping statements about what I do or do not know, as you don't know me. Who do you think you are?
Just so you know, I have a dgree in Cinema History, Theory, and Criticism from the USC School of Cinematic Arts in Los Angeles (known as the School of Cinema-Television when I was there), widely considered to be the best school for the study of cinema in the world. Do I know it all? No. Not even. But I'm not coming from a place of pure ignorance either. All my student films were REAL films, shot on film. I didn't make student videos, like most do today.
| IP: Logged
|
|
Tom Spielman
Master Film Handler
Posts: 339
From: Minneapolis, MN, USA
Registered: Apr 2016
|
posted July 02, 2016 10:32 AM
Dominique, I ride a bike to work rather than a car. It is cheaper, healthier for me and the environment, and sometimes even quicker.
I could see film making a comeback if there was a general rebellion against all things digital. And actually I think that's a possibility unless society somehow comes to terms with declining incomes due to jobs lost to automation. The argument has been in the past the greater automation has lead to a shift in the labor market, but ultimately more new jobs being created than lost. I'm not sure that trend will continue.
Another possibility is that there is a push back against the explosion of battery operated devices and the potential environmental impacts. Super 8 cameras were mostly battery driven but they could work largely without one. The meter might still require batteries but those can last a long time.
Lastly, if you could convince a substantial number of people that the consumption of digital media has negative health impacts while analog media does not.
Vinyl has made a comeback but I don't know if that's a short or long term trend. Apparently about half the people buying LPs don't even listen to them. They buy the album to own something physical or they just like they way the looks, but they listen to the music digitally. 7% of LP buyers don't even own a turntable. The most popular album sold on LP last year was from Adele and was almost guaranteed to have been recorded digitally. Those LPs are coming from a digital source.
Anyway, buried in there might be the most compelling reason for Kodak (or anyone) to sell reversal film. Digital looks good (to most people), is easy to share and convenient to watch, but it's ephemeral. To me the ideal product would be projectable and archivable, but also shareable in a high quality format. Ultimately, I'd like to have the film, but I also want a high quality scan that I can easily view and share.
And I want it to be affordable. ![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
So there's where you should be aiming Kodak !
BBC Article on the return of vinyl
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
Raleigh M. Christopher
Expert Film Handler
Posts: 130
From: New York, NY, USA
Registered: Jan 2016
|
posted July 02, 2016 11:15 AM
That's what I mean -
There has been this period of "throw out everything," "digital is better": Books, records, motion picture film, still photography film. But now you see people saying "Hey, wait a minute, not so fast" It's happened in other areas of life too. Once upon a time the "great big beautiful tomorrow" (to quote Walt Disney's "Carousel of Progress") was cars, cars and more cars, suburbia, freeways, and the death of the traditional, crowded, dense, walking city. Look at the nightmares created by Le Corbusier. The man wanted to level Paris, or Robert Moses who wanted to ram expressways through the heart of Manhattan. There were plans to do the same to San Francisco (But today, SF has even torn down the 480 and half of the 101). Now we see people moving back into the cities, using public transportation, dense development around transportation lines and hubs. Cities are thriving again after the Mid-20th Century fiasco of suburbanization and abandonememt of inner cities.
The "New" can be seductive and intoxicating, until people realize it isn't really all that.
| IP: Logged
|
|
John Hourigan
Master Film Handler
Posts: 301
From: Colorado U.S.A.
Registered: Sep 2003
|
posted July 02, 2016 01:29 PM
Have to agree with Sonny and Andrew on this one.
Wow, after reading this thread, it might be best to step back and take a deep breath, Raleigh -- life is too short to get worked up and make broad, sweeping statements about formats that are different just to fit your narrative. (I can tell you, this week I screened Star Wars: The Force Awakens in my home theatre for some visiting friends, and it certainly didn't look like "crap" or "shit," even with my critical, professional eye. However, while I'm a long-time film collector, I have plenty of film prints that do look and sound like "crap" or "shit" in comparison.)
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
Tom Spielman
Master Film Handler
Posts: 339
From: Minneapolis, MN, USA
Registered: Apr 2016
|
posted July 02, 2016 04:30 PM
I guess the question is whether film is like bikes vs cars, paper books vs ebooks, and city vs suburban living or is it like carburetors vs electronic fuel injection, - just a technology largely replaced by a different technology.
I don't see this as digital vs everything else. I can easily see paper books continuing to be popular while film becomes a very small niche of movie making. A paper book is sharable, portable, won't break, cheap, and doesn't to be charged or plugged in. You don't need a device at all. You can gift an e-book but it's not the same as giving someone a nice hard cover. I think that is part of the appeal of an LP too. It's something substantial.
E-books have their advantages as well so I can see them co-existing with books for quite a while.
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
Printer-friendly view of this topic
