8mm Forum


Post New Topic  Post A Reply
my profile | my password | register | search | faq | register | forum home
  next oldest topic   next newest topic
» 8mm Forum   » 8mm Forum   » Kodak's new super 8 camera (Page 3)

 - UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!  
This topic comprises 6 pages: 1  2  3  4  5  6 
 
Author Topic: Kodak's new super 8 camera
Andrew Woodcock
Film God

Posts: 7477
From: Manchester Uk
Registered: Aug 2012


 - posted February 06, 2017 07:34 PM      Profile for Andrew Woodcock         Edit/Delete Post 
As things stand Tom, we're simply arguing semantics.

There isn't any plans for there to even be a dilemma surrounding how to place a stripe over a reinvented frame size!

Silent movies, here we come!

Who ever said technology = progression?

I'm completely jaw droppingly astonished that i'm even reading some people would be satisfied to shoot silent footage again now, and then expect their families to be entertained by them nowadays???

Also the amount of people seemingly who never transitioned to Mag sound cartridges in the first instance??

Astonishing beyond belief. [Eek!] [Confused]

--------------------
"C'mon Baggy..Get with the beat"

 |  IP: Logged

Adrian Winchester
Film God

Posts: 2870
From: Croydon, London, UK
Registered: Aug 2004


 - posted February 06, 2017 09:00 PM      Profile for Adrian Winchester   Email Adrian Winchester   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
"Silent movies, here we come!"

Here we came... in 1997!

--------------------
Adrian Winchester

 |  IP: Logged

Tom Spielman
Master Film Handler

Posts: 339
From: Minneapolis, MN, USA
Registered: Apr 2016


 - posted February 06, 2017 10:11 PM      Profile for Tom Spielman   Email Tom Spielman   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
Let's be fair. The new Kodak camera does have sound, but in their vision of the future, the end product is digital.

For those of us messing around with old silent cameras, this is my explanation:
Photographs don't have sound yet we still enjoy them. Images can be quite powerful on their own and even more so with the right music. And I enjoy working with film.

Speaking for myself, if I want video with sound I don't need Super 8 at all. I shoot lots of film now (mostly stills) but have no intention of giving up my digital cameras. Most of my family memories will be recorded digitally. Besides, I don't think that capturing birthday parties and Johnny's football game are what Kodak's new camera is intended for. Not at that price. Not at what film and processing will cost.

Looking back I would also guess that cost is why many families never upgraded to Super 8 sound. Not only did you need a new camera, but a new projector to go with it.

 |  IP: Logged

Adrian Winchester
Film God

Posts: 2870
From: Croydon, London, UK
Registered: Aug 2004


 - posted February 07, 2017 12:08 AM      Profile for Adrian Winchester   Email Adrian Winchester   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
Tom - I think that's a fair summary.

I think another pertinent point is that 'live' sync sound has never been the primary usage of sound in Super 8 film-making. I used to attend the annual public shows of a local cine society, seeing a selection of well-crafted Super 8 films, but a very large proportion of the sound I was hearing was not recorded by the cameras used.

But having said that, it would be impressive and innovative if the new camera also offered the option of recording sound without filming at the same time. That could be very useful when assembling a soundtrack.

--------------------
Adrian Winchester

 |  IP: Logged

Dominique De Bast
Film God

Posts: 4284
From: Brussels, Belgium
Registered: Jun 2013


 - posted February 07, 2017 01:30 AM      Profile for Dominique De Bast   Email Dominique De Bast   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
Tom, since people who will not project the film will use the version, I don't see the problem : they will have the full frame. And for people like me who will always use a traditional projector, the picture will anyway, as I wrote, have the size we are used to so the stripe will not make you loose anything.

--------------------
Dominique

 |  IP: Logged

Brian Fretwell
Phenomenal Film Handler

Posts: 1642
From: London, UK
Registered: Jun 2014


 - posted February 07, 2017 02:49 AM      Profile for Brian Fretwell   Email Brian Fretwell   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
I suppose we could compare it to the Super 8 shows at the BFCC when prints were synced to DVD soundtracks of the film - Super 8 DTS for home movies.

 |  IP: Logged

Andrew Woodcock
Film God

Posts: 7477
From: Manchester Uk
Registered: Aug 2012


 - posted February 07, 2017 03:17 AM      Profile for Andrew Woodcock         Edit/Delete Post 
Ok then, once again, seeing as I feel I must have been living in a parallel universe during the mid to late 80's and early 90's...

I wasn't myself talking about films shooting Johnny's first football game or panoramic views of Llandudno with live sound.

I shot 27 rolls of Film in Florida once. Tom here, has a similar planned "once in a lifetime" trip coming up soon,..

If none of it had been taken using the built in boom microphone to capture the live sound, the whole film lasting 82 minutes in total, would have sent a glass eye to sleep despite all the superb and exciting sights there were to see from Universal, MGM, Disneyland, Busch Gardens,Sea World etc etc.

Now that was in 94, wouldn't it had been great if Tom could now do a similar thing by taking his old cameras along for the ride?

Chances are, even if the cartridges are available in time, he probably wouldn't bother if he can only take some silent footage.
Some things simply HAVE to have live sound for them to make sense and to entertain a viewer. The soundtrack on the film I speak of above is just as entertaining and memorable as the images themselves.

And yes, I too used a silent camera for very short films in the mid to late 70's also. But then obviously simply progressed to the real deal later on,and that began over 30 years ago now!

I kept it with Kodak once, like they suggested.
Now, I'd just like the opportunity to do the same.

--------------------
"C'mon Baggy..Get with the beat"

 |  IP: Logged

John Clancy
Phenomenal Film Handler

Posts: 1954
From: Cornwall
Registered: Jun 2003


 - posted February 07, 2017 03:33 AM      Profile for John Clancy   Author's Homepage   Email John Clancy   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
I have shot both sound and silent Super 8 but have to admit that when it comes to Super 8 I always preferred silent. With the new camera's ability to record high quality sound I suspect that would change. Synching the sound from the SD card is fairly simple even if you don't have an Elmo GS1200 or similarly equipped projector. And if you want a sound stripe on the finished film to record the sound onto permanently but don't want to cover the new wide format picture area then just have a balance track applied and record it on that.

The positive thought everyone interested in Super 8 film should take from Kodak's new venture is that it gives Super 8 a new lease of life to a potential new customer base. As a result of that Super 8 film stock will be available for use in our classic cameras. If the venture is successful there could be developments in other areas of the hobby. It's an exciting time and J.J. Abrams must surely deserve a lot of the credit.

I'm looking forward to shooting Super 8 film again and right now I think that is a very realistic possibility. It hasn't been realistic for some time.

--------------------
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

Andrew Woodcock
Film God

Posts: 7477
From: Manchester Uk
Registered: Aug 2012


 - posted February 07, 2017 03:39 AM      Profile for Andrew Woodcock         Edit/Delete Post 
Where are you going to find anyone who will put a balance stripe on a film now?

You can't even find packaged films now with a balance stripe.

Why would anyone prefer silent to sound filming??????
I'm even more in a parallel universe now. [Confused]

Let's not forget, even the most kindest of Film handling projectors, used the gate to handle only the outer edges of the film with no image on them.
With this now, you are placing the image inside the edges of the gate and over the sound heads.

How good is the FULL image of Max 8 going to look after its been projected just a handful of times when traditionally, the image would always sit outside the gate parts like the pressure plate as well as the magnetic heads and pressers?

Has anyone even bothered to give that some thought?

Let's face it, already this new product isn't simply ever designed to be projected.
That's not the intentions at all here with this one from Kodak, and that's just after phase one of reinventing the wheel!

What's the saying again, if it ain't broke, don't fix it!!

[ February 07, 2017, 06:23 AM: Message edited by: Andrew Woodcock ]

--------------------
"C'mon Baggy..Get with the beat"

 |  IP: Logged

Tom Spielman
Master Film Handler

Posts: 339
From: Minneapolis, MN, USA
Registered: Apr 2016


 - posted February 07, 2017 09:18 AM      Profile for Tom Spielman   Email Tom Spielman   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
I agree Andrew, it's not designed to be projected. It is designed to go to digital.

I also agree that 82 minutes of silent film isn't something I'd likely be interested in watching. In fact I couldn't afford to shoot that much film and still have money for the plane fare home from Florida. [Wink]

So I'm content to shoot digital when I want sound or I'm going to be in the water, or when I didn't think to bring a camera with me and all I have is my phone.

The ~3 minutes of run time I get with Super 8 works pretty well actually and forces me to be selective about what I capture. But again it's a supplement to digital for me, not instead of. I may watch it on a projector now and then, but I'll transfer it to digital almost immediately and that's how it will be viewed most frequently.

The truth is when it comes to home videos or home movies, less is often more. Here's an example of a Super 8 "home movie" that I like. It's called Super 8 - 2016 and is a year out of someone's life shot on silent super 8. It's less than 4 minutes long.

Every year on mother's day my wife gets a hard bound picture book from me and I also create a slide show on DVD that's mostly still photos but has some video snippets as well. Even the year we went to Belize and visited pyramids, went scuba diving, and spent a day on a gorgeous sand bar, the slide show was only about 20 to 30 minutes long and mostly silent save for background music. I even turn the sound off for some of the clips. This was before I got into Super 8.

Don't get me wrong. Sometimes the audio is more interesting than the images, so I do appreciate the ability to capture sound.

[ February 07, 2017, 11:04 AM: Message edited by: Tom Spielman ]

 |  IP: Logged

Andrew Woodcock
Film God

Posts: 7477
From: Manchester Uk
Registered: Aug 2012


 - posted February 07, 2017 11:49 AM      Profile for Andrew Woodcock         Edit/Delete Post 
So that's the end of that then. Kodak's new Super 8 products belong only in today's digital world as they are not designed with projection in mind.

Which brings me back to Grahams point early and say to myself,
Well what's the point of it then?

The deeper we delve, the less sense this whole fiasco seems to make.

--------------------
"C'mon Baggy..Get with the beat"

 |  IP: Logged

Martin Davey
Film Handler

Posts: 94
From: Southampton UK
Registered: Dec 2011


 - posted February 07, 2017 12:30 PM      Profile for Martin Davey   Author's Homepage   Email Martin Davey   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
I don't believe I read anything about plans for it to be projected in a conventional projector, or even a new projector with a larger gate from Kodak. It is firmly placed for the professional film production market, where the expensive costs of transfer to a digital format can be swallowed up in total production costs.
With regard to the larger gate I am reminded by Super 16mm, in which the soundtrack area is abandoned and replaced with addition picture area. The point of this format was for films to be shot cheaply on 16mm but have a suitable picture ratio to allow it to be blown up to 35mm (widescreen) with little cropping or loss of quality, which does become more of a concern using 1.133 material in such a way.
Nowadays everything has to at least fit a 16x9 format (scope excepted) so Kodak making a 4x3 camera would be a non starter in TV/ film production and become quickly a loss making product.
I doubt that Kodak have the slightest interest in amateur film production, and I can't really see Kodachrome coming back either and being sold to the masses at an affordable price. The big boys just want the neg to play with in the digital domain.

 |  IP: Logged

Dominique De Bast
Film God

Posts: 4284
From: Brussels, Belgium
Registered: Jun 2013


 - posted February 07, 2017 12:36 PM      Profile for Dominique De Bast   Email Dominique De Bast   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
Live sound recording is useful when you want to record people talking but otherwise you will most of the time have to re-work the sound track. If you shoot a party for example, you will of course shoot small scènes of 5 or 10 seconds. Each time you stop your camera, the living sound recordind is stopped. So, if it's music you won't be able to keep it like that. Silent family films were never really silent, people usually comment what's on the screen, exactly like when you show pictures. You don't remind quiet during five minutes looking at these photos. The trouble is when those who took the film or are on the film are not there anymore to comment.
Andrew, you can have your film striped in Germany :

http://www.ffr-film.de/eng-bespurung-.html

http://www.andecfilm.de/assets/docs/pdfs/pr_2014_jan_Preise_seite_09.pdf

--------------------
Dominique

 |  IP: Logged

Rob Young.
Phenomenal Film Handler

Posts: 1585
From: Cheshire, U.K.
Registered: Dec 2003


 - posted February 07, 2017 01:36 PM      Profile for Rob Young.     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
This really is a bizarre situation.

Whilst I applaud Kodak pressing ahead with this venture, I feel that they are really marketing this badly.

If this is no longer regarded as an amateur venture, then which professional market are they hoping to attract?

These days, the future of broadcast is regarded as 4K capture, with a view to HDR content.

Now that isn't to say that a fine grain super 8 stock, mastered properly couldn't offer something here, but at what cost?

Surely a "cheap" SLR camera with 4K video capture can provide much better quality than those literally awful Kodak demo videos, and be manipulated any which way.

I really do not understand what they are doing here.

Does this appeal to a professional?

Hell, no.

Kodak really need to step up their game, give us high quality examples of what is achievable and sensible, priced workflows (in terms of turnaround for processing and quality offered) or this is just a joke.

 |  IP: Logged

Steve Klare
Film Guy

Posts: 6797
From: Long Island, NY, USA
Registered: Jun 2003


 - posted February 07, 2017 01:39 PM      Profile for Steve Klare   Email Steve Klare   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
I'd be afraid if I shot live sound I'd keep having some yahoo walking up to me asking "Ya takin' pichas?!".

-I speak from experience here: a couple of years ago I was doing timelapse and my friends' dopey teenage kid walked over and looked in the lens!

--------------------
All I ask is a wide screen and a projector to light her by...

 |  IP: Logged

Rob Young.
Phenomenal Film Handler

Posts: 1585
From: Cheshire, U.K.
Registered: Dec 2003


 - posted February 07, 2017 01:42 PM      Profile for Rob Young.     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
"I'd be afraid if I shot live sound I'd keep having some yahoo walking up to me asking "Ya takin' pichas?!"

Steve, welcome to my everyday working life!!! [Smile] [Smile] [Smile]

 |  IP: Logged

Andrew Woodcock
Film God

Posts: 7477
From: Manchester Uk
Registered: Aug 2012


 - posted February 07, 2017 02:20 PM      Profile for Andrew Woodcock         Edit/Delete Post 
Well there you go then. Even a professional cameraman cannot see what Kodak seek to gain from this project or who in fact it is actually aimed at??

That tells me everything.
Thanks Rob, I thought I was going mad there at one point!

--------------------
"C'mon Baggy..Get with the beat"

 |  IP: Logged

Simon McConway
Phenomenal Film Handler

Posts: 1071
From: Doncaster, UK
Registered: Jun 2004


 - posted February 07, 2017 02:32 PM      Profile for Simon McConway   Email Simon McConway   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
Anything new in the Super 8 world or just the film world itself has to be good news. We specialists have a duty to support it; if we cannot, then who can. Perhaps those who are negative and cannot support it should move on from this forum. You are doing nothing for film.

 |  IP: Logged

Rob Young.
Phenomenal Film Handler

Posts: 1585
From: Cheshire, U.K.
Registered: Dec 2003


 - posted February 07, 2017 02:34 PM      Profile for Rob Young.     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
I know Andrew, and don't get me wrong, many of us here are all kids of the 60's / 70's / 80's who would dearly love to see super 8 make a come back as a filming format. And those who are younger, I dare say would also love to film with real "film" stock.

But this nonsense is so far off the mark that it's just fantasy.

Please, Kodak, WE GENUINELY ARE INTERESTED, but if you have any integrity left, give us proper examples of who this is aimed at, quality achievable, time scales, cost per minute, workflow, etc., etc...

 |  IP: Logged

Simon McConway
Phenomenal Film Handler

Posts: 1071
From: Doncaster, UK
Registered: Jun 2004


 - posted February 07, 2017 02:40 PM      Profile for Simon McConway   Email Simon McConway   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
Wow imagine if Kodak are reading this post; they will say that even the 8mm community can't support their new product. I would ask that a moderator locks this post before our integrity is ruined.

 |  IP: Logged

Rob Young.
Phenomenal Film Handler

Posts: 1585
From: Cheshire, U.K.
Registered: Dec 2003


 - posted February 07, 2017 02:44 PM      Profile for Rob Young.     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
Simon, I'm sorry that you need to call in a moderator.

Not the first time.

Again, my views are my own.

Integrity? I have simply asked fair questions?

I really don't understand you guys any more...

I thought I was asking fair questions as a potential customer?

 |  IP: Logged

Simon McConway
Phenomenal Film Handler

Posts: 1071
From: Doncaster, UK
Registered: Jun 2004


 - posted February 07, 2017 02:49 PM      Profile for Simon McConway   Email Simon McConway   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
We've got to support it. This is the very place that should do that. But what have here is tantamount to the fire brigade saying they hate water! If Elmo announced a new Cine projector, would people who call themselves members here say it was a pointless project? Probably. Would you hear vinyl collectors being negative on a vinyl forum? No. So why do this here? We don't need it.

 |  IP: Logged

Rob Young.
Phenomenal Film Handler

Posts: 1585
From: Cheshire, U.K.
Registered: Dec 2003


 - posted February 07, 2017 03:03 PM      Profile for Rob Young.     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
Really, I'm not seeing that Simon.

I'm simply asking Kodak to step up and give us real examples of what can be achieved with contemporary super 8.

If my comments seem negative, then they are only to question what is planned.

Look, 15 years ago it was alright to ask a premium brand broadcast show if you could film a few minutes on super 8 because it was "grainy" & "filmic" & "legacy".

Do that now and they'll ask A) Is it HD or 4K? B) How Much? C) When Can We Start Editing The Footage?

Kodak?

Oh, and BTW I spent £1300.00 having my Linn LP12 Turntable serviced last year, together with a new £2500.00 Musical Fidelity Amplifier just so I could continue to enjoy my vinyl...so don't get me even started on supporting causes.

 |  IP: Logged

Simon McConway
Phenomenal Film Handler

Posts: 1071
From: Doncaster, UK
Registered: Jun 2004


 - posted February 07, 2017 03:07 PM      Profile for Simon McConway   Email Simon McConway   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
As a former DJ, vinyl rocks! Technics have brought out their legendary 1200 turntables again.

 |  IP: Logged

Rob Young.
Phenomenal Film Handler

Posts: 1585
From: Cheshire, U.K.
Registered: Dec 2003


 - posted February 07, 2017 03:11 PM      Profile for Rob Young.     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
Well, we agree on that much my friend.

My Linn LP 12 has been with me a long time and thanks to a great couple of guys which I don't mind plugging here;

http://www.houseoflinn.com/mall/departmentpage.cfm/houseoflinn/_-/1

Vinyl rules!

Sorry...off topic again!!!

 |  IP: Logged



All times are Central
This topic comprises 6 pages: 1  2  3  4  5  6 
 
Post New Topic  Post A Reply 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