This is topic Why do you prefer Super 8? in forum 8mm Forum at 8mm Forum.
To visit this topic, use this URL:
Posted by Oemer Yalinkilic (Member # 86) on November 06, 2013, 03:13 AM:
I know that many of you collect also 16mm and even 35mm.
What is the most important argument for your choose?
I prefer 35mm for the sharp focus and I can use the prints in cinemas for public screenings. But it is very bulky.
16mm is the best for home use, because I use a Elmo 16CL Xenon with a 20mm lens. I have with this equipment the bigest image and it is very bright too.
Only plus for Super 8 is for me the Stereo sound and the Elmo GS1200 is very quiet.
At the end I collect all 3 gauges, but for home use is 16mm the best choice.
What is the reason for your choice?
Posted by Guy Taylor, Jr. (Member # 786) on November 06, 2013, 04:50 AM:
I collect both 8mm and 16mm. Storage is a problem; can easily store a lot more titles on 8mm than 16mm.
Posted by David Guest (Member # 2791) on November 06, 2013, 04:50 AM:
in my opinion 16mm is the best as its a good picture quality and very portable .35mm is to bulky with films etc I have nearly a 1000 films on 16mm where would I put these if there were on 35mm I would need a warehouse ,and re super 8 its a definate no to this gauge its like watching a film with sand in your eyes
Posted by Maurice Leakey (Member # 916) on November 06, 2013, 05:01 AM:
We are asked "Why do we prefer Super 8". My answer is that I don't, although I do collect Super 8 I have many more 16mm films and this is the gauge I prefer.
I worked all my life with 35mm but I would never consider this gauge for home use purely for the space which it would need.
Posted by Pasquale DAlessio (Member # 2052) on November 06, 2013, 05:41 AM:
For me it's space and price. I was into 16mm then ran out of space and money. Though I'm not sure which ran out first. So I sold all my 16mm and went into super 8mm. I still have a great collection of films to watch and more space. To tell you the truth , I was amazed at how much product is out there.
Posted by Lee Mannering (Member # 728) on November 06, 2013, 05:49 AM:
My own collecting is based on a film title rather than a choice of many celluloid formats. For instance, many rare titles only made it onto 9.5mm film so that would be the choice of format and the same would apply to using Standard 8mm (reg 8) with a good example being the first Derann trailer ad reel which was only issued on Standard 8. As far as your question goes Super 8 has many advantages in that projectors can be compact and light and the films take up a fairly small area for storage plus thousands of titles were issued. Moving up the ladder to 35mm which we also have here in the shape of a Kinoton projector which takes up minimal space but film storage can be an issue if you opt to go wild collecting. The image of course from 35 is amazing with such clarity it will blow your mind at home, I view preserving a 35mm projector a privilege and am very choosy with any film collected due to space.If you are a little careful when buying 35mm features they generally sell for around the £50 mark in a quite close nit group of enthusiasts, but if you go to traders look to pay a great deal more. If you are a collector who loves cartoons 35mm is not for you as they are usually very expensive but 8mm has a massive choice at very reasonable prices.
Posted by Steve Klare (Member # 12) on November 06, 2013, 05:52 AM:
For me it's mostly of matter of having a standard. Being only in one gauge means that every film I have plays on every projector I have and I only need one of things like editors and splicers.
I was into Super-8 from teenage years, so this is where I stay. If I was into 16 it would be that.
It's not just a medium of film collecting to me, I also make films, which is a lot more affordable and portable in S8.
I see a lot of 16 at CineSea, and I like what I see, but the moment I make that leap life will become more complicated, and that's something I'd rather avoid.
[ November 06, 2013, 09:35 AM: Message edited by: Steve Klare ]
Posted by Paul Adsett (Member # 25) on November 06, 2013, 09:29 AM:
quote:Rather a suprising put down to super 8 collectors from someone who is about to host a big film collectors convention.
and re super 8 its a definate no to this gauge its like watching a film with sand in your eyes
Almost everybody here knows that super 8 prints can be amazing, and collecting and showing super 8 is a wonderful hobby.
If the poster feels that way what is he doing on the 8mm forum?
Posted by Steve Klare (Member # 12) on November 06, 2013, 09:41 AM:
At CineSea we have alternating Super-8 and 16 on the same screen Saturday night. Obviously in either case we are seeing prints good enough to show in front of a crowd, but the difference isn't astounding. (Certainly there was no "sand".)
Actually it was more a matter of the quality of individual prints than the gauge.
(Doug's GS Xenon with 1.0 lens certainly helped..)
Posted by Paul Adsett (Member # 25) on November 06, 2013, 09:49 AM:
Yes, I'd love to see the reaction Mr Guest would get making that comment to Keith Wilton and John Clancy!
Keith and John run all film sizes, but they both love super 8 and have promoted it for years. In fact super 8 has always been the main format of the BFCC, probably because that was where all the action was in the form of new releases.
If Mr Guest wants to run a 16mm only convention, more power to him, but please do not trash super 8 in the process.
Posted by Keith Ashfield (Member # 741) on November 06, 2013, 10:15 AM:
I think a quick look at the dealers, and what they represent, attending the Northern Film Collectors Convention will give Super 8 collectors an idea of what to expect. there are 21 dealers listed but only 4 have Super 8 listed against their name.
I am in no way "putting down" the Convention but as a Super 8 collector, I attended last years convention and actually spent longer queueing to get in than I actually spent in the dealers hall. There was very little in the way of Super 8 product available.
This, of course, is not the fault of the organiser, but I do think Super 8 collectors who are going should be aware of the fact that the guage of their choice is not "paramount" at this event.
The other point that needs to be remembered about the North Film Convention is that it was originally started with 8mm by Regent Films and then advanced greatly by Derek Simmonds of Derann for many years with fantastic success.
Back then all guages were welcome and none were "rubished" but the main product then was 8mm not 16/35mm.
Posted by Zechariah Sporre (Member # 2358) on November 06, 2013, 10:55 AM:
For me I would say that it is largely because off the storage space issue. Also super 8 tends to be a little cheaper in some of the genes that I like to collect.
I'm sure I could enjoy 16mm and 35mm quite a bit. However, quality isn't the main reason I'm into collecting film and it doesn't "hurt my eyes" to watch a digital movie Although, it is fun to see a print now and again with outstanding picture and quality.
Posted by Dominique De Bast (Member # 3798) on November 06, 2013, 11:41 AM:
All gauges have their own advantages and their own supporters. I collet films in 8, super 8, 9,5 and 16mm. I shoot also in these three first gauges (but mainly in 9,5 and super 8). I can see no reasons to start a war against a specific gauge. We should all show some solidarity as we all like the same thing : real movie on real filmstock. As I mentionned it in another post, a few years ago when there was still a super 8 festival in Brussels, super 8 films were projected on a big screen in a cinema and the picture was terrific (when the digital projections started at this festival, the size of the picture had to be reduced and the quality, even so, was far from what super 8 could offer at the same time, as projections were mixed).
Posted by David Guest (Member # 2791) on November 06, 2013, 11:54 AM:
re super 8 every one has a opinion I don't like super 8 I think it look terrible when you try to project a big picture from such a small frame if super 8 was good they would have it in the cinema picture quality is much better on 16mm but 35 has the edge .re super I do support it in fact there will be 2 first class film shows on super 8 presented by bob Nichols on a super 8 xenon projecter as this film convention is for all gauges of films and projecters
Posted by Steve Klare (Member # 12) on November 06, 2013, 11:56 AM:
My standard settup is two machines side by side so I can show films without stopping to rewind.
If I went into 16mm and wanted to keep the flexibility to show my entire collection this would become four projectors, two of them substantially bigger.
Being that this usually happens on a designated end of our dining room table and doesn't always go into storage when the show is over, who's volunteering to sell this idea to the other people in my household?
-although the audio settup to connect four machines into my stereo would be...interesting
Posted by David Guest (Member # 2791) on November 06, 2013, 11:56 AM:
re film fair I will be selling super 8 features as well as 16mm
Posted by Steve Klare (Member # 12) on November 06, 2013, 12:08 PM:
Saying Super-8 is no good because you can't use it theatrically is like saying a compact car is no good because you can't haul concrete with it.
-the right tool for the job, the right job for the tool.
You don't want to haul structural steel in a compact car and you don't want to drive to work in a 40 ton diesel truck with 10 forward speeds and air brakes. (...or at least you shouldn't!)
For the limted screen size my circumstances allow (about 5 feet by 8), S8 does just fine.
Posted by Graham Ritchie (Member # 559) on November 06, 2013, 12:26 PM:
A true film enthusiast will enjoy "all" gauges of film collecting and projection, and they "all" have there place...including my 35mm slides.
There is so much quality stuff on Super8 that you cant get on 16mm or 35mm and likewise with other gauges of film as well...as I say they all have there place...providing you have room to store it
Posted by Michael O'Regan (Member # 938) on November 06, 2013, 01:03 PM:
For me, 16mm is the gold standard of home projection. However, I started out with Super 8 back in my teens and I've recently gone back to that gauge.
Super 8 is more affordable. Good ,original 16mm prints became beyond my means while I had three kids at University.
David, I have seen Super 8 prints which are at least as good as 16 - one which immediately springs to mind is the Derann DRACULA. Others include some of the Blackhawk two reelers. So, while I agree with you that 16mm generally is much sharper and closer to theatrical quality than Super 8, I can't really agree when you suggest that Super 8 is unwatchable.
Posted by Vidar Olavesen (Member # 3354) on November 06, 2013, 01:07 PM:
Love Super 8 myself, but picture is sharper on 16mm. Of course 35mm is the ultimate format, it's a hassle and a lot of work compared to Super 8 especially, but also 16mm is quite easy to handle (not sure I agree if I get 10 years more on my already bad back)
Posted by Fabrizio Mosca (Member # 142) on November 06, 2013, 01:27 PM:
I collect all formats (8mm, s8, 9,5, 16mm and 35mm) and shoot both on super8 and in 16mm. I don't have preference on one format than the other for what pertains the features, but for short disney and warner toons I prefer to go to 16mm or to 35 only because there's more chance to find the IB tech versions of them.
The problem with super8, for me, is finding very good projectors and the risk that the print can be scratched more easily than the other formats.
[ November 07, 2013, 01:31 AM: Message edited by: Fabrizio Mosca ]
Posted by David Guest (Member # 2791) on November 06, 2013, 01:46 PM:
I totally agree with Michael may be I should correct my self yes I have seen some top tiles on super 8 as demonstrated by bob Nichols at my film conventions but what I meant to say was, if picture is only about 6ft its fine. but trying to project a big picture then you lose the quality where as 16nn its there
Posted by Paul Adsett (Member # 25) on November 06, 2013, 02:18 PM:
quote:Screen size is NOT a limiting factor with super 8mm. Resolution is determined by the angle the screen presents at the eye. Simply put a 24 ft wide screen viewed at 48 ft will have exactly the same sharpness as a 6ft wide screen viewed at 12 ft. The only limiting factor for super 8 projection is screen brightness, which is why the BFCC uses the Elmo GS1200 HTI with an f1.0 lens and a 2 bladed shutter.
I don't like super 8 I think it look terrible when you try to project a big picture from such a small frame if super 8 was good they would have it in the cinema
Posted by Robert Crewdson (Member # 3790) on November 06, 2013, 03:01 PM:
I agree with everything Michael O'Regan said.
Posted by David Ollerearnshaw (Member # 3296) on November 06, 2013, 04:09 PM:
Started out with super 8, then later bought B&H 16mm I like both gauges 8mm for shorts and the cut downs. 16mm for larger choice of feature titles and TV series that were never on 8mm. I have a few 35mm, but no projector (yet). I was hoping that someone would have collected 70mm too.
I project at home on 72" screen measured the correct way. I remember one year at Blackpool, The Gables hotel maybe Derann premièred "Raise The Titanic" on the biggest screen I had ever seen 8mm projected on. About 20ft I think.
I think at this time it was still organised by Regent Films and not Derann, but not 100% sure. Projection could have been done for the scope show by Tony Shapps of the Widescreen centre.
With the right pre print super 8 is excellent. I have had a couple of 16mm that were quite poor in focus.
But as long as its real film all the gauges would be OK with me.
Posted by Tom Photiou (Member # 130) on November 06, 2013, 04:13 PM:
lets all remeber that super 8mm is the gauge for home movies,i.e. amatures and enthusiats like all of us, i also have a very small collection of 16mm and of course the quality is going to be better in many cases,its a larger gauge and its use was semi-proffesionals and TV, many features were also shot on this gauge but the costs prohibit most people of an average wage. Super 8mm ,as ive said, is designed for the home use but quality wise its wrong to trash it, some titles are so good its hard to belive they are 8mm and not 16. If you want to project onto very large screens in big halls then obviously 16mm is better for you but i cant sit back and see 8mm critised like this, thats just ridiculous.
As for the question asked, my choice of gauge is 8mm, for cost,size and its more than ideal for the home use, if you watch films on 8mm like Mickeys xmas carol, the fog, infact most of the films released by Derann,Walton and other top 8mm dealers the quality is generally outstanding. Most people have homes with rooms that are perfectly matched for the projection of 8mm, we all have an opinion but go easy on our gauge
Posted by Mal Brake (Member # 14) on November 06, 2013, 04:34 PM:
David, I too used to attend the Blackpool events when hosted by Regent Films and Bill Davison.
Yes it was Tony Shapps presenting the scope shows. The screen in question was the 16ft wide 'sidewinder'. I almost bought one from Tony but at £300 it was a little too much for me at the time.
I have successfully projected super8 in halls onto an 8ft wide screen. As Michael implies, viewer to screen distance is very important. I made sure the screen was set well away from the front row of people.
On one occasion I projected a DCR film 'Tracks Around The Island' which has stunning colour.One person approached me and said "you can't beat good old 16mil can you"? I invited him to take a closer look at the GS..
Posted by Michael O'Regan (Member # 938) on November 06, 2013, 04:58 PM:
Of course, there's one thing that's been overlooked in this.
It does depend on what titles one likes to collect.
My main interest is the silent era and pre-code stuff. There's little of much interest or in good quality on Super 8 from that era in the feature length dept. For my purposes 16mm is invaluable.
There are some who collect Super 8 for it's own sake, by which I mean collecting digests, cut-downs, etc. I have no interest in this, but, as I said above there are some two reel comedies by certain distributors which, to me, are more than adequate on Super 8. I'm very much a fan of Charley Chase and I see no need to spend up to £100 in some cases on a Chase two-reeler on 16mm when I can have much the same on Super 8 for £10 - £20.
Posted by David Guest (Member # 2791) on November 06, 2013, 05:25 PM:
re stalls I would think that most of the stalls will be selling a variety of cine films and accessories ,re mr ashfields statement I am in no way "putting down" the Convention but as a Super 8 collector, I attended last years convention and actually spent longer queueing to get in than I actually spent in the dealers hall. There was very little in the way of Super 8 product available end of quote . my wife and daughter in law was on the door and they had everyone in very quickly as the business we are in we deal with crowd control very good as every weekend we deal with thousands of people of all ages .I seem to see paul foster going away with lots of super 8 films etc plus many more and there is always plenty of super 8 items on the bring and buy as well
Posted by Mike Peckham (Member # 16) on November 06, 2013, 05:39 PM:
David, you should see one of the fantastic and highly professional super 8 presentations at the BFCC where John and Keith use John’s HTI GS1200 to project a scope image onto their 24ft wide screen. It would change your view of the potential of super 8!
My preference has always been for super as there are plenty of titles available that interest me, the film and equipment is of a size that makes storage practical and the image and sound has the potential to rival 16mm.
But in an ideal world I would like to collect all gauges!
Posted by David Guest (Member # 2791) on November 06, 2013, 05:48 PM:
hi mike yes maybe next year I will have a stall at ealing and then I will be able to see the film show on super 8 but even with a good lamp behind it and distance there must be some sort of picture quality but that's only my opinion in fact I have just got home from picking up a xenon super 8 projecter so will be trying it tomorrow in my cinema I will be projecting 20ft with the super 8 and same with my 16mm xenon showing identical films so I will be able to see which is the best
Posted by Winbert Hutahaean (Member # 58) on November 06, 2013, 09:12 PM:
This type of question had been discussed on several threads in this forum.
To me collecting small gauges film does really mean "small". Going to larger format means that you are no longer on small gauge league.
When we are in a VW buggy forum, there is no point to ask why you don't go to VW Karmann Ghia which is more comfortable and faster. We know that of course.
I am collecting super 8mm for the sake of loving the film format (i.e celluloid). If I want to get easier and unfaded film, simply watch DVD with a Pany LCD projector.
But I love real film, and since I am projecting inside the house, I chose super 8mm only with the below reasons:
1. Space (I want to have films as many as possible, but my life CANNOT be surrounded by can of can films. I have to have another side of my life. My family needs my attention too)
2. Price (I already set my self to spend around max. $30 for a digest or $100 for a feature. I have more money in my banks but my life is not only for films. I need to enjoy the other sides of this world)
3. Time with film (8mm has more digest, 2 or 3 parters while 16mm is mostly full feature. I can enjoy one title through a digest/three parter and doing something worth after that. With 16mm, I have to sit 2 hours to enjoy one title. My kids will not be able to do this, while I want my kids also to get involved in this hobby too. A digest or 2/3 parters is the only option to attract them).
4. Stereo (8mm has stereo sound while 16mm is only mono. I cannot say mono is better than stereo unless I only have one ear )
5. Art works (8mm is mostly with nice artwork, while 16mm comes only with can or plain box. It is so boring to see can by can on my library self compared to blue Marketing Film box which I always proud as the best super 8mm art work)
8mm is grainier.... sure...this is only 8mm format. Will I try to upgrade to 16mm..... ?
Do you think it will solve the problem? ...Why then not to go to 35mm which is obviously sharper than 16mm?
...But then how about 70mm?
Out human life will never get satisfied to anything, that is why after VHS we have LD then DVD and now BluRay. This will only cost you more money eventually.
my 2 cents,
Posted by Graham Ritchie (Member # 559) on November 06, 2013, 10:33 PM:
One of the things I have found with Super8 is that there is less chance of finding films with damaged sprocket holes compared with 16mm.
A lot of 16mm prints I have come across, have had a hard time over the years "sprocket wise" simply, because you have a claw pulling the film down, and its a much wider frame area being dragged down through the gate than with Super8.
Once the perforations on 16mm get damaged like that, the film will get jumpy in the gate. I am not saying you wont find damaged perforations in Super8.....I just have not come across it as much, actually, very seldom on Super8.
Another point, and Winbert has just made it, is the cut down 3/400ft films like "Airplane" and the like, they do make the movie far more enjoyable to watch, time and time again simply because they were well edited "padding removed" and have a running time of only around 50 minutes.
Derann also released heaps of interesting stuff on 8mm over the years "Look at Life" etc and a lot of the colour is still fine.
I have put on Super8 film shows in the past where people comment afterwards, how good 8mm can actually look. But like any film projecting, its down to the quality of the print, the projector itself eg two bladed, the lens, the screen...has it got generous amount of black and so on.
As far as film gauges...I really would like an "IMAX" projector and platter as they have now gone down the digital yellow brick road.....I do need a bigger garage
Posted by Oemer Yalinkilic (Member # 86) on November 07, 2013, 03:50 AM:
Thank you very much for the lively discussion.
This topic is not new, but I am thinking myself often about this question and I changed my mind from time to time.
I sold few years ago many titles from my 16mm collection as I started to collect 35mm. Later I regret that I sold some prints.
But this is often the problem between 35mm and 16mm. To decide if I want a title on 35mm or 16mm is not a matter.
What I don´t understand is the question between Super 8 and 16mm.
Recently I bought some desirable titles on Super 8 and as I cogitate about the value of the prints and comparable 16mm prints value, it was a mystery for me, why someone pay sometimes more for a Super 8 print than the same or similar title on 16mm.
For example some time ago as a forum member from Spain wanted to sell his 16mm LPP print of The Blade Runner, it was not sold immediately. But lot of forum members would buy a brand new Super 8 print of Blade Runner.
The reason can´t be only the Stereo sound.
The other curiosity was as I sold some years ago my 16mm original LPP scope print of Return of the Jedi on Ebay.
I got something around of 500 Euro for my print, the buyer sold few days later his Super 8 print and he got the same price for his Super 8 print.
And I must say, the 16mm print was definitely better.
Posted by Brian Stearns (Member # 3792) on November 07, 2013, 04:08 AM:
I enjoy the cutdowns, having a family sometimes I don't have time to watch a whole film.great things are storage space,cheaper shipping and easier to put them in book bag. 16mm films don't go well in them.
I like 16mm because the variety of films and tv shows. I hate films on cores or no cores. I rather pay extra shipping.
Collecting 8mm films for me are cheaper then 16mm films.Though I see people on eBay charge 16mm prices for 8mm film.
Nothing like projecting a film on the wall. Ahhh the smell of a projector
Posted by Keith Ashfield (Member # 741) on November 07, 2013, 04:13 AM:
Mr Guest -
quote:Just shows how short a time we were in the dealers room
my wife and daughter in law was on the door and they had everyone in very quickly as the business we are in we deal with crowd control very good as every weekend we deal with thousands of people of all ages .
quote:The secret is to get there before Paul
I seem to see paul foster going away with lots of super 8 films etc
quote:Couldn't see the Super 8 for because of the amount of DVD's on the stall. Must have been the "sand in my eyes"
plus many more and there is always plenty of super 8 items on the bring and buy as well
Seriously David - I am not "rubbishing" your efforts witn the convention, I am pleased that you have the Convention and appreciate the amount of hard work that goes into this event. I will be attending this year (providing I can get in before Mr Foster) .
My comments were "just an opinion", as a Super 8 collector, as your statement about Super 8 quality, being a "larger gauge" collector, was an opinion. )
Posted by David Guest (Member # 2791) on November 07, 2013, 04:34 AM:
hi kieth I understand what you are saying I have trebled the size of the bring and buy this year as it was as you stated overcrowed with all sorts of stuff ,I don't let any one in till 10am but paul foster is always at the front ready to get in ,there are some new sellers this year attending one guy selling refurbished projecers 8 and 16 .and I would think that most of the stalls will have super 8 on ,I have some super 8 features this year which I will be selling
Posted by Keith Ashfield (Member # 741) on November 07, 2013, 05:13 AM:
Good news David. Looking forward to the event.
Posted by Mal Brake (Member # 14) on November 07, 2013, 05:43 AM:
[QUOTE] ] One of the things I have found with Super8 is that there is less chance of finding films with damaged sprocket holes compared with 16mm.
That was my experience too when I added 16mm to the hobby. One would have thought that there would be more damage to S8 seeing how close the sprocket holes are to the edge of the film.
There is one scenario where big screen presentation of S8 can be marred and that is the appearance of lines /scratches.16mm is about 4 times the area of S8 so a line a fraction of a mil wide would look less intrusive on 16mm than it would on the much more magnified S8 image on the same size screen, given the relative picture areas.
Posted by Winbert Hutahaean (Member # 58) on November 07, 2013, 08:16 AM:
quote:Oemer, that is to show tha basic principle of economic, i.e supply and demand.
The other curiosity was as I sold some years ago my 16mm original LPP scope print of Return of the Jedi on Ebay.
I got something around of 500 Euro for my print, the buyer sold few days later his Super 8 print and he got the same price for his Super 8 print.
And I must say, the 16mm print was definitely better.
We all know that the supply of ROTJ on 16mm is rather plenty compared to 8mm. There are a lot of ROTJ version on 16mm knowing it was used for certain purposes (TV, librarry, small cinema at rigs/clubs, etc). But 8mm afaik is only available from Derann.
All 8mm collectors who are looking ROTJ will only after this version and that will pump its price up, right?
This happens in any type of collecting hoby that include my initial parallelism that a certain model of VW buggy will sell more than a reguler Karmann Ghia
Posted by David Ollerearnshaw (Member # 3296) on November 07, 2013, 08:26 AM:
When you look back to the early 70's and the film hire libraries were in full swing, the major complaint was the 'new' gauge super 8 prints coming back scratched and with damaged sprockets. Some at the time dropped super 8 and just had standard 8.
Look at some of the projectors available in the first 10 years of super 8 that doesn't surprise me.
I bought an ex-library print of "The Naked And The Dead" 4x400ft B/W, cost maybe £10 the part where the claw would have engaged were all torn.
Remember a lot of projectors didn't have sprockets, they just used the claw to pull the film though. Frightening that, but cheap to make.
One reason I also have 16mm is more variety in features, usually complete. Also like Brian says the TV shows such as "Hogan's Heroes" "The Flintstones" "Hawaii-5-O" and many more.
Now if I had a big BIG BIG house 70mm could be there. Dream over.
Posted by Osi Osgood (Member # 424) on November 07, 2013, 12:11 PM:
I'm surprised that I didn't notice this topic earlier ...
It's a matter of cost, but great curiosity. I rarely collect super 8 magnetic anymore, (though Winberts comment about stereo is certainly a valid point, and there's nothing like having that stereo booming on a spectacular print!), I love to collect the optical sound features as, they usually have a sharpness on par with nay good 16MM and the number of extremely rare prints on super 8 optical sound is still quite inviting ...
... though, I'm running out of unexplored continents for finding rare super 8 optical sound. They have popped up in the strangest places, I must say.
Posted by Paul Adsett (Member # 25) on November 07, 2013, 05:32 PM:
But are,nt most optical prints now faded to pink? And does that also mean that the sound track is disappearing as well?
Posted by Andrew Woodcock (Member # 3260) on November 13, 2013, 05:29 PM:
No Paul, not all by any means as I have quite a few that still have very good colour even if not excellent colour compared to LPP prints, for example Lethal Weapon, Croc Dundee, A Fish Called Wanda etc
Posted by Osi Osgood (Member # 424) on November 14, 2013, 12:40 PM:
Yeah, My Croc Dundee still looks great ...
Micheal, I'd strongly urge you to look at Blackhawks catalog of early cinema. In many cases, films weren't actually "resurrected from the dung heap" by Blackhawk's efforts, and while there are some lower quality releases, (for instance, the laurel and Hardy features), the silent shorts tend to be of very high quality, and even better when you see the earlier standard 8mm prints, which are often quite stunning.
Posted by Michael O'Regan (Member # 938) on November 14, 2013, 12:47 PM:
Yep, I realise that there is SOME Super 8 from my era of interest from Blackhawk, in particular.
My point is that there is way more on 16mm.
Posted by Robert Crewdson (Member # 3790) on November 14, 2013, 01:01 PM:
Are Super 8 optical prints produced any different from 16mm optical. I have one short that was red when I got it. I never noticed anything different about the sound.
Regarding more prints in 16mm with damaged perforations than Super 8, could this have anything to do with the fact that some prints will have had a lot of use on projectors that were manually threaded. I damaged one film on a manual threader because I hadn't noticed that the film had come of the rear guide roller when I turned the switch to forward.
Posted by Andrew Woodcock (Member # 3260) on November 15, 2013, 08:16 AM:
I know that the soundtrack can fade if the print fades but on any I have even if the print has faded a little the soundtrack is still ok. As with all optical soundtracks you never get a brilliant frequency range on them and they do tend to be very "clacky" to my ears with far too much midrange and treble and nowhere near enough lower end frequencies even with the tone setting at it's lowest, but ironically the one print I have where the soundrack is fading has brilliant colour? Doesn't make sense I know unless the recording was always too low. That, I suppose, I will never know unless anyone else still has a copy of "She'll Follow You Anywhere". Quite a rare 70's British comedy and somewhat in the vein of the "Carry On" series.
Visit www.film-tech.com for free equipment manual downloads. Copyright 2003-2019 Film-Tech Cinema Systems LLC