8mm Forum: Pro8mm now beta testing new 100D color reversal film

8mm Forum

my profile | my password | search | faq | register | forum home

next oldest topic

next newest topic

»	8mm Forum » 8mm Forum » Pro8mm now beta testing new 100D color reversal film (Page 1)

UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!

This topic comprises 2 pages: 1 2

Author

Topic: Pro8mm now beta testing new 100D color reversal film

Tom Spielman
Master Film Handler

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

posted June 27, 2016 01:00 PM

Email Tom Spielman

Send New Private Message

Edit/Delete Post

I'm assuming I received a notification because I recently purchased one of their remaining stock of Kodak 100D reversal cartridges. There's a limited supply.

The new stuff is Provia 8 by Fuji. Pro8mm is collaborating with Retro-8 of Japan.

The cost is $80 a cartridge which includes processing. That's $15 more than what I paid for their Kodak 100D and $35 more than what they charge for 200D reversal. Hopefully that price will come down if they start getting regular stock.

| IP: Logged

Alexander Vandeputte
Expert Film Handler

Posts: 243
From: Belgium
Registered: Nov 2009

posted June 27, 2016 03:25 PM

Send New Private Message

Edit/Delete Post

Unfortunately the price for reversal stock is not likely to come down, since no one makes it anymore. What is being sold are left overs reconfected from 35mm slide film...
Ferrania in Italy remain our only hope for reviving reversal film stock, but until that day there is only overpiced (and possibly outdated) reversal stock available...

| IP: Logged

Raleigh M. Christopher
Expert Film Handler

Posts: 130
From: New York, NY, USA
Registered: Jan 2016

posted June 28, 2016 01:18 PM

Send New Private Message

Edit/Delete Post

What makes you think Kodak won't bring back color reversal in the future?

| IP: Logged

Dominique De Bast
Film God

Posts: 4486
From: Brussels, Belgium
Registered: Jun 2013

posted June 28, 2016 01:30 PM

Email Dominique De Bast

Send New Private Message

Edit/Delete Post

Raleigh, I guess if Kodak intended to bring colour stock back in the market in a forseable future, the company would have announced it.

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

| IP: Logged

Raleigh M. Christopher
Expert Film Handler

Posts: 130
From: New York, NY, USA
Registered: Jan 2016

posted June 28, 2016 01:31 PM

Send New Private Message

Edit/Delete Post

Not nessecarily. Their Super 8 revival project has only just begun.

| IP: Logged

Dominique De Bast
Film God

Posts: 4486
From: Brussels, Belgium
Registered: Jun 2013

posted June 28, 2016 01:34 PM

Email Dominique De Bast

Send New Private Message

Edit/Delete Post

I hope you're right.

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

| IP: Logged

Adrian Winchester
Film God

Posts: 2941
From: Croydon, London, UK
Registered: Aug 2004

posted June 28, 2016 07:01 PM

Send New Private Message

Edit/Delete Post

I still live in hope that Kodak might bring it back. They have impressive orders for their new camera and if a reasonable proportion then start asking for reversal stock, that should be an incentive, especially as they would do much of the processing.

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

| IP: Logged

William Olson
Master Film Handler

Posts: 287
From: Poughkeepsie, NY USA
Registered: Jun 2010

posted June 28, 2016 07:48 PM

Email William Olson

Send New Private Message

Edit/Delete Post

To think...back in the 70's, I could buy a Kodachrome 40 cartridge for $4 and get it processed for $2. Did I mention it was Kodachrome? I miss Kodachrome. It was the best!

| IP: Logged

Tom Spielman
Master Film Handler

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

posted June 28, 2016 07:53 PM

Email Tom Spielman

Send New Private Message

Edit/Delete Post

Kodak seems to be trying to straddle both worlds. Their current Super 8 filmstock and camera features appear to be aimed at people capturing on film but ultimately outputting in digital. Their color negative stock is more forgiving than reversal and scans better (according to them).

Based on that I'd guess that they don't have any intentions to make any more color reversal film but I hope I'm wrong.

Personally I want to be able to project the film but also have quality digital scans. I'll admit that of the two, digital scans are more important just because of the ease of sharing them. I realize that I may be a minority here in that regard.

| IP: Logged

Raleigh M. Christopher
Expert Film Handler

Posts: 130
From: New York, NY, USA
Registered: Jan 2016

posted June 29, 2016 08:56 AM

Send New Private Message

Edit/Delete Post

It makes no sense as Kodak still makes B/W reversal film. Stil, if Kodak won't make color reversal, then give me the ability to have S8 prints made from their S8 negative stock. Though honestly, I'd like both.

| IP: Logged

Andrew Woodcock
Film God

Posts: 7477
From: Manchester Uk
Registered: Aug 2012

posted June 29, 2016 06:03 PM

Edit/Delete Post

For a company who are supposedly marketing a brand new camera range, the lack of any decent camera film cartridges regarding reversal film stock is beyond remarkable!

We need reversal stock of 100D or K40 standard.
Beyond this, for the remaining protectionist out there,
We need a reversal stock mag sound cartridge to keep the filming fraternity contented and buoyant for the future.

It's old technology, but it worked...just like vinyl worked and still does!!

There...that can't be all too difficult now can it? After all, it was all perfected once, decades ago!!

People who crave analogue, want it just as was. Simples!!

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

| IP: Logged

Brian Fretwell
Phenomenal Film Handler

Posts: 1785
From: London, UK
Registered: Jun 2014

posted June 30, 2016 04:28 AM

Email Brian Fretwell

Send New Private Message

Edit/Delete Post

I read (from a Derann magazine) that Kodak stopped producing pre-strip print stock due to the amount of film damaged in the process making it not economic. I bet they'd use that excuse for not producing sound cartridges now.

| IP: Logged

Raleigh M. Christopher
Expert Film Handler

Posts: 130
From: New York, NY, USA
Registered: Jan 2016

posted June 30, 2016 08:40 AM

Send New Private Message

Edit/Delete Post

How hard would it be to record sound on Super 8 as optical analog, or optical digital? Of course, for the either, Kodak would have to also build new projectors.

| IP: Logged

Tom Spielman
Master Film Handler

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

posted June 30, 2016 01:36 PM

Email Tom Spielman

Send New Private Message

Edit/Delete Post

Looking at their new camera's features it's pretty easy to see what Kodak's future intentions are and unfortunately it's not making sound cartridges.

The new camera has crystal sync and records sound digitally so the audio and video can be later married digitally.

I'm sure it would also be possible to sync the audio with a projector if you wanted to go that route but there'd have to be a way to for the projector and the audio playback device to stay in sync. I don't think it would work with just any projector but I've seen it discussed here before.

| IP: Logged

Andrew Woodcock
Film God

Posts: 7477
From: Manchester Uk
Registered: Aug 2012

posted June 30, 2016 05:20 PM

Edit/Delete Post

No it would not Tom. Equally, because Kodak's only foresight with this project is to somehow convince our analogue obsessed (for the time being) public, that marrying the best of both technologies, digital and analogue, is the way forward, I fear there will equally be no thought given to bringing to market any new reversal stock.

Basically using this stuff traditionally with a cine projector, is not in their plans or thoughts.

I cannot see the new generation of film makers being convinced for any particular length of time, that converting a cine film then back to digital to view it at considerable expense for a 3 minute take, is the way forward myself.
Maybe the odd music video photographer etc will enjoy this facility for the unique characteristics that only film can bring to the table, maybe the odd bespoke Wedding photographer may think likewise, but en masse?

I don't think so somehow, not for any real length of time anyhow.

Give traditional users an option for reversal stock, you may not have a huge market, but it would purchase the product regularly and for many years to come, I feel.

In fact kodak, it should never have been discontinued in the first instance if you valued your loyal customers. [Confused]

[Confused]

[ June 30, 2016, 06:49 PM: 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 June 30, 2016 07:29 PM

Email Tom Spielman

Send New Private Message

Edit/Delete Post

I suspect the traditional market for reversal film was drying up and they determined that they couldn't make it at a profit any more. I don't think that's going to change. After all, the traditional market was home movies and Super 8 is not likely to see any sort of revival for that purpose.

I was at a Target today (local big box discount department store) and on a whim I thought I'd see if they still sold 35mm film. They didn't as far as I could tell but they do sell polaroid instant cameras and film. The film is much smaller than it use to be. Anyway, I think that is very telling.

We've become accustomed to being able to see the pictures immediately. The idea of paying for film, paying again to have it processed, and then waiting to see how many actually turned out doesn't make a lot of sense in this era. So instant film hangs on while traditional film has become a specialty item.

I also fear that any major Super 8 resurgence will be temporary but my hope is that it will at least remain a small but healthy niche.

| IP: Logged

Raleigh M. Christopher
Expert Film Handler

Posts: 130
From: New York, NY, USA
Registered: Jan 2016

posted June 30, 2016 08:10 PM

Send New Private Message

Edit/Delete Post

I just love the Eeyore style pessimism and negativity from everyone, including even people who actually LIKE Super 8, that I encounter all over the place. Even when good things are happening. It's amazing. No, Super 8 won't be the wide choice for home movies again. The general public just isn't that smart really. Look at the idiots who abandoned Super 8 for VHS camcorders. Those tapes today look like shit, and most people don't have a VHS VCR to play them on anymore. Or they accidentally erased them. Records and film are NOT going anywhere. LP's should have died already in that case. Society has ben going through a highly overrated Digital mania, that I think is slowly subsiding. In the end, things will balance out a bit more, as people with brains say "hey, wait a minute" and don't follow the digital lemming trail, whether it be sound or still or moving images. Digital won't go away, but the heated obsession over it will cool, as people out there regain their bearings.

| IP: Logged

Andrew Woodcock
Film God

Posts: 7477
From: Manchester Uk
Registered: Aug 2012

posted June 30, 2016 09:31 PM

Edit/Delete Post

Anyhow, Super 8mm for the masses, that's all I can conclude from the crazy world of today!!

[ July 01, 2016, 06:00 AM: Message edited by: Andrew Woodcock ]

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

| IP: Logged

Raleigh M. Christopher
Expert Film Handler

Posts: 130
From: New York, NY, USA
Registered: Jan 2016

posted July 01, 2016 02:45 AM

Send New Private Message

Edit/Delete Post

Maybe it was just a little too early in the morning for you.

| IP: Logged

Andrew Woodcock
Film God

Posts: 7477
From: Manchester Uk
Registered: Aug 2012

posted July 01, 2016 05:59 AM

Edit/Delete Post

[Big Grin]

[Big Grin]

[Wink]

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

| IP: Logged

Raleigh M. Christopher
Expert Film Handler

Posts: 130
From: New York, NY, USA
Registered: Jan 2016

posted July 01, 2016 08:06 AM

Send New Private Message

Edit/Delete Post

I see you've thought a little bit better...

| IP: Logged

Tom Spielman
Master Film Handler

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

posted July 01, 2016 03:23 PM

Email Tom Spielman

Send New Private Message

Edit/Delete Post

Maybe somebody can help me with the chronology a little bit. I'm in my early 50's. My family's home movies were all standard 8mm taken by my father who died in 1972. I know Super 8 was pretty well established by that time but apparently my father was not inclined to upgrade.

While in college in 1985, my roommate and I thought would be fun to film a bunch of our friends so we each borrowed our parents' cameras which we thought were quite ancient (the cameras, not our parents). I remember being mildly surprised that I could get film so easily. Yet, in 1985 video cameras we extraordinarily expensive and it seems to me that a majority of people must have still been using Super 8 for home movies. In fact I'm starting to question my own memory a little. Was it Standard 8 that I thought was outdated? Silent 8? or just movie film in general? I'm not sure I really knew the difference between 8mm and Super 8 at the time.

I don't expect you all to know what I was thinking 30 years ago, but I'm wondering if any of you have a good sense for when video really started to take over.

Also, did sound capable Super 8 ever have a big market? I've heard that it was never more than about 10% of the total volume of Super 8 film sold.

| IP: Logged

Steve Klare
Film Guy

Posts: 7016
From: Long Island, NY, USA
Registered: Jun 2003

posted July 01, 2016 03:59 PM

Email Steve Klare

Send New Private Message

Edit/Delete Post

I started to shoot Super-8 in 1978 as a teenager. There really weren't "camcorders" per se, but video cameras which required you to sling your battery equipped VCR over your shoulder on a strap. These never really caught on, it's when they made a real all-in-one camcorder a few years later things changed a lot more quickly.

A lot of people still shot film. The following year the photography club at my high school made a film, and we never even considered video.

At the time you could still buy cameras and projectors in many department stores. (In the photo department, not "home electronics": that's where the TVs and stereos were!) Kodachrome and Ektachrome film was in every drug store and supermarket. It was only once you wanted something slightly funky like black and white film did you have to go to a real camera shop.

By 1985 the slide towards video would have been well under way. A lot of the gear we use today was already out of production. Right around then, I was out to dinner with my Aunt and Uncle and he told me I wouldn't be able to buy film at all within a year. (Wouldn't he be surprised!)

Super-8 in general was an unusual item: I saw an estimate once that stated it was something like 3% of the amateur photography market. Sound was rarer still. I knew maybe five families that had home movies: none of them had sound. The first time I ever saw a S8 sound projector it was mine because I decided to make the leap.

-this was 2002.

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

| IP: Logged

Tom Spielman
Master Film Handler

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

posted July 01, 2016 04:27 PM

Email Tom Spielman

Send New Private Message

Edit/Delete Post

Thanks Steve, that helps clarify some things. I guess I'd just assumed that most middle class families by the 70's and 80's made home movies but maybe not.

Canon has a camera history page on their site. Their last Super 8 cameras were introduced in 1982 or 1983. It says right there that video had already taken hold but the only video cameras they were selling at the time were those separate camera/recorder combos. I can't imagine that many people would have seen those as even affordable. Maybe they're just referring to the higher end market.

It's possible too that video wasn't all that unaffordable in comparison if you wanted sound. With sound film, you needed a sound capable camera and a sound capable projector. With video, you could just use your TV.

| IP: Logged

Andrew Woodcock
Film God

Posts: 7477
From: Manchester Uk
Registered: Aug 2012

posted July 01, 2016 04:49 PM

Edit/Delete Post

Yes Raleigh, you're right. It made perfect sense when I read it through again sorry. [Wink]

[Wink]

Tom, I don't believe class came into it with regard to who shot with film vs who didn't.

We were a very ordinary working class family but I used film from an early age as did many others I know and knew at the time back then of similar status to our own.

It was more to do with interest than anything else. Cine has always been a minority hobby when compared to many other hobbies. Those that were interested enough back then, would still find a way to buy films and a camera similarly as a smoker will always find the money for tobacco.

Those early huge cameras and separate recorders taking full sized VHS cassettes that Steve speaks about, were never really that popular here in the UK.
As they were present at the very beginning of the video age, they really were aimed at the wealthy end of the market of movie makers.
By the time camcorders came about, be it 8mm, hi 8 or VHS-C, just about everybody had one or someone in the family had one to borrow one from for a family wedding etc etc.
Even people who previously had no interest whatsoever in moviemaking suddenly took a interest.

Early car phones were a similar luxury item to those huge video cameras and recorders in the early 80s here.
They cost more than average car, weighed more than the average car back then and were a true symbol of someone who believed they were flying the flag high for Thatchers yuppie Britain back then [Smile]

[Smile]

)

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

| IP: Logged

All times are Central

This topic comprises 2 pages: 1 2

Move Topic

Delete Topic

next oldest topic

next newest topic

Printer-friendly view of this topic

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

UBB.classic^TM 6.3.1.2