8mm Forum: 8mm ... " a toy film gauge " ?

This is topic 8mm ... " a toy film gauge " ? in forum 8mm Forum at 8mm Forum.

To visit this topic, use this URL:
https://8mmforum.film-tech.com/cgi-bin/ubb/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=1;t=012426

Posted by David Hardy (Member # 4628) on August 05, 2018, 12:00 PM:

Someone just said to me they dont like any 8mm film as they regard it as " ...a toy film gauge regardless of how good the print quality might be i much prefer 16mm film to it ... ".

I replied ... "yes okay you have your opinions and reasons for that view and i am inclined to agree but it is and can be a very expensive toy."

What do you think !

[Smile]

Posted by Melvin England (Member # 5270) on August 05, 2018, 12:29 PM:

It sounds like it was said by someone who knew you were into film and just wanted to rattle your cage.

Posted by Robert Crewdson (Member # 3790) on August 05, 2018, 12:35 PM:

Similar to my thoughts, possibly because I remember toy projectors being supplied with Standard 8 film. I always looked on it like an executive toy, but it was that or nothing, but I was never really that happy with Super 8. I haven't watched a lot of my collection in years, while 16mm gets frequent outings.

Posted by Paul Adsett (Member # 25) on August 05, 2018, 03:09 PM:

David, was the guy you talked to named Denys Davis by any chance!
I remember his column in Amateur Cine World where he expressed similar sentiments, and unmercifully bashed 8mm at every opportunity. [Roll Eyes]

Today of course we now know that super 8mm can be incredibly good, even with CinemaScope and stereo sound. Of course 16mm is better, but 16mm 'is a toy' compared with 35mm! [Big Grin]

Posted by Luigi Castellitto (Member # 3759) on August 05, 2018, 03:59 PM:

In truth, I see more "toy" the digital format, with his shots with telephone and other childish applications.
Let's try to put in hand a super-equipped Bolex in the hands of a 10 year old boy, let's see what happens. [Smile]

Posted by Mike Newell (Member # 23) on August 05, 2018, 04:55 PM:

David I suppose this colleague was slightly stooped over from the hernia carrying his heavy 16mm projector. Anyway 16mm is great if you like everything in black and white or pink if in colour and made before 1980. 😂😂😂. I think Talking Pictures Channel in UK is the digitial equivalent for 16mm. As someone else said 35mm collectors look down on 16mm as a toy gauge for amateurs 😜

Posted by Nantawat Kittiwarakul (Member # 6050) on August 05, 2018, 08:35 PM:

But even 16mm films were intended to be "amateur" format first,then evolved to something more serious later on? [Confused]

That sounds much like cassette tape,miniDV,AVCHD codec,etc. that first marketed as pure amateur format,and creep onto upper market later.

Posted by Burton Sundquist (Member # 5813) on August 05, 2018, 11:34 PM:

...Reminds me of the scene in Flight of the Phoenix where James Stewart refers to Hardy Kruger's model airplane designs as "toy planes".

Posted by Allan Broadfield (Member # 2298) on August 06, 2018, 02:19 AM:

The 'Flight of the phoenix' is an apt analogy, albeit being fiction, but I've heard similar comments regarding 8mm being a 'toy', made to a fellow enthusiast way back in the seventies, when film was pretty much still king.
Some of us recently in these columns have agreed that we may be a little barmy spending our hard earned on home movies, but most hobbies may seem a little odd to those not in sympathy.

[ August 06, 2018, 05:40 AM: Message edited by: Allan Broadfield ]

Posted by Maurice Leakey (Member # 916) on August 06, 2018, 02:34 AM:

The old Movie Maker magazine had regular reviews of 8mm package films by Bill Davison.
It was called "Bootlace Cinema".
A much nicer name.

Posted by Allan Broadfield (Member # 2298) on August 06, 2018, 02:43 AM:

Ah, memories, the 'Bootlace Cinema' was often the first part turned to with each latest issue!

Posted by Joe Caruso (Member # 11) on August 06, 2018, 08:55 AM:

That being the case, I've handled "toys" for many years - Remember also that 16mm 100' editions were also considered "toy-films" for children - Quality on most 8mm is superior, still remains so - Suppose you can consider those toys to be toys, only handled by adults - Interesting - Shorty

Posted by Steve Klare (Member # 12) on August 06, 2018, 09:40 AM:

I think for the most part it's the case of the right tool for the job. 16mm has a lot higher resolution and that's important for filling a larger screen. On the other hand, this becomes a smaller and smaller advantage as the screen size goes down. A crappy resolution image looks just fine on a cellphone screen, for example.

All other things being equal, I'd rather have 8mm at the house. The film storage is easier and the machines are half the size. Everything is lighter, the transport is quieter (which matters a lot in a small space like a living room) and zoom lenses make setting up a lot more flexible.

I wouldn't want to try two 16mm machines and setup in my Civic coupe either. We brought one home from CineSea and I thought somebody was going to have to ride up in the cargo pod! (You really need to plan for this kind of thing.)

I haven't really messed around with 16mm sound yet, but I suspect the optical tracks aren't going to amaze me.

What I really like about 16 is the different films available that never saw the light of 8mm. That's the main reason I went into it more than the technical side. If I started out in 16 I imagine I'd do the same thing the other way for this reason.

8mm goes toe to toe with 16 on the big screen down in Wildwood, but to make that happen, it's the better prints with the best lenses and the brightest lamps. You can make a car with a small engine go very fast, but it takes everything being better than the bigger-engined ones.

[ August 06, 2018, 10:43 AM: Message edited by: Steve Klare ]

UBB.classic^TM 6.3.1.2