8mm Forum: Time warp - digital didn't happen?

This is topic Time warp - digital didn't happen? in forum General Yak at 8mm Forum.

To visit this topic, use this URL:
https://8mmforum.film-tech.com/cgi-bin/ubb/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=8;t=003085

Posted by Allan Broadfield (Member # 2298) on May 03, 2014, 11:21 AM:

Recently I was reminiscing with a like minded pal (film mad), about what would the consequences have been if digital, or indeed video of any sort, hadn't happened?
Film presumably would have continued it's development (yes I saw the pun there), resulting in even more improvements in grain structure, super 8 optical sound prints would have possibly become more common, and cheaper, as these could be printed in one pass, and features would perhaps be manufactured in cassettes of some type, like the airplane prints.
As regards film grain, this has already improved, with 16mm giving 35mm quality when blown up digitally, but it's fascinating to think what could have been.
Maybe it would have outpriced itself without the incredibly cheap DVD's becoming available?

Posted by Larry Arpin (Member # 744) on May 03, 2014, 11:32 PM:

There would at least be magnetic pre-striped film from Kodak and Agfa. Since film is silver based price of film would vary depending on the price of silver. And I hate, with a passion, the look of the digital motion picture cameras.

Posted by Jason Gronn (Member # 3921) on May 04, 2014, 12:15 AM:

Larry, I would have to agree with you on the digital cameras infact l havnt been to my local cinemas in two years since they went digital, l hate the look of it and going to the cinema has just lost it's atmosphere in my opinion

Posted by Christian Bjorgen (Member # 1780) on May 04, 2014, 04:34 AM:

You can be sure that one of the Japanese companies, such as Sony or Samsung, would be pioneering new ventures into film. Self-developing film, new one-pass-processing to do at home and such. I reckon we would have much cheaper, and better, cameras and film, and projectors would also be cheaper and better.

Imagine an Elmo GS1200 with todays technology and know-how.

But sooner or later we would get iFilm, and then everyone would drop everything and run at it!

Posted by Allan Broadfield (Member # 2298) on May 04, 2014, 05:37 AM:

Posted by Allan Broadfield (Member # 2298) on May 04, 2014, 05:41 AM:

I think pre-striped camera film could have become more common, though it's not beyond the realms of possibility that an optical sound exposure could be built into some cameras if on the spot recordings were required. This I think would be quite likely due to extra costs of striping. As far as editing is concerned mag would be essential for dubbing purposes.
It's swings and roundabouts.
Four track mag was abandoned professionally years ago due to expense and when the digital revolution happened was replaced by several types of digital stereo tracks printed with the picture.

Posted by Andrew Woodcock (Member # 3260) on May 04, 2014, 09:06 AM:

Perhaps by now the soundtrack would have been digitally encrypted on the mag stripe or perhaps even some other method of producing digital sound alongside the synchronized frames of film if Super 8 had remained popular among the masses.

Posted by Dominique De Bast (Member # 3798) on May 04, 2014, 12:55 PM:

The quality reached by Derann 10 years ago give us an idea of what film could have been if investement had been made by companies. Obviousely the filmstock would have been improved. Miniaturisation would have led to smaller and lighter cameras (with silent mechanism like the Braun Nizo). Projectors would have benefited also from miniaturisation and the new bulbs would have made the projectors more silent as ventilation makes a noise. All this with sound improvment. But sadly, in this case, you cannot change history.

Posted by Graham Ritchie (Member # 559) on May 04, 2014, 06:15 PM:

Dolby Digital sound mix synchronize to film on a "mini-disc" not on stripe would have been the way to go [Smile]

Posted by Allan Broadfield (Member # 2298) on May 05, 2014, 03:42 AM:

Yes, Grahame, this is the DTS system now often used with 35mm, but would this have worked in our non-digital time warp?

Posted by Andrew Woodcock (Member # 3260) on May 05, 2014, 04:10 AM:

For technology to have satisfied all of our needs, we really just needed more of the population to appreciate the beauty of REAL film.I think the way projectors were advancing in the early 80's, had they only been purchased for a few years longer by the masses, then things may have been slightly different. Many of the later models were definitely becoming more sophisticated, quieter, brighter and with relatively sophisticated recording and mixing facilities in stereo.

Posted by Allan Broadfield (Member # 2298) on May 05, 2014, 04:23 AM:

Regarding quieter projectors, could the intermittent mechinism have been gradually replaced by a smooth running method perhaps involving revolving prisms,as already used in some viewing machines?

Posted by Andrew Woodcock (Member # 3260) on May 05, 2014, 07:26 AM:

or even microprocessor controlled direct drive using stepper or servo motors! No cam or claw needed, just another sprocket at the side of the gate, therefore the only noise audible would have been that of the cooling fan for the lamp!

Posted by Allan Broadfield (Member # 2298) on May 06, 2014, 09:07 AM:

These innovations would have definitely been the way to go.

Posted by Paul Mason (Member # 4015) on May 06, 2014, 09:42 AM:

Personally I would miss the loss of the claw intermittent noise from a smooth motion projector. Incidentally projectors using a flashing light source were tried to eliminate the need for the shutter.

Posted by Steve Klare (Member # 12) on May 07, 2014, 02:40 PM:

Count your blessings!

-if "digital" really never happened the internet wouldn't have happened either, and we wouldn't be here talking about what would have happened if digital never happened.

There are a lot of modem technologies that would have been nice to use in super 8 projection.

What if for example a print just had time code instead of a magnetic or optical sound track, and the projector had slot for a audio CDs with booming, hiss free, hum free stereo soundtracks?

-you put in the disk, you run the film and the machine does the rest.

Posted by Allan Broadfield (Member # 2298) on May 07, 2014, 04:07 PM:

The situation you're illustrating is the very situation that exists now, which has resulted in the decline of film. The different technologies have worked alongside each other for a while, but the most economical one has taken over.

Posted by Steve Klare (Member # 12) on May 07, 2014, 08:13 PM:

As a hobby medium, small gauge film is great: the machines require skill to operate and maintain (maybe even fix here and there...) and the films themselves are collectible.

This doesn't make it a great consumer medium, though. With the silver disk you slide it in the little drawer, you push a couple of buttoms on the remote and it's showtime.

-my son has been playing DVDs since before Kindergarten!

I think this is as big a factor as the low media cost in people turning away from projecting film. Projecting film requires effort most people just aren't interested in making.

Some people go fishing, others buy frozen fish at the supermarket. (Pretty much the same thing.)

Posted by Allan Broadfield (Member # 2298) on May 08, 2014, 06:49 AM:

DVD's are wonderfull, no mistake about that. We can own any film we want in excellent quality, with a bit of luck.
While I was running some 16mm films at a nursing home some time ago, a carer wondered why I was bothering with all the film paraphernalia, wouldn't a DVD have done the job easier, she thought? "Not so much fun" was my response. I'm sure she thought I was nuts. But that's why, with what youngsters may call it's disadvantages, I still have a yen for the pre digital days. It's my age perhaps.

Posted by Steve Klare (Member # 12) on May 08, 2014, 08:03 AM:

Film is impractical (there! I said it!)

-but who wants a completely practical hobby? (Wouldn't that be called "work"?)

My brother-in-law spent a week learning how to build a rocking chair in his wood shop. If you miss the whole idea of getting satisfaction from accomplishing something this seems like a waste of time.

-perfectly good rocking chairs are pouring out of factories into furniture stores every day for less money than the course he took. Why be bothered?

Simple: for the joy of it.

Posted by David Ollerearnshaw (Member # 3296) on May 08, 2014, 02:14 PM:

Nothing wrong with frozen fish. I always ask the assistant to throw it a me so I can say I caught it.

IF we could get film with 5.1 sound encoded on it would THAT be utopia for me

Posted by Mark Todd (Member # 96) on May 08, 2014, 06:25 PM:

Conversely if you popped in to your time machine and got out in 1895 with decent generators and lots of digital equipment and the associated tech etc would film have got going at all. Probably not.

Film development was governed by what they could do at the time with what they had if you will. If electronic development and components etc were more advanced who can say etc.

There are huge environmental benefits of the digital surge not just in film etc as well.

I love film and always will but a 2nd hand Video projector for only a £100 or so and a blu Ray player blows all but the very best 16mm clean out of the water and can also look very nice and filmic even if you like.

If S8 projector and film development had continued longer it would have been great.

What it comes down to now really is the fiddly fun that mainly appeals to men, and its very enjoyable.

Vinyl is coming back in a huge rush, but was always to begin with a massive market by comparrison. But you can buy a really great quality Chinese made record deck from around £100 + new with a guarantee in 2014 and away you go.

I don`t think the long term future of super 8 is commercial in a sense. The costs are crackers. The way to go would be for a group of collectors from all over the world to join via the net and put some money in.

To set up a digital to film set up somewhere with a super 8 camera which can do sound either to optical or mag sound direct as you film from HD, and associated equipment to slit and process etc all in house and source stock from China, India etc.

Also its a shame CHC`s efforts regarding a new machine failed but what was really needed was a buy up of old Elmo little used ST600`s etc, having upgraded sound and light and stereo connectors and guides fitted, then fully serviced and guaranteed for say £450-£500.

Its a shame but I don`t think the hobby can really get any long term ( younger ) people in any significant way. Not least as they will initially be sniffed out and sold red, scratched and crappy films and duff machines etc to begin with !!! unless very very lucky.

Films day is done really, but it would have been nice and very interesting if super 8 particularly had been longer in development.

Best Mark.

[ May 09, 2014, 09:24 AM: Message edited by: Mark Todd ]

Posted by Graham Ritchie (Member # 559) on May 08, 2014, 07:18 PM:

Allan
Don't forget that long before the DTS disc, sound used to be in sync to 35mm film using a record. DTS is just an advancement of something that had been around a long time.

If the digital age didn't happen, film would still be around, however the digital age has done much to improve things, like health care, communication, the internet, Facebook [Big Grin]

etc.

The thing with all film, be it slides or Super8 etc, is the look of it when projected onto a screen. To a certain extent I still miss projecting the stuff for a living, and sometimes cringe when I go to the cinema and watch, not film but digital...it just ain't the same [Frown]

Anyway my next project is to make our small projection box slightly bigger, to include the 5 deck platter that is already running from the garage and place it in a more dust free environment. [Cool]

..in time will be the only place in town still running a wee bit of film using a platter [Smile]

Posted by Dominique De Bast (Member # 3798) on May 09, 2014, 01:11 AM:

Mark, you're right to point out that the cost of the film is a problem. However, you never know how things can change. I remember an intersting interview (I cannot find back)about the possibilities of 3d printers regarding the film. The person who was interviewed said that it should already be possible for a small lab to manufacture filmstock through this at reasonnable cost. Who knows if the 3d printers will not be one day capable of manufacturing new projectors and cameras for a fraction of the price than it would cost with the traditional way ?

Posted by Mark Todd (Member # 96) on May 09, 2014, 05:17 AM:

Hi Dominique, that is a really interesting thought, it is amazing how things are progressing with those. I think CHC has one actually unless I`ve had a memory flip.

The whole concept seems a bit nuts really but it works !!! For me it just seems to have a Sci Fi twang to it.

I have to say having seen very good HD to film, to me it had the quality of film and a filmie look. I wonder if there is a camera on super 8 with a 400 feet canister could do it with sound direct mag or optical.

I always thought it was a shame optical prints for the home market didn`t make more ground.

Best Mark.

Posted by Lee Mannering (Member # 728) on May 10, 2014, 04:15 AM:

On the face of it 3D printers are a great idea but I have never heard anyone talk about the longevity of the components they make. [Roll Eyes]

Posted by Paul Adsett (Member # 25) on May 10, 2014, 07:34 AM:

That's the problem right now with 3D printers. They just cannot be used to make parts out of traditional hard wearing materials such as alloys of steel, aluminum, copper, and Titanium. All they can do at the moment is generate parts using a lamination of low strength plastic material in a process called stereolithography. Therefore 3d printers are used mainly to replicate parts and assemblies during the design phase of an item, for instance to check the form fit and function of an Aluminum metal part before committing to the expense of tooling for production injection molding casting.

Posted by Mark Todd (Member # 96) on May 10, 2014, 09:45 AM:

I suppose the compound has to be in liquid form initially.

I like the idea of an any title hd to super 8 set up if it could be done as half the problem is that .

Shorts, features etc even L+H, s etc.

Best Mark.

Posted by Pete Richards (Member # 2203) on May 20, 2014, 07:12 PM:

Jus ton the old sound-sync methods, how did they work?
Was the projector speed synchronised to the record player, or was the record player synched to the film projector?

I have been wondering about this for ages, it is a piece of cake to put a hall effect sensor on a super8 projector to get a 'sync pulse' out of it, but I don't know how you would go about modifying the projector to run at a speed synched with a soundtrack.

Re 3D printers, we print in hard-wearing vinyl right now, it makes parts just as durable as any plastic parts inside a typical projector.

A company I consult to also prints directly in Stainless Steel, Bronze or Tungsten from their 3D printer with one of these:
http://www.engineering.com/3DPrinting/3DPrintingArticles/ ArticleID/7618/ExOne-M-Flex-Production-Metal-3D-Printer.aspx

I made a 35mm stills camera on my 3D Printer, it actually works okay!
http://www.thingiverse.com/thing:113865

Posted by Allan Broadfield (Member # 2298) on May 23, 2014, 01:45 PM:

As interesting as these contributions are, have we perhaps wandered off the subject a little, chaps? The idea was that in this time warp, digital hadn't ever existed. How would our hobby have advanced?

Posted by Steve Klare (Member # 12) on May 23, 2014, 03:14 PM:

It depends a lot on what you mean by "digital". Do you mean digital video, or video of any kind or do you mean the information processing technology that is the basis of modern computing?

The problem you run into is bending the course of technological development so that ideas stemming from common beginnings didn't all happen together in the way that is natural.

Once all electronics was analog, but digital information processing developed as a consequence.The math underlying digital technology actually existed back in the days of oil lamps, but needed electricity for it to do anything useful.

So in a world without digital video (or digital anything), there shouldn't be analog audio either.

Since cinema was originally an optical/chemical/mechanical technology, we could still have movies, but the sound would have to be a synchronized record with a big cone for "amplification". Without any electricity this would need to be powered by a kid on a stationary bike with a pulley and belt (or an itty-bitty steam engine) and the illumination would need to be some sort of magnesium flare.

So this could actually be what our hobby would be like in a world without digital technology. My wife is very good about my little cinema, but I think this would be really pushing the limits!

To me the real question is without film equipment being falsely obsoleted, what new technologies could have been incorporated and how would they change what we do.

Posted by Allan Broadfield (Member # 2298) on May 25, 2014, 05:49 AM:

I suppose if you dig deeply enough you'd find that a lot of things eventually sprung from obscure beginnings. As soon as the adverts for video began appearing in the home movie mags I'm sure we all sensed the death knell of our hobby as we knew it. Despite the high cost of the equipment you could own a whole feature on one cassette. It was certainly tempting to me at the time.
If that hadn't happened, how would real film have developed without overpricing itself for us cash strapped enthusiasts?

[ May 30, 2014, 04:21 PM: Message edited by: Allan Broadfield ]

Posted by Steve Klare (Member # 12) on May 25, 2014, 06:18 AM:

It's true: early video was marketed by promoting the cost advantages over film: "You get the entire feature with sound for a tenth what a film feature would cost".

Frankly, that's hard to fight. If you aren't a film hobbyist and don't enjoy all the time and effort we do, it's basically a no-brainer. Over dinner in the early 80s my uncle (neutral in this) told me nobody would be using film at all in 5 years. It was hard to argue the point.

I'd say all you need to do to see what 8 and 16mm film would be like now if it remained comercially viable is look at the 35mm cinema, since that was actively developed until a few years ago. For example, 35mm prints have a digital soundtrack (between the sprocket holes actually) as well as analog tracks for the theaters without digital capability. It's not too much of a stretch to imagine we'd have this too, or the two system digital sound I mentioned earlier.

(8mm platter system, anyone?)

Sad to say though, if home film projectors had followed the path of most consumer electronics, all but the premium ones would be flimsy crap meant for a trip to the landfill a few years down the road. The build quality of even a mid-range 1970s machine is amazing when you look at it in this light. This is why we still have them.

Posted by Paul Adsett (Member # 25) on May 25, 2014, 09:19 AM:

Well said Steve. I look at my Eumig 820 Sonomatic and the design and construction quality is superb. Same for the Eumig 938, although I would have preferred a little less plastic. And of course the Elmo GS1200, built like a tank - I wonder what they would cost today if they were still being made. Probably a small fortune, but as you say, it would most likely have a DTS and/or Dolby digital sound reader in addition to the mono optical and magnetic stereo capability.

Posted by Allan Broadfield (Member # 2298) on May 25, 2014, 11:53 AM:

So the conclusion is that the non digital time warp couldn't have happened? I worked on setting up the digital sound printing techniques in the lab for 35mm and they were legion; SRD, SDDS, DTS as well as good old analogue, both silver and later cyan tracks, all on one piece of stock, several different companies having their fingers in each pie. Stereo four track mag. had been replaced by the digital systems printed with the picture in one pass. What was more inevitable is that they would be replaced by the hard drive arriving rather like an oversized box of dairy milk. I was one of many made redundant by this advance, but despite my hankering with the past I don't consider cinema dead yet, despite the comments of Tarantino the other day.

Posted by Steve Klare (Member # 12) on May 25, 2014, 02:01 PM:

I think there is just a natural progression from the beginnings of electricity to analog signal processng to digital signal processing. The lightbulb begat the vaccuum tube, which begat the analog amplifier...and then the Eniac. In order for there to be no digital motion pictures a lot of people would have had to ignore all the possibilities of what that technology could do...as well as all that lovely money that could be made.

As far as quality goes, I am the Dad of an 11 year old boy and I've taken apart (and fixed) a lot of toys. I also work at places with industrial quality equipment. Modern consumer electronics looks a lot more like the toys and a decent quality movie projector looks a lot more like a piece of professional grade equipment.

Hey: here's a thought. There's a fairly recent technology that can electronically manipulate the opacity of a piece of glass. How about an electronic shutter? 3 flashes per frame at 18 FPS and two at 24.

(If you could use a high power LED as a projection lamp, you wouldn't need any shutter at all.)

Posted by Allan Broadfield (Member # 2298) on May 25, 2014, 04:22 PM:

Excellent idea.

Posted by Steve Klare (Member # 12) on May 25, 2014, 05:12 PM:

Modern projectors probably would have USB ports for things like synchronized sound recording and playback as well as computer controlled changeovers.

-it's entirely possible they would be shipped with a CD ROM inside the box!

UBB.classic^TM 6.3.1.2