8mm Forum: Super 8 on Wikipedia project

»	8mm Forum » 8mm Forum » Super 8 on Wikipedia project

UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!

Author

Topic: Super 8 on Wikipedia project

Jan Adolfsson
Film Handler

Posts: 55
From: Stockholm, Sweden
Registered: Oct 2012

posted November 23, 2012 02:21 AM

I have begun a Wikipedia project listing Super 8 editions and I will be greatful for all help I can get.

My first step will be to list all KEN Films digests releases. So all help you can give me on these will be highly appreciated.

I will present the titles in a table with following columns:
Number | Title | Company | Release Year | Sound | Color | Length

Any other columns that would be of interest?

| IP: Logged

Bill Phelps
Phenomenal Film Handler

Posts: 1482
From: USA
Registered: Jan 2009

posted November 23, 2012 06:11 AM

There are some lists on other threads here on the forum....just use the search and put in Ken films and you should find some info. I will check it out and help if I can. I love making lists!

Bill [Smile]

| IP: Logged

Ronald Kwiatkowski
Film Handler

Posts: 67
From: Luxemburg
Registered: Nov 2012

posted November 23, 2012 06:41 AM

Great idea... how about a stock column?

--------------------
Vinegar belongs in the salad...

| IP: Logged

Jan Adolfsson
Film Handler

Posts: 55
From: Stockholm, Sweden
Registered: Oct 2012

posted November 23, 2012 07:41 AM

How do you tell what stock the film is printed on?

| IP: Logged

Winbert Hutahaean
Film God

Posts: 5468
From: Nouméa, New Caledonia
Registered: Jun 2003

posted November 23, 2012 08:46 AM

Jan, normally stocks code are written between the sprockets. You need a magnifier to read this.

However, I don't think the issue of stock is matter. There were too many stock used at the time of super 8mm, it is just like today's lab where they are using photo paper that can be anything. Let us see Walton Films that for the same title used film stock from Kodak SP, Eastman, 3M, Fuji, AGFA, LPP, etc.

I understand that film stock issue will bring the idea about the color seen today, but giving this to Jan, will create too much job for him.

In fact so many films are found to be unmarked stock, then how can we tell?

Now, Jan can you give us the wikipedia link?

--------------------
Winbert

| IP: Logged

Jan Adolfsson
Film Handler

Posts: 55
From: Stockholm, Sweden
Registered: Oct 2012

posted November 23, 2012 02:21 PM

I realise I have to provide references for the articles I publish on Wikipedia, if not they'll probably be deleted. So I guess I have to start collecting reference material such as old film catalogs etc.

Anyway, this is the link to my "sandbox" on Wikipedia, where I've started working on a list of KEN Films.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Mr.H_Spencer/sandbox

| IP: Logged

Jan Adolfsson
Film Handler

Posts: 55
From: Stockholm, Sweden
Registered: Oct 2012

posted November 24, 2012 01:35 PM

I think I've found a table format that works. With these columns it's possible to see which editions were released for different titles and it's possible to sort on Color, Company or whatever you like.

Feel free to post comments and feedback. Please don't edit the Wiki-page since I'm not actually writing the page through Wikipedia

| IP: Logged

Winbert Hutahaean
Film God

Posts: 5468
From: Nouméa, New Caledonia
Registered: Jun 2003

posted November 24, 2012 11:09 PM

Hi Jan,

I have checked your Sandbox and has the impression that the current list is a bit confusing. This is due to separation entry for the same film but released in different length and sound format.

As a result when we sort the list based on the title, the same title will be listed twice or three times because they are listed separately.

Here is the screen shot:

My advise is for you to list one title only in one entry by taking the greatest version available, e.g 400' length, color and sound.

Most collectors will find the best print available and avoid to buy e.g. a 200', B/W, Silent of Star Wars if they know a 400', Color and Sound of the same title is available.

On the note we can add some info that several versions of prints were also released.

With this type of spread sheet will make the table looks simpler as shown on the below screen shot:

My second input is to put the particle "the" on the back so "The Robe" is best written as "Robe, the". By doing this, every title started with "the" will not be listed under 'T' on alphabetical order.

My 2 cents though,

--------------------
Winbert

| IP: Logged

Ronald Kwiatkowski
Film Handler

Posts: 67
From: Luxemburg
Registered: Nov 2012

posted November 25, 2012 04:54 AM

I suppose your right about the stick, Winbert... on some titles it might help, on others it may just be confusing... maybe an "LPP availability" column or something like that? I would find it really helpful, if one had some super 8 specific information... I mean more than the distributor and the number of reels [Wink]

of course you can't consider every little detail, but I guess what interests most is: can I get a good print, are good prints of that title in circulation? What'll it (most probably) cost, for how much did it sell lately? Where might I find it?

Just my train of thought, of course [Big Grin]

--------------------
Vinegar belongs in the salad...

| IP: Logged

Jan Adolfsson
Film Handler

Posts: 55
From: Stockholm, Sweden
Registered: Oct 2012

posted November 25, 2012 02:31 PM

Thanks, great input!

I'll take your opinions in consideration and try a new table format. I'll get back to you as soon as I find the time.

| IP: Logged

Winbert Hutahaean
Film God

Posts: 5468
From: Nouméa, New Caledonia
Registered: Jun 2003

posted November 25, 2012 08:43 PM

Ronald, I understand that the need of putting film stock is to give the idea about the possibility of fading.

But it can be misleading.

Here is my own Raiders of the Lost Ark that is printed on AGFA (low fade).

The fade of my film is much clearer on the below 3 pictures because the scene was outside and brighter.

and when it came to a darker scene, fade was more horrifying !!

The above same film is owned by many members here and reported to be in excellent color. But since mine has faded it suffices to say that no matter what film stock it will fade if the owner does not keep properly or the country where heéshe lives in is very humid and hot (in this case is Indonesia, my country)

It was discussed in the older thread here:

http://8mmforum.film-tech.com/cgi-bin/ubb/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=1;t=003953# 000000

While on the other hand, I also got a film that was printed on EASTMAN stock where many people look down to this stock but I found it still has good color as screen shots below (it was taken 7 years ago, so am not sure how does it look today):

More screen shots and discussion is here:

Can we solely blame to the stock in judging red print?

So the best thing to find out if the film whether or not film is in good color stage is by ASKING the seller. Do not rely on what color stock the film is printed. It does not guarantee anything.

--------------------
Winbert

| IP: Logged

All times are Central

Printer-friendly view of this topic

UBB.classic^TM 6.3.1.2