|
Author
|
Topic: Standard 8mm or Regular8
|
Bryan Chernick
Jedi Master Film Handler
Posts: 654
From: Bothell, WA, USA
Registered: Mar 2010
|
posted August 12, 2013 05:59 PM
I don't collect very many commercial films, I like to shoot and project home movies. I shoot both Regular 8mm and Super 8 but I prefer Regular 8mm. I think both the cameras and projectors are a lot more fun to work with. There are so many more varieties in the designs of Regular 8mm cameras and projectors than there are for Super 8. In my opinion Super 8 cameras and projectors are mostly plastic boxes that were made in a few factories in Japan to very similar specifications. I know, some are much better than others but they lack the variety in basic design that there was with Regular 8mm.
My 8mm projectors include a Bolex M8, Bolex 18-5 and a Keystone K109D. My Bolex cameras include a H8 Rex 4, H8 (non-reflex), C8, B8, B8L, D8L, P1, P2 and K2. I also have a Nizo Helomatic and a Sekonic Dualmatic. They're made of metal and leather and built to last.
| IP: Logged
|
|
John Hermes
Expert Film Handler
Posts: 139
From: La Mesa, CA, USA
Registered: Nov 2008
|
posted August 12, 2013 06:22 PM
"I love standard 8mm. I love the super high quality, all metal, standard 8mm projectors and cameras made by Bolex and Bell & Howell. I love double run 8mm camera film.
I think a good case can be made that super 8mm was unnecessary, and that it added nothing that would not have been achieved with standard 8mm. Fairchild already had a double 8mm magnetic sound camera in 1963! Certainly super 8 was a step backward in terms of the plastic Kodak cartridge - far inferior to the double run 8mm film which utilised precision metal camera gates. What were Kodak thinking?
When all the super 8 plastic projectors and cameras have fallen by the wayside, the 8mm metal cameras and projectors will still be running like new."
I have transferred Reg 8, Super 8, and 16mm films for almost thirty years and have seen probably a couple million feet of film. Regular 8 has its own share of problems: complete rolls fogged by not loading in darkness, rolls inadvertently double exposed, footage jittery due to not threading correctly, etc. Even regular 8 magazines have the annoying characteristic of a different frame line for almost every roll. Too much frame area was wasted by using the 16mm perforations. The super 8 frame has 50% more area which certainly, all thing equal, yields a finer grained, sharper image. I agree that the super 8 silent and sound cartridges were poorly designed, leading to potential jams and unsteady footage. However, the super 8 frame used the 8mm width much more effectively.
--------------------
John Hermes
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Hugh Thompson Scott
Film God
Posts: 3063
From: Gt. Clifton,Cumbria,England
Registered: Jan 2012
|
posted August 13, 2013 08:32 AM
To put it simply Dominique, the std 8mm 25' was a double 8 roll,
for cine shooting, once split, was std 8mm for projection, although
the gauge was usually referred as std 8.Remember,the film had
to be turned over in cine shooting, thus the "double 8 " name, as
the film was then split & joined to make up the normal 50' spool.
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
The most important is that gauge, too is still alive and seems to attract some interest.
Printer-friendly view of this topic
