|
Author
|
Topic: Super 8 filming again
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Tom Spielman
Master Film Handler
Posts: 339
From: Minneapolis, MN, USA
Registered: Apr 2016
|
posted September 13, 2016 04:50 PM
Right Dominique. Kodak does have a B&W reversal product, not color. But they do have a color super 8 film, just not the traditional kind which you can use in a projector. It is very well suited to scanning, however, if that's you're ultimate goal.
I guess what I haven't mentioned is that while film and processing are still available, it's much more expensive now than it used to be. Along with the lack of color reversal options, this is what keeps me from filming more Super 8. Hopefully Ferrania can help with that situation.
Also earlier in the year, Kodak said that they were going to market a new Super 8 camera, build a new factory, etc. So that might mean better prices for film and processing. It doesn't seem like color reversal film is part of their plans though.
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Winbert Hutahaean
Film God
Posts: 5468
From: Nouméa, New Caledonia
Registered: Jun 2003
|
posted September 13, 2016 09:28 PM
Trevor,
I don't mean to discourage you but you came a little bit late in super 8mm film making league.
I had been filming super 8mm from 1989 - 2013 (before that my father did filming for me).
I used super 8mm for casual shootings, not meant for making indie films. So I shot my school, birthday party, our holidays, etc just like people did with their video camera.
During that time, shooting super 8mm had also been expensive but still affordable for most of our pockets.
For example, the availability stocks I used at that time:
1989 - 1997 I used Kodachrome color reversal stock. One 50' cartridge (3 minutes) was $8 for silent and $12 for sound...and that processing included!
1998 - 2005 Sound cartridge was discontinued and only Kodacrome silent color stock was available. The price was around $11. I still remember my post in 2003 regarding this: http://alt.movies.cinematography.s uper8.narkive.com/hhEniSgp/re-super-8mm-k40-only-6-75-us-11-3-au-17-at-elizabeth-pharmacy-melb-aus-prepaid
2006 - 2012 Kodak replaced the Kodachrome to Ektachrome 64T and 100D color reversal stock. The price rise to $15-18 ...but the processing did not include. So we must send to Dwayne for $11 more...yet I was still filming, Until Kodak stopped producing reversal color stock in Dec 2012
In 2013 I only used my left over stock, and finally sold them all (about 6 carts), since the price of processing also had increased.
Now.. there are few remaining stocks as Dom mentioned above, but the prices are ridiculous for casual shooters like me. I believe it is about $25/cart where the processing cost is $15. Not to mention the postage to send to the lab v.v that can reach $30 alone. So for one cart can hit our pocket to about $70.
I don't shoot anymore since I also read from many review those remaining stocks are grainer than the previous Kodak. I cannot stand for the grains since it makes everything to become blurrier.
Anyway, if you are interested more on film shooting, there is a well known forum that we are here freed to mention: FilmShooting Forum
Our forum here more about film collecting hobby. We deal with the same format, but different on the aim.
cheers,
--------------------
Winbert
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
Tom Spielman
Master Film Handler
Posts: 339
From: Minneapolis, MN, USA
Registered: Apr 2016
|
posted September 14, 2016 08:28 AM
I have two Super 8 cameras, one that used mercury batteries for the meter (a Nikon) and one that doesn't. The Nikon will let you set the aperture manually but there are also "zinc-air" batteries that have the correct voltage and just as importantly will maintain that same voltage until they die. The problem is that they don't last as long as mercury batteries. Once exposed to air, you are likely to find that they are dead if you haven't used your camera in a couple of months. I'm pretty sure that mercury batteries were only used in cameras sold in the 60's and early 70's.
As Dominique says, not all cameras are compatible with all films but I think that was the case even in 70's and 80's. It can all be very confusing. Somebody correct me if I'm wrong, but I think it's fair to say that if you have anything but a really cheap camera, all the film that Kodak sells today should work except for possibly 500T which says on the box that you need a camera that can handle ASA400 or above.
Some film, like Agfa's 200D don't fit exactly into the Super 8 notch system. Dominique pointed out that Wittner's 200D is made by Agfa. So is Pro8mm's. I read something today that said they don't notch their cartridges the same way. One results in a slight overexposure, the other in a slight under exposure. Don't know if that's true or not. Today's film has more latitude than the film of past decades so it works even though most cameras will not expose it exactly right. Anyway, you can see why it's confusing.
I think the good news is that good Super 8 cameras can be found for little money. Some of the more sought after models (like newer canons and nikons) command a premium.
[ September 14, 2016, 10:17 AM: Message edited by: Tom Spielman ]
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Tom Spielman
Master Film Handler
Posts: 339
From: Minneapolis, MN, USA
Registered: Apr 2016
|
posted September 14, 2016 01:07 PM
Hi Jim,
Yeah, Film and Video Services. The phone number I found works but I've left several messages that weren't returned. They also apparently moved to the Little Canada/Vadnais Heights area but the address listed is a private residence with no sign indicating that there's a business operating out of it.
So I figured they're no longer in business but maybe I'm wrong. I would love to be wrong.
Anyway Trevor, as Winbert says, from a monetary standpoint it's very hard to justify filming in Super 8. Last Spring I purchased a camera for $35 (USD). Then I spent almost $160 on film and shipping. Processing was included. That was for two cartridges. One of which was 100D reversal and I paid a premium for it because it's not readily available. If I had stuck with 200D then it would have cost maybe $110 for both. I scanned them myself and ended up with 3 minutes of film I'm happy with out of the 6 minutes worth I shot. Since I now have a camera, that was a one time cost, but film and processing is a killer. Having a local place would have saved the shipping at least.
Was it worth it? I will say yes. I had a specific event I wanted to capture in Super 8 and the people involved enjoyed the results. In the process I've learned so much about photography in general and it has branched off into other areas that have become a hobby. Will I do more? That is the big question. If I do, it will be only for very special things.
[ September 14, 2016, 03:07 PM: Message edited by: Tom Spielman ]
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
Printer-friendly view of this topic
