This is topic So Why 8mm ? in forum 8mm Forum at 8mm Forum.

To visit this topic, use this URL:;f=1;t=010813

Posted by Tom Spielman (Member # 5352) on July 06, 2016, 11:52 AM:
I'm sure this question has been posed here before but I'm curious to hear from current participants.

Do you collect 8mm films? Why 8mm and not 16mm or some other format?

Do you shoot 8mm? Again, why 8mm and not some other format?

I just did some filming in Super 8 over this past weekend. It had been the first time in nearly 30 years. I have no immediate plans to do more but I'm not ruling it out. We'll see how this turns out when I'm all done.

It was at a party and the camera sparked some interest. My 12 year old daughter helped me out some. She had a friend who was very curious: "So how do you see the movies you just took? Can you edit them?" [Wink]
Posted by Osi Osgood (Member # 424) on July 06, 2016, 12:01 PM:
Why collect 8mm? Why not?

OK, that's not an answer.

1. Lack of room for larger formats (that's in my case).
2. The quality, especially in optical super 8, and the earlier standard 8mm.

3. The nolstalgia of it.

That's as brief as I can be. [Smile]
Posted by Raleigh M. Christopher (Member # 5209) on July 06, 2016, 12:13 PM:
I don't collect films. But shooting with Super 8mm is fun! I have a degree in film history, theory, and criticism, and all my student films were shot on Super 8mm. I love physically cuttting and splicing film to create a work. I love how tactile it is.

I also love the sound of the camera and the sound of a projector. The whole experience of shooting, cutting, splicing and projecting film is satisfying to me.

I'd love to shoot 16mm film. I did bid on a Bolex H16, but lost out by just a few dollars. It was mint too, and only one owner. Oh well. I think I will do it eventually.
Posted by Mathew James (Member # 4581) on July 06, 2016, 12:59 PM:
For me, it was simply happenstance.
I had just finished wanting to watch our old films from super 8 my parents made of us growing up...I obtained the B & H from my brother who had it stored away in a closet, burnt bulb, broken belt and all, and then got the old films from my parents...I got my wife's family films as well from her parents... may as well check them all out I, thought...

I then ordered a bulb and belt, and then, as we often did, were out fleamarketing, when i spotted a stack of Blackhawk super 8 movies. I bought them all...I had never notice super 8 at a fleamarket before, because i simply was not interested....but now that i was trying to fix the old machine to watch these old films, the bug hit and i wanted more...I started hunting local fleamarkets and ebay, and happened upon this forum while trying to fix the Elmo ST-180E I purchased from ebay that had bad belts. I purchased the elmo because the super 8 films i got at the fleamarket were sound, and i didn't have sound on our projector... and so, here we are... I never got interested in 16mm yet myself. I feel there is enough in super 8 to keep me interested for now...I have too many other hobbies as it is.
Posted by Steve Klare (Member # 12) on July 06, 2016, 01:30 PM:
To me it's kind of life long history.

When I was a little kid the lady across the street had Super-8 home movies and I decided very early on I wanted "one of those."

As soon as I got my first crappy (McDonald's, no less!) job as a teenager I bought a film, then a camera, then an editor (had to: I couldn't afford a projector...).

Mom and Dad bought me a projector for Christmas that year. For the last year or so of high school my movie camera followed me many places and there were shows in my parents' living room at least once a week.

I had a long break while I was in engineering school, along with girlfriends, television, recreational reading, hanging out with friends and what most young people would call "a life", there wasn't much time for anything but studies.

-I literally lost my taste for beer in those years, the first swig I took post-graduation tasted downright awful! (This didn't last too long!)

I was basically at a standstill around the year 2000. I had the projector, I had some films: once or twice a year I watched a couple of them. I didn't buy any more films because I didn't think there were any to be found anymore.

Then the Internet happened and I became more active than ever: sound films, features, 'scope, much more filmmaking and being active at CineSea. The amount of information was spectacular: the printed literature at the time was downright worthless, but I found out about things online I had no idea existed!

I doubt I'd be doing it today if I didn't start as a teenager: that's when I caught the bug. I may not have done it as a teenager without the lady across the street and her home movies either.
Posted by Tom Photiou (Member # 130) on July 06, 2016, 01:58 PM:
Dunno mate [Big Grin]
Very good question and here is why i say that, as i have posted this before i'll condense it,
1/ When at school i had a fascination on the projector, i tried to work it all out & i loved watching the reels going around and the patterns the light beams made from the lens to the screen,especially in the cinema in the smoking days, the patterns were quite amazing.
2/Later aged 10 years i still loved the way films were shown,
3/Pure chance,my brother was an American civil war enthusiast, he spotted a 50ft reel of film on a spinning rack in our town centre, he asked what it was,(an extract from Shenandoah, 50ft b/w silent in 1973), and bought it along with a Eumig P8 std 8 projector.
4/ Few years later moved onto sound films and a Eumig markS810D DLUX, wow that was it, i wanted one.
5/ Aged 16,(almost 17) got my own first projector, an Elmo ST1200HD M&O, (how i got it is is another story, if you want me to bore you to death let me know and i'll open a new thread, but it's a good un. [Wink]
6/ Got my first full feature aged 17,(nearly 18), the 4 x 400ft Texas chainsaw, and since then the collection just got bigger, with a few sales in between.
Now as to why super 8? I dont really know, i guess in those days films of all sizes were easy to get and the second hand list were in abundance, always something to buy, we do have some 16mm films, we were going to sell the lot this year to stick to 8 but hopefully i will be gaining a new projector because the price of some super 8 is becoming so ridiculous it makes the whole hobby unaffordable while 16mm has so many better titles and a whole cheaper with generally, (NOT always) much better picture quality as far as sharpness goes. Some will disagree. We stick to our 8mm more due to space and dont have any intentions of building a huge 16mm collection, especially with new digital methods and projection being so very good that it is becoming harder to tell the difference. we also have this but at present i still like my films too much. It was only a matter of weeks ago we almost decided to sell up, seeing films advertised for a thousand or two, or even hundreds for 15 minute movies just makes me feel a bit like Why?
I think if i was just getting into the hobby i would take a look at a couple of the films being asked for way over inflated prices, then i would probably laugh and ask the same question you are asking? Why super 8? then i would move away and onto digital projection.
Fortunately i am of the age, as many of us are on here, where we have good collections bought at realistic prices have also seen the very best haydays of super 8.
Film is and always will be the real deal. [Wink]
BTW, if you are a person who simply enjoys a film and wants to watch it the cheapest way possible on a big screen then the digital era is upon us and it is getting better all the time. There is certainly nothing wrong with it, films are as cheap as cheap can be while the equipment is becoming so affordable its almost the norm for many households to treat themselves up.
Posted by Andrew Woodcock (Member # 3260) on July 06, 2016, 03:32 PM:
Is there anything else?

As was pointed out here less than a week ago, once you get the very best negatives from the film studios, send them to the best labs available, keeping strict quality control, then you simply finish up with some of the best prints money can buy.

That is what is there for all to witness in the Disney / Derann contract for example.

Couple this with a quiet running convenient sized projector that places a beautiful bright image on just about anyone's home cinema sized screen, then add on a polished stereo sound track put through a nice pair of loudspeakers, I simply couldn't imagine anything bettering the whole experience myself!

Digital projection is nothing new, even high resolution images.
The Sony VPL-10 HT or The SIM 2 were around two decades ago now producing gorgeous images up on our screens.
We need not bring it into the equation here as it is a completely different experience altogether unless of course, you simply want to watch a movie?
If so, even a mobile phone can allow you to do that now!!
Posted by Joe Caruso (Member # 11) on July 06, 2016, 03:37 PM:
Look at the beauty of it all -In 1932, 8mm came as a result of splitting 16 in half - Now, we ahve the opportunity (those at the time), to acquire some rare silents - can you imagine what was available...Then the pleasure of grouping those nice films with their accompanying boxes...oh, did I forget to mention the joy of those creative artists who made eye-catching emphrema via the box-cover? Mini-posters for our viewing pleasure, attractive to display for guests...why 8mm? Shall I really have to continue? - Shorty
Posted by Tom Spielman (Member # 5352) on July 06, 2016, 05:21 PM:
Matthew: My reasons very closely match yours. I haven't bought any 8mm films (yet) but the idea of fixing up an old sound projector is appealing. Then of course I'd need film with sound. [Wink]

But, also like you I have other hobbies and things that require time, money, and space. One reason I ask the question is that it would seem like there would be a lot more available in 16mm. While 16mm would have been more expensive years ago, is that still true today? Space is something I've seen mentioned a couple of times and honestly it never occurred to me that that would be a reason, - but it does make sense.
Posted by Steve Klare (Member # 12) on July 06, 2016, 06:38 PM:
The 16mm space issue is a killer for me, but there is some spectacular stuff available for sure.

If I could just do a little I'd be less reluctant.

-but I know myself better than that!

If I could just do a little I wouldn't be hatching schemes to store 8mm reels inside hollowed out furniture!
Posted by Barry Fritz (Member # 1865) on July 06, 2016, 07:10 PM:
Tom. There are very few 8mm sound projectors, and very few 8mm sound movies. If you are considering something other than 16mm, I would suggest Super 8. Contact me if you need a super 8 projector.
Posted by Tom Spielman (Member # 5352) on July 06, 2016, 07:33 PM:
Thanks Barry. Figured it would be Super 8. Not quite ready to go there yet, but if I do I will keep you in mind.
Posted by Daniel Macarone (Member # 5102) on July 06, 2016, 08:44 PM:
Just reiterating what's been said, but Super 8 can be used not only because it's the least expensive film format and occupies the least space, but because of the fun of the hobby - I enjoy having a modest collection of features stored in boxes that fit up to three 1200' reels and painstakingly glueing a mini-poster on each box.
Whether it's shooting my own films or buying prints, I'm interested in the challenge of making Super 8 look as good as it can using what I can afford. I'm happy when it can pass for 16mm.
Posted by Michael Lattavo (Member # 4280) on July 06, 2016, 10:28 PM:
I actually have gotten into 8mm/super 8 in reverse - I started out with 16mm. I remember my Dad showing Disney features - my Mom would make popcorn (the kind with tin foil on top, my sisters and I would take turns shaking it to make the foil blow up like a baloon. In the summertime, my Mom would make ice cream in the driveway. A long time ago, I was helping my Dad clean out his basement, and we came across his Dad's 1950s era projector, and my Dad's 1960s era projector. He was going to toss them into the trash, so I took them. For 20 years, every time I moved into a new apartment, then houses, I lugged these old projectors around. Never did anything with them, but always kept them. A few years ago, on a whim, I pulled them out, cleaned them up, and bought some film - and was hooked. Have only recently started appreciating super 8, largely due to seeing it projected at CineSea, and through meeting Bill Phelps and Steve Osborne. I just never knew super 8 could look as good as it does. Storage space with 16mm is an issue, I have outgrown my fruit cellar and am taking over the rest of the basement, much to my wife's dismay! On the same note, though, my super 8 collection is quickly outgrowing it's little section as well!

I just realized I haven't answered your question - I like the look and feel of film, and I like how it takes me back to when I was a little kid watching a real movie in the basement with my whole family. Those were always special nights.
Posted by Andrew Woodcock (Member # 3260) on July 07, 2016, 04:53 AM:
As Michael points out here, if you purchase a fading 200ft colour sound short and a basic Super 8mm sound projector, you simply will never have any idea JUST how good Super 8mm can look!

I post many screen shots elsewhere and I defy anyone who could argue they are anything other than magnificent in their quality when projected on even the largest of home cinema screens as I have taken with these.

When you get the best that's out there on the gauge, the quality of image and sound will far surpass anyone's expectations from a tiny frame size, very often looking every bit as good as a 16mm print on a like for like screen albeit without the dozens of splices and often scratches that frequently occur from well used library prints etc etc.
Posted by Brian Fretwell (Member # 4302) on July 07, 2016, 05:18 AM:
For me it was dad's friends 8mm home movies. The all the projectors I saw in catalogues were 8mm or Super 8. I had experienced 16mm at school but it was noisier and needed a long through to the screen to give a decent screen size.

So for me it had to be 8mm.
Posted by Andrew Woodcock (Member # 3260) on July 07, 2016, 05:35 AM:
Super 8mm with its short throw zoom lenses is indeed much more user friendly in any home environment without really any compromise for the most part, unless of course, you happen to live in mansion.

Stereo sound too for those that want it.

Also a whole less noisier and bulky too!!
Posted by Steve Klare (Member # 12) on July 07, 2016, 11:05 AM:
That's an important point!

I've been thinking about 16mm the way some guys consider having an affair...just pondering the pros and cons...the benefits and the penalties...

(Neither my wife nor Super-8 have anything to worry about! -and if I tried 16mm I wouldn't wind up living with my Mom...I think...)

The lack of 16mm Zoom lenses mean I couldn't sit a 16mm projector on the same table I keep my 8mm machines without getting a smaller picture on screen, which is a huge waste of potential.

I did the math: I CAN fill the screen up with a typical 16mm lens, but that would mean setting up the projection table about 10 feet further back, which I can't leave there because it would be where my wife sits when she watches TV!

I mean, she's supportive of all this, but everyone has a limit!

I actually have a lot of flexibility in how I set up my machines, so I ("We") actually could live with this providing I put it away when I was done. I'd hate to be the one who actually built a projection booth for Super-8 or has a concrete wall 10 feet too close when I brought my first 16mm machine home.
Posted by Osi Osgood (Member # 424) on July 07, 2016, 11:23 AM:
I was totally screwed to begin with ...

as a child, my dad had a lovely Eumig P8 ...

("The reels on the thing go round and round, round and round, round and round ...")

When i was in high school, I ended up by chance, in dale Klitz's "media room", for an hour a day. Klitz would get all the throwaway films from the local Mountain Home movie theater, a neat old school theater, mostly 16MM trailers and a few 35MM's. He even got original theatrical posters, (I had an original theatrical poster of "The land That Time Forgot" on my wall in my bedroom!), and just splicing all of those films together was just such GREAT fun!!

At 18, I was thrown out on me arse into the cold cruel world, and while I was in a halfway house in Boise, I would go down to the local TV shation, and they were throwing away boxes and boxes of 16MM commercials, (this was 1983, and nearly all commercials were then switching to VHS), so naturally, I spliced them onto reel after reel. I wish I still had all of those ole commercials!

I entered the job corp and in my second year, in advanced training, I was shipped off to San Francisco, and a department store, downtown S.F., has a whole rack of marked down for clearance, Disney titles, color and sound!!! I didn't have a projector yet, but now, I was a determined man!

I wanted my dad's beloved Eumig P8, but he sold it for drink money, so that one was out of the question ...

so, in my formative years, I was saturated with film, and once I got myself on my feet and had my own place, when I had money, I bought a super 8 projector, used, from a thrift store, and bought a STAR WARS 400ft, (that no doubt, had come in with the projector), to go along with my Disney's ...

It's all went downhill from there ... [Big Grin]

Hey, I really like this series of posts, as I thought about stuff I haven't thought about in years, what lovely days!
Posted by Michael O'Regan (Member # 938) on July 07, 2016, 12:12 PM:
When you get the best that's out there on the gauge, the quality of image and sound will far surpass anyone's expectations from a tiny frame size, very often looking every bit as good as a 16mm print on a like for like screen albeit without the dozens of splices and often scratches that frequently occur from well used library prints etc etc.
This is true up to a point and I have grown to love Super 8, but in reality it is difficult to compare with 16mm. There are still vastly more amazing looking prints available on 16mm than there are on Super 8. This can't be overlooked.
Posted by Oemer Yalinkilic (Member # 86) on July 07, 2016, 12:54 PM:
It´s definitely a matter of the right projector and the space for storage of your collection.
If you say 35mm needs to much space, that´s not true, it´s a matter how big is your collection.
I know some 16mm collectors, they need more space for their 16mm collection than I need for my 35mm collection. I store in my basement about 60 35mm prints, you can store about 300 16mm features in the same space.
The other important think is, if you have the right projector for your need. I screen my film in my living room, like many other collectors. Most of the 35mm portable projectors are too noisy, but my Philips FP 3 is perfect for the use in a living room. It’s not noisier than my 16mm Xenon machine. I can use also 2000 meter reels, so I can run a feature with only one break for a reel change like most of the 16mm projectors, or my Super 8 Elmo GS1200.
I use for 16mm an Elmo 16CL Xenon or the halogen version.
Often, it is better to own the 35mm print, but not always. I have 16mm cinemascope Technicolor prints of “The Girl can´t help it” and “An Affair to remember” and this movies does not exist in Technicolor in 35mm, they are some more examples.
Some movies are not worth to own them in 35mm. Lot of movies are not important, to watch them in better, sharper quality, because the setting is not important.
And now the main question: Why Super 8?
Some features, especially modern movies looks in Super 8 good, like a 16mm print. For example, I got last 16mm prints of Tim Burton’s Batman and Batman Returns. Batman Returns is one of the best 16mm prints I ever saw, it is a beautiful LPP print. The Batman print is a normal Eastman print, the colour is very good and not really faded, but very, very little touch of brown is there. I own the Super 8 Trailer and in compare to the 16mm feature, the colour of the Super 8 trailer is a little bit better and the big plus, the trailer is in Stereo.
The last reason is the price. Yesterday closed the auction on ebay for a 16mm scope fuji print of Jaws, it was sold for $ 2109. I own a German dubbed 35mm Technicolor print of Jaws and I paid only 250 Euro.
The quality of my print is much better, than every 16mm or Super 8 print of this title and it’s not too expensive like some Super 8 features today.
So I collect all 3 gauges.
Posted by Stuart Reid (Member # 1460) on July 07, 2016, 01:23 PM:
Hey, Tom Photiou, that shop with the spinning rack wouldn't have been upstairs in Fernley Wallis the chemist at the top of town would it? That's where my film adventure began!
Posted by Joe Caruso (Member # 11) on July 07, 2016, 01:37 PM:
Forget all I typed - Shorty
Posted by Panayotis A. Carayannis (Member # 1220) on July 08, 2016, 01:11 AM:
Barry,you are wrong! There are many standard 8 sound projectors and many double,standard/super, projectors and too many standard 8 sound films. Believe me!
Posted by Winbert Hutahaean (Member # 58) on July 08, 2016, 06:30 AM:
In the today's scenario comparing 8mm vs 16mm just like comparing VHS vs DVD (in terms of resolution, so when comparing films in 8mm and 16mm must have the same neg source and lab).

Now for me collecting film is just a hobby. Honestly I am more admiring the format (film medium) so I am not using 8mm films as medium of entairtainment. Should I need to be entairtained I will play my DVD :-).

Having said this I feel enough with 8mm no matter 16mm has better resolution.

I am worried of storage space if I move to 16mm, plus most 16mm projectors are heavy.
Posted by Osi Osgood (Member # 424) on July 09, 2016, 11:48 AM:
I'm not sure if i would agree with you're scenario completely, as i have run into truly grange super 8's that are as good or better than a 16MM. Now, 16MM at the top of it's game is probably better. If you go by "grain" and such, I would, as a general rule agree, but there are the exceptions. [Smile]
Posted by Paul Adsett (Member # 25) on July 09, 2016, 01:35 PM:
All things being equal, 16mm is about four times better than super 8mm, based on frame area.
I was watching the Blu ray of the 1995 Pride and Prejudice a couple of nights ago, and the picture was the most stunning I have yet seen on Blu Ray. Beautiful film like colours and really astonishing detail on clothing and landscape shots. I thought for sure it was filmed in 70mm, but when I looked up the technical specs it was in fact "mastered on super 16mm"!
Which just goes to show that digital origination may not be as good as super 16.
Posted by Andrew Woodcock (Member # 3260) on July 09, 2016, 02:38 PM:
Maybe against standard 8mm Paul 4 times, but I thought the maths worked out far more favourable for the bigger Super 8mm frame. You'd certainly never believe the 4x difference anyway on home sized screens for the best that's out there on 8, if it is a genuine 4x increase in actual frame area?

Don't know personally, never bothered doing the maths.
Posted by Brian Fretwell (Member # 4302) on July 10, 2016, 02:55 PM:
Also, Paul, could you tell the shot on the Pride & Prejudice Blu Ray that was from a print - not the negative? The BBC team that did the transfer said that they had to take one outdoor shot from the print for some reason I can't remember. After they had put that (ans identified the shot)I could see that it was of lower quality.
Posted by Winbert Hutahaean (Member # 58) on July 10, 2016, 08:06 PM:
Osi, if comparing 8mm vs 16mm - Ceteris paribus/all other things being equal - i.e the same master, the same film stock, the same lab chemical, the same lab process, the same screening size, etc there is no chance 8mm will be better than 16mm. This something we, 8mm collectors, must admit it.

8mm can only win against 16mm in terms of giving stereo track. But once 16mm is installed with DTS or other synchronizer sound devices, it can also give stereo or even 6.1 sound.

For me having 16mm is just to attract having larger format 35mm, 70mm etc. There is always sky above the sky. So I limit myself on 8mm and claiming my self as a film collector.

Should I need entertainment I will go to DVD.

This is similar to Chevy Bel Air collectors, where they have this type of car not for their daily transportation e.g shopping to a mall, but more as collectible items. Once a while they can show them off in an exhibition or during a parade. When they need shopping just drive a Dodge Caravan.... [Wink]
Posted by Adrian Winchester (Member # 248) on July 10, 2016, 10:29 PM:
I certainly have Super 8 prints that beat certain 16mm prints, but I suspect that collectors are sometimes comparing top quality modern Super 8 prints with older colour 16mm prints that don't showcase the gauge at its best. It tends to be the relatively scarce features, trailers, etc (printed from negatives) from around the mid 1980s onwards that really 'knock out' an audience. 16mm printing stock was also setting new standards at the same time as Super 8 stock was.

I think there's also a psychological factor in which your expectations influence the impression that a print makes. E.g. I once had a sharp Super 8 print and a somewhat soft 16mm print of the same film. I made a point of comparing the two before deciding which to keep, because it was the Super 8 copy that had impressed me more. But the comparison revealed that the 16mm print was sharper and had more detail, even though it had seemed less impressive simply because it was 16mm. You occasionally hear claims that a Super 8 print is "as good as 35mm", but even if it's exceptional, I'm convinced that a direct comparison would show that it can't compete with 35mm.
Posted by Alan Rik (Member # 73) on July 10, 2016, 11:55 PM:
I love Super 8 but there is no way that it could compare to 35mm. I think if your viewing size is between 6-8 ft. than a 16mm print next to it would look comparable if its at the same size. Where you really notice it is when the print is screened on a large scale. My GS1200 Xenon was projected at the Walter Reade Theatre on a huge screen for an Independent Film Show. Thats when you see the limitations of the format. It just can't hold the same resolution as 35mm or 16mm. I think if you had 2 prints that came from the same master but one was printed on Super 8 and the other on 16mm-no contest. can get nice Stereo sound from Super 8. [Smile]
But since I don't project over 10ft, the gauge works great for me! But if I had a bigger place where I could store the projectors in a dedicated booth and the films in a vault than I would definitely get a 16mm and a 35mm projector as well. But I would still keep Super 8 because I still shoot in Super 8. An acquaintance of mine had a print of "Enter the Dragon" 35mm Scope. With the new scenes with Bruce talking to the monks. He said it was pristine. I saw a screenshot. Price-It sold for $2000. I was definitely almost going to buy it. But then would I watch it? [Big Grin]
Posted by Graham Ritchie (Member # 559) on July 11, 2016, 12:03 AM:
I guess for me it was more Super8 filmmaking than collecting back in the 70s, but as time went on collecting digests as well became the thing.

Later years I added 16mm as well, and titles of interest were coming up either on Super8 or 16mm.

Things grew and grew and then 35mm came along...where does all this film stuff end [Big Grin]

Anyway Super8 is where I started and have never given it up and wont. I still shoot Super8 from time to time and collecting the odd Super8 digest like "Mag Men in the flying Machines" I bought just last weekend.

All film formats have something to offer but the down side is I just don't have enough room for an 70MM Imax projector [Wink] or have I mmmmm [Roll Eyes]
Posted by Michael O'Regan (Member # 938) on July 11, 2016, 11:42 AM:
Now, 16MM at the top of it's game is probably better.
No "probably" about that. Osi.
Posted by Tom Spielman (Member # 5352) on July 11, 2016, 01:02 PM:
Thanks for your replies everyone. I now have a better understanding.

For home viewing Super 8 has some particular advantages it seems:

Posted by Osi Osgood (Member # 424) on July 11, 2016, 01:03 PM:
well ... yeah, Micheal! [Big Grin]

Ah c'mon Alan ... really? [Roll Eyes] [Smile]
Posted by Andrew Woodcock (Member # 3260) on July 11, 2016, 01:25 PM:
Obviously from the very same negative, a 16mm frame will of course offer greater resolution than the same print on Super 8mm.
Whether this is truly noticeable on a regular HOME cinema screen, is debatable. I've certainly no complaints screening on a 10ft diagonal 16:9 screen filling its width for scope prints and its depth for flat prints.
All later decent quality prints taken from a decent negative, look bloody brilliant to my eyes!

But just for clarity Tom, stereo sound or magnetic sound isn't an option for 16mm feature film viewing.
16mm uses an optical mono track.
Magnetic 16mm films are very rare.
Posted by Paul Adsett (Member # 25) on July 11, 2016, 04:34 PM:
I think we should consider the overall sensory impact of each format. To me, the availability of stereo sound prints (original and re-recorded) adds a huge plus to the super 8mm column. I remember when I first got my super 8 scope print of Grease from Derann, I was amazed at the print quality, but the mono sound seemed flat and dull, particularly for a musical film. So I re-recorded the film, using my Eumig 926GL, and simply could not believe how much a high quality stereo track added to the enjoyment and impact of the film. That is something that a 16mm print, for all its great definition, is simply incapable of supplying.
Some might say that sound quality is every bit, or perhaps more important, than picture quality, as long as the PQ is perfectly acceptable.
Posted by Garth Tiffen (Member # 5476) on July 11, 2016, 11:59 PM:
Brand new to both the forum, and collecting Super 8, so greetings from Northern Canada! For myself, as a child in the mid-late 60's I remember a mink farm salesman (of all things) coming to our house setting up a projector, and showing my parents his film reel /pitch (they didn't bite incidentally) some point his film broke, and he left me a piece of the film with a few frames that he left out during the splice. Anyway, I was hooked! This was magic to I got older my grandma would occasionally show us old home moves (8mm I believe, and sure wish I still had those) an acting student at college around 80/81, I used my grandpas old Kodak 8mm camera to shoot some student projects, ...and then as the years passed I moved to videotape of course and eventually all the other physical media..(still collect laserdisc to this day)....however recently I remembered renting a library copy of the movie Logans run from the public library, on super 8 in the late 70's and decided to search for that on EBay, as I collect things from that movie...I found it, then of course had to find a projector, and have been bit by the bug now!! I have a few other films on the way and glad to have found this forum!! Tonight I ran a Disneyland souvenir film, that I think is from the 60's that I found on the weekend, and the magic and nostalgia was back!
Thanks for adding me to your group!
Posted by Graham Ritchie (Member # 559) on July 12, 2016, 02:55 AM:
Welcome to the forum Garth.

That was an interesting story [Smile]

Just be careful buying prints these days, a lot of them have now faded a bit [Frown]
Posted by Andrew Woodcock (Member # 3260) on July 12, 2016, 03:17 AM:
But none of the later LPP, Agfa or Fuji Acetate or better still, Ester stuff!

Nor will any of it anytime soon!

You pay more for it all than the equivalent 70's mass produced titles, but well worth the extra by comparison.

Also many of the 70's Walton titles are still holding up very well indeed given that Walton choose the best stock of the day for stability, so these also, are well worth keeping a look out for. Expect considerably more grain though from these prints than the later Derann type prints or similar.

Enjoy Garth, there is still plenty to go at yet for many many years to come! [Wink]
Posted by Graham Ritchie (Member # 559) on July 12, 2016, 03:42 AM:

Just something I forgot to ask, what happened to your family 8mm films? All that Kodachrome Standard 8 films from the 60s would still look fantastic, if you can find them. There are plenty of Standard 8 projectors around that can still screen them. [Cool]
Posted by Garth Tiffen (Member # 5476) on July 12, 2016, 07:33 AM:
Thanks for the welcome guys:) ....sadly my family movies are long dad had them transferred to video tape some years ago, then disposed of the films, sadly...I wish I still had them, as they were transferred to some pretty crappy VHS tape at the time, so I'm sure resolution was lost in the process. And thanks for the heads up re: the quality of mass produced 70's super those are the ones that I remembered lusting after as a kid and teenager in spinner racks at bigger retail stores like Hudsons Bay and Eatons, here in Canada, those are the ones I've great info! I've already learned a lot just pursuing the forums, so looking forward to now tracking down some quality prints!
Posted by Andrew Woodcock (Member # 3260) on July 12, 2016, 11:04 AM:
You should be extremely pleased Garth once you get to see some of the highest quality prints available to the gauge.
Posted by Paul Adsett (Member # 25) on July 12, 2016, 11:08 AM:
Garth's story of his family transferring all their precious 8mm films to tape or disc, and then disposing of the original film, and later losing or being unable to play the video record, is sadly commonplace.
Posted by Phil Murat (Member # 5148) on July 12, 2016, 12:40 PM:

From my side, 95% Super 8 , 5% 16mm.......

"Super 8" was a good "Balance" between Weight/Storage and Picture Quality, providing prints were done from "Top" Negatives, once more.

Now , the idea is to keep "rare titles" which are not produced on DVD, so what DVD come to complete the SUPER 8 library.
Concerning Disney's "Silly Symphonies" to be note the DVD offers more titles that you can find in Super 8 world , keeping an interesting quality.
Same thing for "Classical" Mickey, Donald, Pluto's shorts (before 80's) , DVD Colectors, easy to find for 20 Euros.

Concerning, shooting with super 8, the Film Stock rate price/mn is not reasonable anymore : this is like running a Ferrari with a rare Gasoline around 1000E / Ltr
Posted by Andrew Woodcock (Member # 3260) on July 12, 2016, 02:09 PM:
Correct Phil.
The price to run a silent camera now is currently extortionate and totally non viable now from my own point of view.
£50 for 3 minutes of silent film makes even Deranns 4x 600ft Scope film of Star Wars seem like a bargain when it occasionally surfaces!
Posted by Douglas Warren (Member # 1047) on July 12, 2016, 02:55 PM:
Welcome to the group Garth! What Andrew says is sadly true regarding fade on many of the mass produced Super-8 digest titles from the 1970's. This is my dominant category for collecting in this gauge,so it can be hit or miss with color on these releases. I wish I could (but cannot) afford features in Super-8, especially the later issues with superior film stock. For me it all comes down to budget vs product. Heck, I still collect (and enjoy) the old B & W / Silent reels produced by Ken Films, Castle Films,etc!
Posted by Andrew Woodcock (Member # 3260) on July 12, 2016, 03:03 PM:
As you know Douglas, there are still many good prints to be found from Walton etc in colour for sensible money plus many classic titles on B/ W stock that still look excellent.

It's only the very later prints which can be expensive / very expensive.

There's plenty to go around still for all tastes and budgets,just try obtaining a couple of screenshots for any title you may be interested in Garth and don't accept any lame excuses such as "no projector to test it on" when parting with your hard earned! [Wink]

You should always be able to SEE what you're paying for before buying any item to an extent, and not just the box!!

[ July 12, 2016, 05:32 PM: Message edited by: Andrew Woodcock ]
Posted by Douglas Warren (Member # 1047) on July 12, 2016, 03:22 PM:
Very true Andrew and it's a shame that the film stock used on most USA prints was the dreaded Eastman stock. Of course these being consumer products of their era,they weren't made with long term quality in mind. Alas,this is true of most modern consumer products of today. But that's another subject entirely and off topic of course [Smile] Ditto Garth on all of Andrew's advice!
Posted by Tom Spielman (Member # 5352) on July 12, 2016, 05:56 PM:
Andrew: Very true regarding the price of filming with Super 8. I did recently use Super 8 to film an annual family gathering. The intent is to pair it with old 8mm and Super 8 footage from 40 to 50 years ago.

People really enjoyed seeing the Super 8 camera and hopefully they'll enjoy the results but going forward I don't know that I'll do it again. Maybe once a year or every few years at this particular party but for two cartridges it's costing me close to $150 USD for the film, shipping, and processing. Might make more sense to invest in some nice lenses for my DLSR.

The intent of Super 8 after all was to be a format for the masses. It's now far too expensive for that.
Posted by Andrew Woodcock (Member # 3260) on July 12, 2016, 06:01 PM:
And to be fair Tom, I suppose it always would be in this day and age, with it's niche marketplace.

To me though, £50 without developing or shipping the finished article for three minutes of silent film, just isn't worth it sadly and there is no bigger advocat of K40 sound film than I used to be. I loved the stuff right up until it got phased out here around 96/97.
Posted by Barry Fritz (Member # 1865) on July 13, 2016, 07:12 PM:
I agree there are many, many dual 8 projectors, super 8 sound, super 8 silent and standard 8 silent projectors. However, there are comparatively very few standard 8 sound projectors.
Posted by Andrew Woodcock (Member # 3260) on July 13, 2016, 07:25 PM:
The Dual Gauge models probably offers the best solution nowadays for Standard 8mm sound films Barry.

Something like this, which proved rather popular here in the UK recently, judging by the number of bids! (16 bids is rare right now here for any projector!) Brexit!! e=STRK%3AMEBIDX%3AIT
Posted by Barry Fritz (Member # 1865) on July 14, 2016, 12:49 PM:
I agree Andrew. That was a good buy for whoever won that Eumig.

Visit for free equipment manual downloads. Copyright 2003-2019 Film-Tech Cinema Systems LLC

Powered by Infopop Corporation