Welcome to the new 8mm Forum!
The forum you are looking at is entirely new software. Because there was no good way to import all of the old archived data from the last 20 years on the old software, everyone will need to register for a new account to participate.
To access the original forums from 2003-2019 which are now a "read only" status, click on the "FORUM ARCHIVE" link above.
Please remember registering with your first and last REAL name is mandatory. This forum is for professionals and fake names are not permitted. To get to the registration page click here.
Once the registration has been approved, you will be able to login via the link in the upper right corner of this page.
Also, please remember while it is highly encouraged to upload an avatar image to your profile, is not a requirement. If you choose to upload an avatar image, please remember that it IS a requirement that the image must be a clear photo of your face.
Thank you!
Since there were number of interesting but off-topic posts about new lab tech in printing from a digital source, I've moved those comments to a new thread: Printing Film From A Digital Source
Further comments here should be specifically about this 400' Dracula cutdown.
Wow!!! very nice Print...i had in the past in my collection the full feature from Derann...but i selled,,,now i have a print in 16MM made from 2K digital.
It is a great looking print and a great edit! I still have the Derann feature, and also Dracula, Prince of Darkness, Dracula Has Risen from the Grave & Scars of Dracula on Super 8mm.
Only one comment I found to be somewhat inaccurate, that all prints from super 8's heyday were and are crap, compared to today's. There are obviously prints that were certainly subpar, but there are also plenty of prints, made straight from 35mm or 16mm, that look absolutely fine. The one thing I will say concerning these new prints is that, perhaps, with digital files directly going to a film source, our beloved super 8, we are finally getting to see super 8 at it's absolute best. I don't know precisely as to whether the film stocks today are a finer grain and capable of an even sharper image than the film stocks used in the 90's, for instance, but the image quality I have seen this far are very good indeed.
...on Dvd to super8: Image quality is good and there are no splices or reel change cues. The sound is fantastic as well be it mono or stereo. The issue I have is it is NOT FILM. For example there is a YouTube video presenting the difference between the DVD version and FILM version of Jaws when Roy Scheider kills Jaws where audio is concerned. The DVD version has an unmistakable ricochet cartoon sound added whereas the original film version does not. The DVD version of this print was altered from the feature that was originally released. Viewing the new 600' release leaves me thinking...Why didn't I just put on the Bluray? The Super 8 version looks Fantastic and I highly recommend this is a better edit but to keep in mind it is not from A film master. A heads up ...
Burton, you did put on the Blu Ray, it just happened to be on film. The same length of film on the Blu Ray
equates to £3 being roughly one quarter of the feature length. God knows what the 8mm print cost.I understand
that people want Super 8 to continue, but how anyone can afford such high prices for something that is in effect
an edited Blu Ray on film I cannot understand. High quality digital projectors outperform Super 8 consistently. If the
prints were made from film negatives it would be keeping film alive, but this is not and is a travesty for pure film
collectors
Of course, Phil, you can have your opinion, and that's fine, but I would also say that it's inappropriate to act like people who choose to enjoy a digest ON FILM, and not digital, reuniting with they're love of the digests of old, are some kind of morons who "just don't get it", when, in truth, you are on a website where people who love to have they're media in this format, are all saying, as they read your posts, "Phil, you just don't get it!". Now, that doesn't make you a bad person, of course, it just seems like you are making an argument to a community that you will never win over to your opinion, as, well, you just don't get it. We have heard arguments time and time again from assorted people that have come and gone shaking they're heads in disbelief... "Digital projection is sharper! Digital projection is better!" Whoopee Doo! "Digital costs a lot less money!" Go figure! No kidding. Everybody buying these digests, KNOWS these things. I hate to say this, but I think folks with your opinion will never understand the most wonderful depths of this hobby, and when you will have probably moved onto just digital again, we will be happily spooling up our films for many more years in our blissful lack of reality. No offense Phil, much love!
Osi, you can’t offend someone and then say no offence. I have collected films since the mid 70’s which I suspect islonger than you. So don’t preach to me about not loving the hobby, you are talking rubbish. If you want to pay inflated prices for blu rays on film that is your prerogative. But don’t insult me on this forum and then tell me you mean no offence.
to quote ‘ The Outlaw Josey Wales’, ‘ Don’t piss down my back and tell me it’s raining!
No offense, Phil, from me personally, but you may not realize how much you offend those who do choose to buy new digests, whom I hear from on an almost weekly basis off forum, not that there is anything that I can do but agree with, as I do agree with them. We will happily spend inordinate amounts of money on our digests for films that yes, most of us already own on Blu-ray. You probably have collected longer than I, as I have only been at it for about 27 years, ( both times included ), but this practice of speaking as if those who wish to spend inordinate amounts of money on super 8 prints of digital files, when you can just buy a digital file of a digital file ( film to Blu-ray, if you're lucky enough to even start with film in the first place, which are, of course, converted to digital anyhow ) are some silly uninformed people who need your enlightenment on a subject that they are already informed upon, well, it IS insulting, and I certainly will not repeat the concensus of opinion or descriptions of you on they're parts. As for me, while I am sure that you are no doubt an OK fellow, on this subject of new digests and the constant harranging about the insanity of buying new digests, whether from digital or cine, is a fool-hardy crusade on your part, and you'd be better off giving up the crusade, but that is entirely up to you, that's all. Best regards.
Everyone please remember, your fellow Forum members will have conflicting opinions (often!). If digital based digests aren't for you, great. If they are, well that's also great. No matter how you feel about it, no one should insult people who feel differently and no one should assume that they can speak for everyone.
Tweet
Comment