First time Super 8 gig - questions/help

[Stephen Perera]

OK so I've been asked to shoot Super 8 at a wedding. Yes I know....it's a fashion. Thank you millennials and Gen Z for your love of film by the way.

Questions/advice

1. I like the idea of 18 fps - you all approve? if so, why? if not? why?
2. Variable ND to reign in 500T in full southern Spain 6pm sun? or am I dreaming to think I can focus with an ND on the front killing 3 stops etc. I have 500T and 200T stock.
3. Any other advice.

Thank you in advance! and thank you Tyler for camera advice.

[Stephen Perera]

BTW I have a Nikon R8. My Leicina died on me AFTER accepting to shoot this.

I contacted Tyler Purcell for camera recommends but I could NOT get hold of good ones as they had fungus and haze on elements.

Oh and I believe the Nikon R8 has an 85A filter in camera that kills 1/3 stop from my metering which will help with the 500T and 200T

Edited August 21 by Stephen Perera

[Joerg Polzfusz]

Hi!

It‘s Super8, hence it’s always a Wratten85 or equivalent (=without A!). Therefore it’s a loss of 2/3 f-stop.

When using an external light meter, remember that there are other factors on top that will reduce the amount of light: the camera’s semi-transparent mirror, … .

Using an ND filter when shooting outdoors on a sunny day with the 500T is a great idea.

Good luck!

[Jon O'Brien]

Either no one's getting married on the Sunshine Coast, or no one knows I exist, or no one's into Super 8 here. I seem to live in an area where only digital as a concept clicks with people's brain function. Film as an idea or concept just deflects off and never sinks in so far. But I will keep trying to interest the punters. What else can you do.

Hmm, ND could be a problem with focusing. So far I've been sticking with 24 fps with Super 8 for most things but just yesterday I was contemplating offering wedding films at 18 fps. I'm not much help to you really. All I can say with shooting a wedding on film is to take a deep breath and jump in.

My own opinion of filming weddings on Super 8 is always have a backup camera, and always have an extra cartridge if you can manage it. Just in case something jams or stops functioning. A jammed cartridge can sometimes be got going again by hitting it hard a couple of times on your leg.

I believe the Nikon R8 has an orange filter that can be disengaged by sticking a thin piece of metal into a slot on the top of the camera. This might be advisable as the old filters inside can sometimes degrade. And then put one on the lens. But don't quote me -- I could be wrong.

I think it might be wise to open up the aperture just a fraction more than what the light meter says. But if you have time best to shoot a test. All the best with the wedding film. I'm sure it will work out well.

Edited August 21 by Jon O'Brien

[Jon O'Brien]

Somehow, I think Super 8 wedding films are more than just a fashion. They truly are beautiful in look. I reckon they're here to stay as an element of the wedding business. It's just in some places in some countries they haven't arrived yet so to speak because the populace was led to believe that film ceased to exist and the only 'Super 8' now is a video imitation with fake sprocket hole and fake dust.

[Stephen Perera]

Hey Jon it’s become big in the northern hemisphere….really really big with the ‘monied’ couples that are spending 50 to 80k on weddings etc.They all offer film photography and super 8 for a load of money. Went to my cousins daughters wedding - a really expensive wedding - and they flew over some photographers from UK and paid them a load of money. talking to the main ‘one’ I tell you, she didn’t know her asa from her elbow and these people are just riding waves and making loads putting cameras on program and hoping for the best…..I’m such a crap business person I’m completely out of all that scene as come on…weddings…..its not easy to shoot them and you have a lot of nervous people around to please

[Joerg Polzfusz]

18 or 24 fps is hard to tell:

Do you plan to transfer the results to video or do you plan to get prints made by Andec? (If video: Do you plan to mix it with somebody else’s video that is shot at xyz rate? If film: Does the couple have a projector that can also do 24fps or only a cheap 18fps-only-one?)

At 24 fps everything is smoother, the exposure duration is shorter (less motion blur, but also more light needed), … . Downside is that you need more film per minute.

The choice is also a matter of taste - many real S8-shooters don’t like the fidgety look of 18 fps. No idea what a couple would like to have. That’s because 18fps is the original amateur frame rate for S8. Hence, it’s more „authentic“, more „retro“, more yourBuzzWordHere, … .

Are you planning to use more than one camera (e.g. when the R8 fails)? If yes: are all cameras able to shoot at 24fps?

Are you planning to use in-camera-fx like lap-dissolves or slow-motion? (Some cameras only have 32 or 36 fps as slo-mo. Hence the effect is hardly noticeable when going up from 24 to slo-mo.)

Are you planning to shoot a lot of pans, driving scenes, … ? (If yes, then avoid 18fps)

…

[Chris Burke]

I would recommend doing the following:

 

1) Disengage the internal filter for the entire shoot. Use an 85 thread on filter instead. 

2) shoot the 200T outdoors. 500T indoors. 

 

With super 8, focus is often very deep. Therefore, if you did use a thread on 85ND combo in the very bright sun,  focusing may be a bit more forgiving. You might still be shooting at an ƒ8 to ƒ11

[Joerg Polzfusz]

„The Film Maker‘s Guide To Super 8“ had a whole chapter about the 18/24 question:
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1-e2AbR1-cRPulQ2akE2YXtfsA_eYRDx4e1JQOYCUMTk/edit?usp=drivesdk

[Mark Dunn]

41 minutes ago, Joerg Polzfusz said:

„The Film Maker‘s Guide To Super 8“ had a whole chapter about the 18/24 question:
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1-e2AbR1-cRPulQ2akE2YXtfsA_eYRDx4e1JQOYCUMTk/edit?usp=drivesdk

access denied

[Joerg Polzfusz]

Sorry. Please try again 

[Stephen Perera]

3 hours ago, Chris Burke said:

Use an 85 thread on filter instead. 

Thanks everyone for your tips. What does this mean "Use an 85 thread on filter instead. " OH I see get rid of the internal which is prob crap degraded or whatever and stick an 85A on the front thread of 52mm right?

Edited August 22 by Stephen Perera

[Stephen Perera]

I've ordered a little Neewer light to stick on the hotshoe for when the party gets going....I really like this brand they make good lights. I have a CB60B continuous light that I rate highly. Im gonna test it out see if I like it when it comes in from Amazon. The diffusion I can alter so lets see what its like....think 'shittyrigs' and thats my vibe hahaha

 

[Joerg Polzfusz]

5 hours ago, Stephen Perera said:

an 85A on the front thread of 52mm right?

No! Use a 85 without A!

https://www.kodak.com/content/products-brochures/Film/VISION3-200T-Color-Negative-Film-7213-TECHNICAL-DATA.pdf

https://www.kodak.com/content/products-brochures/Film/VISION3_5219_7219_Technical-data.pdf

[Mark Dunn]

Actually 85A is what's in the camera, to convert to 3400K, which Super-8 Kodachrome was balanced to. An 85B converts to 3200K, which is the professional standard for tungsten light. The data sheets fudge the difference.

https://hoyafilterusa.com/products/hoya-85b

So you want an 85B, although the difference will be slight since you're scanning and can correct anyway.

[Joerg Polzfusz]

No! 85 without A in daylight!

No! 85 without A in daylight!

No! 85 without A in daylight!

Check the technical data of the Vision3 200T, of the 500T, of the K40 (https://www.repaire.net/forums/attachments/k40-pdf.19075/ ) etc..

Also check the manuals of your cameras! It’s a „Type A“-filter (A=Kodak’s former designation for films designed for Artificial light), but its Wratten-Number is 85 without any letter!

So far, the only Tungsten-balanced S8-film from Kodak, that didn’t need a Wratten 85, was the Ektachrome 64T. The E64T needed a Wratten 85B.

[Tyler Purcell]

I scan a lot of 18fps stuff daily and I don't mind it honestly. If you're going to be delivering in 18fps, it's fine. The problem is when you try to mix it with 24fps stuff, that's when things go weird because editing software has to frame blend in order to alter the timing. I've done this a lot with 24 stuff in a 30fps sequence and it really looks weird, because today we use progressive scan so no 3:2 pulldown. Resolve does a great job re-timing, but it has a more video look as a consequence.

Like the film days, you kinda want to shoot in the same frame rate as the delivery. So I would find out how you're delivering. 

[Patrick Cooper]

Ive shot two weddings on super 8 film (both for family members.) Shot a mix of super 8 and digital video. So I was constantly switching cameras. I filmed at 24fps for the super 8 and 25fps for the digital. 

I agree about bringing along a back up camera. Good advice. With the first wedding, I only used my trusty Canon 1014E and no back up. Previously, that camera had been very reliable for many years. Though on the wedding day, it only worked about half the time. Sometimes, it was dead and refused to film. And there would also be times when it would spring back to life. 

For that first wedding film, I shot a mix of Tri-X and some colour reversal film (which Ive forgotten.) It would have been either Ektachrome 64T or 100D. 

For the second wedding film, the plan was to use Tri-X and 50D negative film for outdoors and 500T negative film for indoors. Though the reception was in a dimly lit venue. Taking a light reading from a white table cloth inside there indicated underexposure (so I didn't bother.) Sometimes I take a reading from a white surface and open up two stops but that didn't seem to be a viable option here. I ended up using digital for the reception instead. 

There was one moment in the second wedding film where the ceremony had just finished and the newly weds were standing outside the church door and were about to walk down some steps towards me. I had only just placed the tripod-mounted camera down and framed my composition and then they started walking down those steps. And I didn't even have time to focus! I had to start filming straight away as they were advancing towards me. Would have been nice if they could wait just a few extra seconds so that I could at least focus! 

However, luckily I was zoomed out all the way to the 7mm setting on my Canon 1014E and as it was a sunny day, I was shooting at around f6.7 or f8. So the depth of field was huge. My brother and his wife remained in focus with every step they took towards me. When they got closer, I had to tilt upwards to keep their heads in the frame. And I was proud of myself for being able to achieve a decently smooth tilt with a tripod that was designed for stills photography. That's right. It was not a video tripod. It's movements were generally jerky and unsmooth but somehow I managed the impossible here. I'm very happy with that particular shot. 

 

 

 

 

Edited August 29 by Patrick Cooper

[Stephen Perera]

Thanks Patrick and everyone else for your messages.....good things to think about indeed from all your messages.

I have NOT had time to shoot a roll and send to the lab (as the logistics didn't work cos the wedding is this Saturday) but I have tested film in the camera and it's advancing well and sounds fine. I did a few X marks on the film with a sharpie to check the film was advancing and it 'sounded' normal, so I'm confident all should be fine. That being said it's still a risk of course to go with ONE camera only.

I'm using this wedding as a test for myself to see whether I enjoy it and offer it as a service why not, as it's en vogue haha.

Importantly, I'm going to test the camera's light meter against my Sekonic using a grey card under different lights. I will reduce 2/3 of a stop on the Sekonic to take into account the inbuilt tungsten filter and if I see the camera responding well I will get the exposure from the camera and 'fix' it with the manual function, as my friend Tyler here advised as well.

Edited September 1 by Stephen Perera

[Mark Dunn]

If you've never tested the camera with film I'd be doubtful but at least run a few feet to check the footage counter is advancing and that is sounds different when running film.

You could backwind, say, a couple of seconds of film, then number the frames, run the camera for a second and check it's showing the number it should, more or less.

Just push the film up into the cartridge with a pencil or pen point. There's room for a few seconds; back in the day backwinders were a thing for dissolves, etc.

[Stephen Perera]

Hey Mark, yes the counter is running and it sounds different with the film running yes. The Nikon R8 has a backwinder too. He who dares Rodney hahaha I have no choice. It's a 'no pressure' wedding where I've said if the camera packs up etc it's all on me in terms of costs. They weren't gonna have any filming done but slowed me to 'have a go' and test things.

[Mark Dunn]

5 hours ago, Stephen Perera said:

Hey Mark, yes the counter is running and it sounds different with the film running yes. The Nikon R8 has a backwinder too. He who dares Rodney hahaha I have no choice. It's a 'no pressure' wedding where I've said if the camera packs up etc it's all on me in terms of costs. They weren't gonna have any filming done but slowed me to 'have a go' and test things.

Where somebody else pays for the camera test lol.

I would be listening out for any change in the running sound. There are reports of faulty carts as well so I might give it a slap if it sticks.

Edited September 1 by Mark Dunn

[Patrick Cooper]

On 9/1/2025 at 7:03 PM, Stephen Perera said:

That being said it's still a risk of course to go with ONE camera only.

 

I actually did the same with both weddings I filmed! Luckily, there were no reliability issues from my Canon 1014E in the second wedding. 

[Stephen Perera]

Two cartridges en route to Cinelab London, wish me luck hahaha basically I exposed EI 200 on the 500T for the daylight stuff with the 85A filter ON and EI320 for the night stuff with the internal filter off