Jump to content

Fuji Single 8 Bites The Big One -- Kodak Karries On!


Guest santo

Recommended Posts

yea that's what angry people like to say

 

tell that to the bacteria and fish...

 

life can stagnate and still survive for billions of years, I doubt humans will survive for a fraction of that time with all their fascinating evolution and progress

 

 

well thats a completely pointless statement, why change perfection. and why change if theres no reason to change. simply saying that things can survive a long time doesnt discount santos statement which i more or less agree with. you sound like an angry person.

 

and unfortunately these days. Nothing is built to last because when it breaks, greedy old men get more money when we have to replace things that they built to break. thats the way of the future. you could say that those who still sell things that cost 10 times the price and will last 25+ years didnt evolve. cos lets face it. theres simply no market for that any more. and you dont have to start pointing out that youd buy quality over some thing else, the tiny minority who have a clue cant help.

 

cheers for reading

 

Tim

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Premium Member
Like singl8, super 8 will soon be nixxed so it may be time to selll your small amatueru cameras and go for a 16mm camera so this time next year i forsee no more super 8 on the market.

 

That's not what I'm hearing at present. Kodak just moved the Super-8 finishing and packaging facility back to the USA from its plant in Chalon-sur-Saone in France, so the "higher ups" thought the investment in the future of Super-8 film had a good business case.

 

But if you want to shoot 16mm, great! Kodak will even sell you all the 65mm negative you need! ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That's not what I'm hearing at present. Kodak just moved the Super-8 finishing and packaging facility back to the USA from its plant in Chalon-sur-Saone in France, so the "higher ups" thought the investment in the future of Super-8 film had a good business case.

 

But if you want to shoot 16mm, great! Kodak will even sell you all the 65mm negative you need! ;)

 

just require a slightly less grainer reversal filmstock now!!!!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That's not what I'm hearing at present. Kodak just moved the Super-8 finishing and packaging facility back to the USA from its plant in Chalon-sur-Saone in France, so the "higher ups" thought the investment in the future of Super-8 film had a good business case.

 

But if you want to shoot 16mm, great! Kodak will even sell you all the 65mm negative you need! ;)

 

Don't tempt me John, don't tempt me! 8)

 

On a personal note, I just bought a Kodak model 1A Series II still camera, using 116 film. Takes pictues as sharp as the day it was built.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am a little bummed as I really loved the footage I shot with the Single 8 Fuji R25. That was a great picture with fantastic colors. I liked it better than the Kodachrome 40. However I really loved Kodachrome 25 in DS8. That gave me some of the best footage I have shot. And my favorite Black and White is TriX. That is a GREAT Super 8 film. I am anxious to try the Fuji Velvia 50 in Super 8 as well as the 100D Ektachrome and the 64T. Even though many say that Super 8 is on the decline I can't remember a time when we had such an assortment of really nice film stocks available to us.

BTW-Its great to have you posting here Mr. Pytlak. Its great that you are joining into these discussions as well as on the other site. Thanks!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have never held or touched a Single8 cartridge... But from the pictures I've seen, they appear MUCH easier to "reload" or "clone" than Super8. If someone wants it, and is willing to pay, someone will supply it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have never held or touched a Single8 cartridge... But from the pictures I've seen, they appear MUCH easier to "reload" or "clone" than Super8. If someone wants it, and is willing to pay, someone will supply it.

 

 

I've never used single 8 either, though I've always felt the Fuji design to be superior.One, there is a REAL pressure plate, and you can do multiple pass work.There are times when you want to do multi pass work in favor of post produced digi effects.

 

Someone should and will supply it.Even if it's in a form of respooling film into empty carts.I was surprised to learn that there is a lab that offers super 8 prints from super 8 negative, something that most everyone on this forum anyway believed to be long dead and not worth reviving.I can't imagine anyone who owns a ZC 1000 willing to just let it sit on the shelf,unless of course it's a collector.

 

Does Kodak offer anything in S8 on Estar base they could sell on single strand rolls?A single 8 fan could roll his own.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Premium Member
Does Kodak offer anything in S8 on Estar base they could sell on single strand rolls?A single 8 fan could roll his own.

 

Almost all the professional motion picture camera films Kodak offers are on triacetate base. Some films have been coated on polyester base for special projects (e.g., IMAX films shot in outer space), or instrumentation films. But special order requirements would be quite large for a niche market like Single-8.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Premium Member
I've never used single 8 either, though I've always felt the Fuji design to be superior.One, there is a REAL pressure plate, and you can do multiple pass work.There are times when you want to do multi pass work in favor of post produced digi effects.

 

I once did a shot that involved several passes, but I did them all at the same time via time-exposure, I used a combination of different lighting treatments and I "flashed" the different images onto the same frame. Since everything was in the cameras field of view I didn't have to deal with the notion of multiple passes.

 

The thing about rewinding and shooting a second pass that I find yucky is there is the possibility that both passes will nullify each other if one of a myriad of things goes wrong. However I bet it's real satisfying to successfully pull off the challenge of rewinding and doing another pass and having the end result work.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I

The thing about rewinding and shooting a second pass that I find yucky is there is the possibility that both passes will nullify each other if one of a myriad of things goes wrong. However I bet it's real satisfying to successfully pull off the challenge of rewinding and doing another pass and having the end result work.

 

 

There is.I've done some multi pass work in 16mm animation.It can be fun.I just always thought that the single 8 cartridge design was indeed superior to Kodak's coaxial design for the reasons I mentioned in my earlier post.Too bad it seems to have been poorly marketed.Like I said, someone needs to offer respooling services.

 

 

One more note.Whenever a stock or format dies, any stock or format,to me, it's just one more nail in film's coffin.

Edited by Marty
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Premium Member
One more note.Whenever a stock or format dies, any stock or format,to me, it's just one more nail in film's coffin.

 

Gee, there have been a LOT more video & digital formats to die off, in a much shorter time span...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Gee, there have been a LOT more video & digital formats to die off, in a much shorter time span...

 

 

That's quite true,David.But I think the analogy is comparing apples to oranges.I'm the last person in the world to start the funeral dirge for film, but with every small film format or stock that dies, it seems to push celluloid formats further away from the small independent guys who want to use it for artistic reasons(which is the main motivation to shoot any film format in the first place].It gets more expensive and further out of reach even for the small shops that want to provide niche markets.Pretty soon a point is reached where it will only be available for the studios and when that happens,it's only a matter of time before the people paying the salaries look to cut their bottom line.As long as the genuine film look makes the difference in the bottom line,film will thrive.When it no longer does that.......

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Premium Member
That's quite true,David.But I think the analogy is comparing apples to oranges.I'm the last person in the world to start the funeral dirge for film, but with every small film format or stock that dies, it seems to push celluloid formats further away from the small independent guys who want to use it for artistic reasons(which is the main motivation to shoot any film format in the first place].It gets more expensive and further out of reach even for the small shops that want to provide niche markets.Pretty soon a point is reached where it will only be available for the studios and when that happens,it's only a matter of time before the people paying the salaries look to cut their bottom line.As long as the genuine film look makes the difference in the bottom line,film will thrive.When it no longer does that.......

 

So Fuji discontinues two amateur movie films in a unique format that was sold almost exclusively in Japan, and the "funeral dirge for film" is starting? :unsure:

 

Kodak now offers FIVE Super-8 films, and more MAY be on the way. ;)

 

The finer grained Kodak VISION2 films have given new life to the Super-16 format, which has been doing very well of late. Arri seems to think so too.

 

And Kodak's 35mm camera films continue to set new records.

 

As Mark Twain once said: "Rumors of my death have been greatly exaggerated". :D

 

I prefer to build with nails, rather than bury them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In fact I think with more and more digital films coming out (most are usually poorly produced and made) the demand for film originated cinema is increasing. Film is becoming more important to secure distribution as a differentiator of quality for the small, independent filmmaker.

 

But the general public HATE FILM. They loathe it - want rid of it. They don't understand it. They can't see it in the shops. They don't understand how it is processed or why it looks so good. For the masses if something is not plugged straight into a computer then there must be something slightly suspicious about it - something undemocratic and elitist. Not in the information age - then it must be a format of a unionised, dinosaur film industry.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Premium Member
In fact I think with more and more digital films coming out (most are usually poorly produced and made) the demand for film originated cinema is increasing. Film is becoming more important to secure distribution as a differentiator of quality for the small, independent filmmaker.

 

But the general public HATE FILM. They loathe it - want rid of it. They don't understand it. They can't see it in the shops. They don't understand how it is processed or why it looks so good. For the masses if something is not plugged straight into a computer then there must be something slightly suspicious about it - something undemocratic and elitist. Not in the information age - then it must be a format of a unionised, dinosaur film industry.

 

 

Why film has been dead for years, even television doesn't broadcast film anymore, it's all high def!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Premium Member
Why film has been dead for years, even television doesn't broadcast film anymore, it's all high def!

 

I'm not sure I understand that statement -- TV always broadcasts video, but much of the dramatic TV and commercial work is still shot on film and transferred to video, now transferred to HD. News, on the other hand, hasn't been shot on film in decades. I'm actually more surprised that network TV shows aren't shot more in 24P HD than on film, but most still prefer shooting film. HD for origination has been more popular on the lower-budgeted cable TV series work. So I don't get the statement "television doesn't broadcast film anymore" -- how many network TV drama series can you name that are shot digitally?

 

But I guess you were joking.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Premium Member
But I guess you were joking.

 

Yes, it was meant as a joke, inspired by the classic line in "The Big Picture" that "black and white films couldn't be shown on color film projectors".

 

In terms of conspiracy, there is an economic agenda to trash and tarnish any service or product that cannot be easily replicated and sold to the largest possible audience. Outside of the educated, film can easily be portrayed as being horse and buggy technology because as Nathan aptly stated, the consumer has been trained to believe that if it can't be just plugged into the computer, it must not be very worthwhile technology.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In terms of conspiracy, there is an economic agenda to trash and tarnish any service or product that cannot be easily replicated and sold to the largest possible audience. Outside of the educated, film can easily be portrayed as being horse and buggy technology because as Nathan aptly stated, the consumer has been trained to believe that if it can't be just plugged into the computer, it must not be very worthwhile technology.

 

I was hardly advocating conspiracy but yes economic forces undeniably work against film, even if the professional sphere of production is more or less isolated from this.

 

Film is the straw man for propelling the dreams and narratives of the billions being made by flogging generation after generation of digital kit in the aim of digital democratisation. When there is so much money to be made from built in obscelesence in digital equipment, due to ever increasing quality, then it is is everyone's interest to knock film. "Cameras that last decades and need only be repaired - why we can't have that!!"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So Fuji discontinues two amateur movie films in a unique format that was sold almost exclusively in Japan, and the "funeral dirge for film" is starting? :unsure:

 

Kodak now offers FIVE Super-8 films, and more MAY be on the way. ;)

 

The finer grained Kodak VISION2 films have given new life to the Super-16 format, which has been doing very well of late. Arri seems to think so too.

 

And Kodak's 35mm camera films continue to set new records.

 

As Mark Twain once said: "Rumors of my death have been greatly exaggerated". :D

 

I prefer to build with nails, rather than bury them.

 

I hear ya,John and like I said, I'm the last person to predict the death of celluloid.All I'm saying is that when a film stock dies, any film stock, a market,albeit a small one goes with it.I'm well aware of the strength of super 16 and 35mm as well as the new super 8 negative stocks.However, do the math here on cost.Stock+processing+telecine= a budget the small guy can't afford without outside funding.Outside funding means somebody wants a return for the investment.This spells more trouble for the small budgeted art for art's sake crowd.When a video format dies,it's no biggie.The same guy that shot Hi8 can now shoot MiniDV or whatever.But the film class at the local high school or junior college(or other similar groups) that wanted to do a film project is rapidly running out of options.They have nowhere else to go but to an electronic format.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Premium Member
In terms of conspiracy, there is an economic agenda to trash and tarnish any service or product that cannot be easily replicated and sold to the largest possible audience. Outside of the educated, film can easily be portrayed as being horse and buggy technology because as Nathan aptly stated, the consumer has been trained to believe that if it can't be just plugged into the computer, it must not be very worthwhile technology.

 

 

I was hardly advocating conspiracy but yes economic forces undeniably work against film, even if the professional sphere of production is more or less isolated from this.

 

Thanks pal for sidestepping the compliment I gave you, but to be sure, I never said you were "advocating a conspiracy".

 

If one were to walk into a high end television sales store and ask about the role of film in the HD movement, it's pretty obvious that virtually all the sales people would laugh off the idea that film is an active participant in the HD movement.

 

This conspiracy is then congealed when an HD set that is showing a Hollywood film, that was shot on film, is purported to being an "HD Production".

 

Kodak would be wise to educate these sales people that think film is not a significant part of the HD movement.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...