Modern look Super 8 films

Matthew Buick · June 25, 2006

Are there any Super 8 films that have that bright modern film look, and don't look 'old movie'.

Darren Blin · June 25, 2006

Yes

The entire "Lord Of The Rings" trilogy.

Robert Hughes · June 25, 2006

Huh?

Oh well, first time poster.

Take a look at Vision 2 negative films 7217 and 7218. They are the same stocks as used in 16 and 35mm and have the same color and sensitivity characteristics. The Super 8 frame is tiny, though, so you will see an increase in grain and a decrease in resolution compared to the larger guages.

ken wood · June 27, 2006

Yes
The entire "Lord Of The Rings" trilogy.

Is that true? Peter Jackson spent $275Mil and used Super 8? Where can I get details on this data?

June 27, 2006

Is that true? Peter Jackson spent $275Mil and used Super 8? Where can I get details on this data?

Oh dear....

Darren Blin · June 27, 2006

Is that true? Peter Jackson spent $275Mil and used Super 8? Where can I get details on this data?

Sorry

I thought people would undertand sarcasm. Some people seem to have taken my comment at face value. I apologize.

Besides, it was King Kong that was shot on Super 8.

Matthew Buick · June 29, 2006

I mean filmstocks.

Mike Crane · June 29, 2006

Check out for film:

http://www.kodak.com/US/en/motion/s8mm/pro....14.4&lc=en

Check out for film, processing, telecine:

http://spectrafilmandvideo.com/Film.html

Guys at Spectra may also provide useful information about the camera you are using, stocks, different looks, etc. Very helpful.

Matt Pacini · June 30, 2006

I think everything you see in Super 8 is going to look "old movie" to some extent, because the format is just soooooo tiny. (and I shot a feature on Super 8, trying NOT to make it look like this!).

Kodachrome 40 was the best stock for this format, because it had such fine grain. You could always manipulate the colors in post, to make it not look so saturated, etc., but with the other stocks, there's just no way around those golf-ball sized grains.

MP

June 30, 2006

I think everything you see in Super 8 is going to look "old movie" to some extent, because the format is just soooooo tiny. (and I shot a feature on Super 8, trying NOT to make it look like this!).

Kodachrome 40 was the best stock for this format, because it had such fine grain. You could always manipulate the colors in post, to make it not look so saturated, etc., but with the other stocks, there's just no way around those golf-ball sized grains.

MP

I think one of the best super 8 films to date was Dances with Wolves.

...sorry I couldn't resist.

Just a joke.

Matthew Buick · June 30, 2006

GOLF BALL SIZED!!! Oh poppysticks.

Anthony Schilling · July 1, 2006

I just got back some 200T from Spectra last week, had them punch up the saturation, and shot it at a 45 degree shutter. It did not look retro at all, but progressive to say the least.

Edited July 1, 2006 by Skratch

Chris Burke · July 1, 2006

I just got back some 200T from Spectra last week, had them punch up the saturation, and shot it at a 45 degree shutter. It did not look retro at all, but progressive to say the least.

7217 rated at 100 is quite nice. I believe it can look both retro and modern. However, this all leads back to the need for 7201 and 7285 in Super 8 carts from Kodak. I have not tried 7265 in Super 8, what have been peoples impressions? Are there any clips out there for viewing?

chris

Larry Wilson · July 8, 2006

Are there any Super 8 films that have that bright modern film look, and don't look 'old movie'.

Unless you're using one of the higher-end S8 cams (Nizo 6080, Beaulieu 2008-9008, etc.) the results are probably going to be equivalent to low-to-mid-end 16mm. You have the size of the S8 frame and the camera's optics working against you, but on the aforementioned cameras, that's almost a non-issue--especially with the Beaulieu cams, which have C-mount lens capability, meaning you can strap on some of the best optics out there.

As far as the actual film stock, if you're looking to get away from the "old movie" look, you definitely want to go negative. Any of the currently available negative stocks will serve you quite well. Part of the "home movie look" has a lot to do with the stocks used. Reversal stocks in general are by nature quite a bit more contrasty than negative stocks due to their being made for direct projection. The negative stocks are way more forgiving.

I'm assuming you know something of using a light meter as well. If not, you would be well advised to learn. Most of the negative stocks aren't notched correctly (in fact, that goes for Pro8mm's reversal stock), and while that's not quite the catastrophe it would be for reversal film, it's still something you want to look out for.

You can get some very good looking footage out of Super-8, just so long as you understand that you are not going to get the same clarity you would with 16mm or 35mm. You are always going to have an element of the "look." But a good story transcends the format it's shot on. Some of the best movies I've ever seen were shot on 16mm or lower, some of them not even on film at all.

Edited July 8, 2006 by Larry Wilson

Konvict · July 8, 2006

Also,don't forget to use mostly closeup and med shots to keep the grain effect down. Lots of people, crowd scenes,landscapes and the like suffer the small format syndrome. This is true for 16mm as well, although you can get away with it alot better. Good lenses are really important. Also for newbies..try to get a copy of Polish Vampire in Burbank. It's a spoof on Vampire films of yore shot in the 80's on super 8. Talk about low shadow detail,grain and early transfers...but it's entertaining. Now there's something to compare current stocks and transfers to. Just had some pre-exposed 8+ year old Agfa 400 16mm stock processed and transferred. Yes,it was refridgerated and was surprised at how well the latent image held up. It would a ctually have looked much better today if shot on the newer S8 stocks. I guess that's a testament to modern S8 stocks.Well,just wanted to get my 2cents worth in. By the way,Plus-X stock pushed 1 stop gives an awesome film noir look. Really good for deep black shadows while hardly adding any grain. Hope I didn't bore y'all too much....

Konvict · July 8, 2006

PS: to my last message. Here's a great lab that really supports S8. The finest color/b&w neg/pos processing and Rank transfers at great prices. http://www.cinelab.com/ Better than DigiBeta transfers to your hard drive.

Douglas Hunter · July 11, 2006

PS: to my last message. Here's a great lab that really supports S8. The finest color/b&w neg/pos processing and Rank transfers at great prices. http://www.cinelab.com/ Better than DigiBeta transfers to your hard drive.

Yes, Cinelab is excellent, I have used them in the past and would use them again, they have a wonderful super 8 wet gate and great service, I was able to talk with them on the phone long distance as they viewed my film in the telecine suite. The colorist really knew what he was doing. Its hard to get that kind of service for super 8. I think the only other place that would give service of that quality is Modern Videofilm in Burbank, they are terriffic and can telecine super8 to any format under the sun including digibeta, dvcpro hd, and hdcam.

Larry Wilson · July 11, 2006

Also,don't forget to use mostly closeup and med shots to keep the grain effect down. Lots of people, crowd scenes,landscapes and the like suffer the small format syndrome. This is true for 16mm as well, although you can get away with it alot better. Good lenses are really important. Also for newbies..try to get a copy of Polish Vampire in Burbank. It's a spoof on Vampire films of yore shot in the 80's on super 8. Talk about low shadow detail,grain and early transfers...but it's entertaining. Now there's something to compare current stocks and transfers to. Just had some pre-exposed 8+ year old Agfa 400 16mm stock processed and transferred. Yes,it was refridgerated and was surprised at how well the latent image held up. It would a ctually have looked much better today if shot on the newer S8 stocks. I guess that's a testament to modern S8 stocks.Well,just wanted to get my 2cents worth in. By the way,Plus-X stock pushed 1 stop gives an awesome film noir look. Really good for deep black shadows while hardly adding any grain. Hope I didn't bore y'all too much....

Not at all. It was definitely a very cool movie. I have one of the very first demo tapes that Super8Sound put out, back before they had the negative stocks. They had excerpts from "Game of Survival," "Nudist Colony of the Dead" and a clip from "Kung Fu Rascals" with a temp score from Raiders of the Lost Ark. They also had an "Entertainment Tonight" segment on Mark Pirro and Super-8.

I wish I could find some of those on DVD. I know Pirro's selling "Polish Vampire" and "Curse of the Queerwolf" on his own website, but I have yet to see anything about the other ones, especially "Game of Survival."

It really would be interesting to see it reshot with the newer stocks, especially the newer Plus- and Tri-X formulations. I haven't shot B&W in Super-8, but I think I might try it fairly soon.

Speaking of Pro8mm, is it just me, or is their colorist into grain and almost glow-in-the-dark color? I got the 2005 demo reel because I wanted to see how the new stocks looked. But the one thing I noticed about most of the shots was that the colors seem to be exaggerated almost to the point that everything looked like it was painted with glow-in-the-dark paint. Now, I like bold, wet-paint color, but this seemed a little overdone. In fact, it was downright garish in spots.

And the grain was quite noticeable with the Eterna sequences. I just got Fuji's latest stock demo DVD, and their Eterna sequences are nowhere near as grainy, and I don't think it's because of the smaller gauge of Super-8, because the higher speed Vision2 stocks didn't suffer from that much grain; in fact, they were much smoother.