Ted Hinkle Posted July 5, 2006 Share Posted July 5, 2006 I would say that a good comparison to Super 8mm would be vinyl records. So ask yourself are they still being made??? Is there still a need??? YES they absolutely are still being made, and there is still a great demand/need for them. Almost all indie labels are still creating vinyl. Ask yourself WHY? People are still buying them! Look at how many people today are trying to get into the film industry. Where do they get there start? Many of those people buying cameras on ebay are going through college or film school. While there may be a lot of super 8 cameras on ebay, many of them breaking and there's simply not near as many places to fix them if they even can be fixed. More simply put there about as expensive to fix as they are to buy. I think it would be amazing if someone started making new cameras. Someone mentioned earlier that they should come up with a basic body for a nice decent price then allow for people to purchase add ons. Maybe something like a digital viewfinder a couple different lenses and you name it. But I think the basic body would have to go for around $500 or $600 for there to enough people interested in buying it. If someone is seriously considering getting this going they should get in touch with Clive Tobin. There was a really interesting article on him in the May/June issue of "Super 8 Today" www.super8today.com. He had some interesting thoughts on how "20 fps would have been the ideal speed for Super-8." Another thing to consider is that super 8 is becoming widely popular among wedding videographers, who are a dime a dozen these days. I can say that because I am one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NathanCoombs Posted July 5, 2006 Share Posted July 5, 2006 Hows about my online petition idea of people that can and want to buy one of the new cameras coming forwards and signing on the condition that they commit to buy one if it becomes reality. Ok so now you're asking an investor and a devoted technician to stump up a at least $300K in advance on the basis of some flimsy online petition. Im sorry but something far more contractual would be needed than that. Money guarantted through pre-orders would be the only credible development path. And Im not hopeful about that judging by some of the 'head in the clouds' responses on here. My suggestion to manipulate Aaton's designs is the only imaginable way it would ever happen, and its not like my comments sparked much interest - just more wishy washy postings like 'yeah wouldn't it be great etc..etc..' The Super-8 'community' are a bunch of dreamers (usually broke too) who dont have the time or moeny to commit to such an undertaking. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ted Hinkle Posted July 5, 2006 Share Posted July 5, 2006 Im sorry but something far more contractual would be needed than that. Money guarantted through pre-orders would be the only credible development path. The Super-8 'community' are a bunch of dreamers (usually broke too) who dont have the time or moeny to commit to such an undertaking. This is a completely ridiculous idea. Your asking people to pay for something they haven't even seen yet. Like were all supposed to put down $3000 and just trust that the camera would come out just the way we all want it. Sounds like your the dreamer! I think there are simply to many people here trying to make super 8 into something it's not. Super 8 is not meant to be HD and it's not meant get the most clearest sharpest picture. It's loved for it's soft and grainy character. It's a format that will never be replaced and there will always be a demand. It may not be the biggest money making plan, but the thought of a super 8 camera made with today's technology is nothing less of a noble idea. That's quite an insult to call the entire super 8 community a bunch of broke dreamers! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tom Doolittle Posted July 5, 2006 Share Posted July 5, 2006 I think there are simply to many people here trying to make super 8 into something it's not. Super 8 is not meant to be HD and it's not meant get the most clearest sharpest picture. It's loved for it's soft and grainy character. I couldn't agree more. There are far too many comparisons being made between S8 and other formats. Those who would like to see a new camera are simply trying to make their voices heard. Nobody is claiming a new S8 camera will threaten the "superiority" of a gizmo-laden videocam or any 16mm camera ever made. All we're trying to do here is discuss what features might make a new 8mm camera worth the effort and the money. If you don't have something constructive to add, go play somewhere else. This is art, people. You don't go to museums and bash oil paintings, spouting comparitive resolution data, do you? TD Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Douglas Hunter Posted July 5, 2006 Share Posted July 5, 2006 I couldn't agree more. There are far too many comparisons being made between S8 and other formats. This is art, people. You don't go to museums and bash oil paintings, spouting comparitive resolution data, do you? TD Exactly. Super 8 is a wonderful tool with unique abilities and attributes, use it as such without lamenting its pronounced grain, etc. In addition I don't think that a new super 8 camera would need many additions, I certainly would NOT want a super 8 camera with and LCD or EVF as others have suggested, a video tap would be o.k. but not on my list. A new super 8 camera that would be teriffic would be 16:9, have interchangable lenses, a big bright viewfinder with TV safe and 16:9 markings, it would have vairable frame rates from 0 - 100 and be constant at 23.98. A longer load would be great as well, a good battery system, and a good 2 stage matte box and rods would finish things off. That is about all I would want, well O.K. I would love the ability to shoot with swing and shift lenses on super 8, that would be amazing, but I know it will never happen. Also a new camera could drop some old features that are not really necessary such as auto exposure, and in camera dissolves. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tom Doolittle Posted July 6, 2006 Share Posted July 6, 2006 So, back on topic... The more I think about it, things like LCD monitors and such seems like too much. I would rather see the money spent on a top-notch optical viewfinder and reflex system. I would limit the onboard electronics, applying them only where they can reduce mechanical complexity, such as in the metering system (replacing mechanically-coupled ASA dials), the speed controller (replacing friction-based governors with an optical encoder/digital motor controller), and in the footage counter (replacing gears and needles with a digital readout). Here's a thought: Why not bring back "Double 8", or "Double-Run 8"? This was the old format in which 16mm film was essentially run through a 16mm camera with half the gate blocked off. You exposed only one side of the negative, then flipped the roll over and exposed the other side. Perhaps a subsequent generation of the Ikonoskop A-Cam could be adapted for this. Ideally it would be a simple operation to switch between 8 and 16mm gate sizes. Add a reflex viewfinder and we'd have all the benefits of a brand new camera, plus the ability to shoot in either 8 OR 16mm. You could develop and telecine the roll just like any other 16mm film. It is not too difficult to envision a program that would perform the necessary frame-split in the computer, eliminating any need to physically slit the negative. Perhaps Ikonoskop could increase sales volume with such a camera, and therefore lower their price? Because it would use 16mm filmstocks, such a camera would not directly benefit sales of 8mm cartridges, but that really isn't the point, is it? TD Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nate Downes Posted July 7, 2006 Share Posted July 7, 2006 From what I know of this ongoing speculation, the only hope of a new super-8 camera is a modification of Aaton's unreleased designs for their super-8. Now Aaton will never make the camera, but some highly skilled devotee to super-8 might convince Aaton to donate their designs. These designs could then be modified to be brought into the 21st century and accept the regular super-8 carts, not the slightly unusual cart system they had in mind. Then I estimate it would take something like a bare minimum of 1000 pre-orders for a $3000 camera to make a production run worth it. So basically no-one is ever going to do this for you. Only a devoted fan base who can put their money where their mouth is will ever see a new camera materialise. Um, the Aaton design used the Super8 sound cartridge. it does not work with normal S8 carts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matthew Buick Posted July 7, 2006 Share Posted July 7, 2006 This is a completely ridiculous idea. Your asking people to pay for something they haven't even seen yet. Like were all supposed to put down $3000 and just trust that the camera would come out just the way we all want it. Sounds like your the dreamer I came up with that petition idea. :angry: I meant that the site have pictures of the product, loads of technical info, and possibly even prototype reviews, y'know, stuff like that. Matthew Buick P.S Does anyone know a plan to get the Aaton designs for the Super 8 (I don't plan to do the camera myself, just suggestions on how to get dem plans). Would the Aaton design work with Single 8 ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris Burke Posted July 7, 2006 Share Posted July 7, 2006 This is a completely ridiculous idea. Your asking people to pay for something they haven't even seen yet. Like were all supposed to put down $3000 and just trust that the camera would come out just the way we all want it. Sounds like your the dreamer! I think there are simply to many people here trying to make super 8 into something it's not. Super 8 is not meant to be HD and it's not meant get the most clearest sharpest picture. It's loved for it's soft and grainy character. It's a format that will never be replaced and there will always be a demand. It may not be the biggest money making plan, but the thought of a super 8 camera made with today's technology is nothing less of a noble idea. That's quite an insult to call the entire super 8 community a bunch of broke dreamers! I really doubt that anything would get done on this front with the level of negativity that I am reading from the last few posts. Mr. Buick is the one of the only pro active people on this thread. He is mearly trying to generate enthusiam. If you are not in, then why waste your time as a nay sayer. Please don't bother, go some place else. You have added nothing new, save one obvious point. People put there money into something they have not seen and purchase items merely on spec all the time. Your keen observation of this fact was a great call, thanks for bringing it up. I believe that loads more research and polling / petitioning should be done before approaching Aaton or anyone else. I do believe there is a small niche market for such a camera. I don't think anyone here wants Super 8 to change all that much. We all know and love it for what it is. The original idea of the thread was to generate ideas and enthusiams around a new Super 8 camera, one that is more pro than prosumer. Obviously I am on board. Mr. Buick, start the petition, go to Filmshooting. com and start it there, go to as many websites and start as many polls or petitions as you can. It is not that far fetched and idea that you could get one thousand or more people to commit to buying a camera that was further along in development. But generating interest and getting as many people as you can on a list is the first big step. Sign me up. Chris Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robert Hughes Posted July 7, 2006 Share Posted July 7, 2006 (edited) I would say that a good comparison to Super 8mm would be vinyl records. So ask yourself are they still being made??? Wrong comparison. Vinyl records are made on big, precision industrial record lathes, not home transcription units. Vinyl record cutters are equivalent to 35mm studio cameras, not Super 8 toys. And nobody's making new record lathes anymore, either. Why worry about Super 8? Use one of the thousands of cameras still available and enjoy it. Don't make it another religion, we've got too many jihadists and evangelists out there already. Edited July 7, 2006 by Robert Hughes Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Adolfi Posted July 8, 2006 Share Posted July 8, 2006 Sent this out this morning. Dear Aaton Sales Rep and the President of Aaton. Many are believing that the time has come to produce a new super 8 camera. With the support of the format by Kodak, Pro8mm and others, super-8 has a future. What do you think? This link gives your company a consensus of feedback on this subject from the Cinematography.com forum. Both you and the president of Arriflex have been notified with the hope one will respond and give this some serious consideration. http://www.cinematography.com/forum2004/in...=15040&st=0 Sincerely, John Adolfi Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sam Wells Posted July 8, 2006 Share Posted July 8, 2006 Good luck, but I don't think Jean-Pierre Beauviala could or would deliver a Super 8 camera for as little $ 3000 USD. I'm surprised the A-minima is priced as low as it is (~ 15,000). I do think we'll likely see something like a digital back for the A-minima. I suspect Aaton in any case has its hands full with the Penelope project (new 2 perf / 3 perf 35mm camera). As for ARRI - it might be more productive to argue for S8 capability for the Arriscanner. -Sam You could always send a petition to Jim Jannard :) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matthew Buick Posted July 8, 2006 Share Posted July 8, 2006 Mr. Buick is the one of the only pro active people on this thread. Mr. Buick, start the petition, go to Filmshooting. com and start it there, go to as many websites and start as many polls or petitions as you can. Thanks for the support, Zaefod. But I,m only 15 I can't set up all these petitions, and pitch to Aaton an' ARRI 'n' stuff. The petition idea was a suggestion, that hopefully, someone more professional and capable would take up. I can't do it, sorry. Matthew Buick Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ted Hinkle Posted July 9, 2006 Share Posted July 9, 2006 Wrong comparison. Vinyl records are made on big, precision industrial record lathes, not home transcription units. Vinyl record cutters are equivalent to 35mm studio cameras, not Super 8 toys. And nobody's making new record lathes anymore, either. Why worry about Super 8? Use one of the thousands of cameras still available and enjoy it. Don't make it another religion, we've got too many jihadists and evangelists out there already. I did not mean for this to be a literal direct comparison. It was simply a way to show that something older and something that, to some people, might appear as outdated could still have a lot of value and use. To some people vinyl records might seem to be outdated and useless, to others there is a great value, nastalgia, and warm fuzzy feeling they get from still being able to play records on there turntable. I collect many records myself. This point could be the same for some when it comes to Super 8 to some it may seem outdated, but to others there is a similar value, nastalgia, and warm fuzzy feeling we get from super 8. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ted Hinkle Posted July 9, 2006 Share Posted July 9, 2006 To matthew Buick, You said "I meant that the site have pictures of the product, loads of technical info, and possibly even prototype reviews, y'know, stuff like that." That's a great idea, and that's all that I meant by that comment. I didn't mean to shoot down your idea, infact (even though your only 15) if we could get all the pictures of the product, loads of technical info, and possibly even prototype reviews, stuff like that then I might sign up for one myself. I guess I was getting irritated with all the negative "it ani't ever gonna happen" comments that were being made. Some of us here are talking about making a new Super 8 that has more gadgets and technical abbilities than have been made with the super 8 before. While I'm thinking that we don't need all of the that. One thing that made the Super 8 cameras popular back when they came out was that they made them simple and easy to use. Now with the improvements to film that Pro8mm is selling, you can do even more than you could before. I think it would be nice to have a "new" camera that strove to be what super 8 was when it came out simple and easy to use. A "prosumer" camera. But maybe others want one that has more of the pro features. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nathan coombs Posted July 9, 2006 Share Posted July 9, 2006 Um, the Aaton design used the Super8 sound cartridge. it does not work with normal S8 carts. er, read my post - "modified design" Changing the type of cartridge the camera accepts is a whole lot easier than designing a camera from the base up. I do wonder though if the A-Minima is $15K how a new super-8 camera would be that much cheaper to construct, especially with the features people are recommending on this board. The reason the A-Minima is more expensive than a HD camera is simply supply and demand. I can't see how a news super-8 camera would be any more in demand than a S16 camera. This is why guaranteed, contractual pre-orders (if product is delivered you cough up the money for it) would be the ONLY way this thing would ever happen, at the price people here are looking for. This is the reality of business, sending petitions will get you nowhere. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris Burke Posted July 9, 2006 Share Posted July 9, 2006 People have mentioned the Aaton prototype that was to be a Super 8 camera. I vaguely remember seeing a picture on the web once, but can not find it again. Anyone have a link or two with more infomation? thanks Chris Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matthew Buick Posted July 9, 2006 Share Posted July 9, 2006 People have mentioned the Aaton prototype that was to be a Super 8 camera. I vaguely remember seeing a picture on the web once, but can not find it again. Anyone have a link or two with more infomation?thanks Chris I saw a picture, it was in the Aaton section of Super8wiki. Anyone know where there are any more? Matthew Buick Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anthony Schilling Posted July 9, 2006 Share Posted July 9, 2006 I always say, a new camera should just reinvent the format as a DS8 50 or 100ft spools... with wider gate. If you use 100ft spools, Kodak could just offer any stock that is available in 16mm daylight spools but with smaller perfs. It could be classified and marketed as a new small guage format, and shake the home movie curse. It makes sense, things get smaller and better as technology advances... so does film. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matthew Buick Posted July 11, 2006 Share Posted July 11, 2006 I was thinking any new camera should do a Elmo Tri-Filmatic, and have detachable backs. Matthew Buick Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robert Hughes Posted July 13, 2006 Share Posted July 13, 2006 (edited) I always say, a new camera should just reinvent the format as a DS8 50 or 100ft spools... with wider gate. If you use 100ft spools, Kodak could just offer any stock that is available in 16mm daylight spools but with smaller perfs. It could be classified and marketed as a new small guage format, and shake the home movie curse. It makes sense, things get smaller and better as technology advances... so does film. Now we're starting to get somewhere. But again, the simplest and most cost effective solution is a modification on an existing standard 16mm design rather than a ground-up S8. How about supporting the half-16 widescreen format, with the bottom half of the gate masked horizontally, as could be done on the old Kodak Cine Specials? You'd get image resolution comparable to S8 with additional wide screen, in-camera pressure plate, twice the footage due to reversible dual perf film, and all the optical and mechanical innovations existing in modern 16mm cameras and film stocks, without spending another dime in R&D or manufacturing. Film stock and processing costs are also precisely 1/2 that of 16mm, thus cheaper than Super 8. This is, notably, an appropriate mod for cameras that cannot be converted to Super 16 anyway - it gives these machines a new lease on life. Edited July 13, 2006 by Robert Hughes Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Adolfi Posted July 13, 2006 Share Posted July 13, 2006 I received this e-mailo from a JP at Aaton, Hello John, a professional camera such as the one described by David(Mullen) (15,000 to 20,000USD) would be ideal but it would be too expensive for Super8 afficionados... contact the ikonoskop guys instead, their A-Cam is better suited. http://www.ikonoskop.com/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NathanCoombs Posted July 14, 2006 Share Posted July 14, 2006 Now we're starting to get somewhere. But again, the simplest and most cost effective solution is a modification on an existing standard 16mm design rather than a ground-up S8. How about supporting the half-16 widescreen format, with the bottom half of the gate masked horizontally, as could be done on the old Kodak Cine Specials? You'd get image resolution comparable to S8 with additional wide screen, in-camera pressure plate, twice the footage due to reversible dual perf film, and all the optical and mechanical innovations existing in modern 16mm cameras and film stocks, without spending another dime in R&D or manufacturing. Film stock and processing costs are also precisely 1/2 that of 16mm, thus cheaper than Super 8. This is, notably, an appropriate mod for cameras that cannot be converted to Super 16 anyway - it gives these machines a new lease on life. So a bit like 2 perf 35mm, but using double perfed 16mm stock - fantastic idea!!! 2.35:1 aspect ratio on stanadrd 16mm! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Premium Member John Pytlak RIP Posted July 14, 2006 Premium Member Share Posted July 14, 2006 So a bit like 2 perf 35mm, but using double perfed 16mm stock - fantastic idea!!! 2.35:1 aspect ratio on stanadrd 16mm! Again, as has been posted before, use non-standard formats at your own risk, as they may have very limited support in post-production. For every "success story" (e.g., Super-16, Super-35), there are many obsolete "mayfly" formats: http://www.widescreenmuseum.com/widescreen/mayflies.htm Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eggart Posted July 14, 2006 Share Posted July 14, 2006 Wouldn't that mean you'd have to run the film through the telecine twice to transfer it to video? That wouldn't help to keep costs down... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
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 accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now