Brian Rose Posted July 20, 2006 Share Posted July 20, 2006 I've got a technical question for you all regarding Super Duper 8. Recently, I bought a camera that had been modified to shoot SD8, and I shot some test film, Ektachrome 64T. However, when I got the film back, it was standard super 8! I know the problem is not the film gate, since it is DEFINITELY wider than the gate another camera I own. Additionally, the cropped image was not due to my projector, since I compared the actual film frame side by side with another reel I had shot, and detected no difference. So, my question is, did something go wrong during processing, i.e. should I have specified that it was SD8? I'm not too familiar with the mechanics of processing film, but it occurred to me that maybe the film was processed on a machine that was designed for S8, and as a result, it was set up for 4x3 aspect, and cut off the remaining film area. Wheewww! Anyways, have you ever heard of something like this happening? Should I be sending my super 8 to a certain lab whether in the US, or Canada? I used Dwayne?s Photo, out of Kansas, since they are one of the few labs still using the E6 process for Kodachrome and Ektachrome. Thanks! Brian Rose Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Leo Anthony Vale Posted July 20, 2006 Share Posted July 20, 2006 I've got a technical question for you all regarding Super Duper 8. Recently, I bought a camera that had been modified to shoot SD8, and I shot some test film, Ektachrome 64T. However, when I got the film back, it was standard super 8! I know the problem is not the film gate, since it is DEFINITELY wider than the gate another camera I own. Additionally, the cropped image was not due to my projector, since I compared the actual film frame side by side with another reel I had shot, and detected no difference. So, my question is, did something go wrong during processing, i.e. should I have specified that it was SD8? I'm not too familiar with the mechanics of processing film, but it occurred to me that maybe the film was processed on a machine that was designed for S8, and as a result, it was set up for 4x3 aspect, and cut off the remaining film area. Wheewww! Anyways, have you ever heard of something like this happening? Should I be sending my super 8 to a certain lab whether in the US, or Canada? I used Dwayne?s Photo, out of Kansas, since they are one of the few labs still using the E6 process for Kodachrome and Ektachrome. Thanks! Brian Rose You should send a letter demanding a refund to whoever did the alleged "conversion". Seems to indicate that SD8 is a scaqm. ---LV Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brian Rose Posted July 20, 2006 Author Share Posted July 20, 2006 I appreciate your feedback, and perhaps I was not specific, but I already looked at the film gate, and my camera has definitely been modified. It is wider than my other camera's gate, which tells me that it is indeed SD8. Thanks Brian R. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bryan Darling Posted July 20, 2006 Share Posted July 20, 2006 Brian, SD8 has nothing to do with the film itself in the sense of a physical manipulation/handling. All it means is that the camera's film gate has been widened out so that "normal" Super 8 film will capture a wider image than normal film. Now whether you will physically see this with your own eyes depends. Unless a projector has had it's film gate widened out, you will see no difference. The amount of extra image will be very small when looking directly at the film yourself, say by holding it up to the light or using a light box. A light box or light table may make it easier to observe the extra image area. So to answer your question, SD8 has nothing to do with processing or the lab. However if you have the film transferred to video you will need a lab that has the ability to record the widened image. They will need a gate that is wider than the normal S8 gates. Lastly, if you do find there really is no actual difference, then I'd say the camera has not been modified. However, it sounds to me that you might be very new to film in general. My guess would be that the extra image is there, but you are unable to see it because of your equipment, i.e. projector, and perhaps because your not sure what to look for. I would contact the person or company that modified your camera and ask them for assistance in figuring out if your camera has been widened properly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brian Rose Posted July 20, 2006 Author Share Posted July 20, 2006 Thanks for the info, but I'm still perplexed--maybe I should have reworded my original message. The gate of my new camera HAS been widened, and it is not my projector that is the matter, because I compared the actuall film under magnification alongside another roll I had shot, and the two were the same. I understand the mechanics of SD8, but not the processing of the film. I was not sure if perhaps lab equipment is designed for regular Super 8. My thinking was, perhaps the film went through on a roller that uses that edge of film, and thus, was not processed as it should have? Or have I got the process wrong? Brian R. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Leo Anthony Vale Posted July 20, 2006 Share Posted July 20, 2006 I appreciate your feedback, and perhaps I was not specific, but I already looked at the film gate, and my camera has definitely been modified. It is wider than my other camera's gate, which tells me that it is indeed SD8.Thanks Brian R. ---The only way the picture could have been cropped in the lab is if you shot negative and had a contact print made. Then the printer aperture would have cropped the picture. The entire surface is processed. the only exception is for the area under ID stickers put on to the head or tail of a roll. ---Then your lens doesn't cover the extra area. Whoever did the conversion should have been aware of that and informed you. They're perhaps incompetent or scammers. So still send that letter. ---LV Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brian Rose Posted July 20, 2006 Author Share Posted July 20, 2006 Hmmmm, this is a puzzler. Oh well, it could be worse. The camera is still great (its not that big a deal if I cannot shoot slightly wider super 8), and I got a fantastic price on the camera (so it wasn't like I was paying extra for the SD8). I would like it to be said that I don't want anyone to think I am in any way disatisfied, or upset. I don't want it to be assumed that I was scammed, or the person who sold me this camera was being less than forthright. The gentleman whom I bought this camera from was nothing but polite and courteous, and is a frequenter of this board. Perhaps there was some kind of mixup or mistake, but I could have ended up a lot worse off. It could have been a piece of junk, or an empty box. The camera is in fantastic shape, the meter works beautifully, and the battery was recelled (its a Beauleau 5008 MS). So, I'm not gonna quibble over some thing like the film gate size. So, if the seller of my camera reads this thread, I want them to know that I am still completely satisfied with the camera. I'm not one to b*#ch over a small thing, especially when it does not affect performance, and was not something I paid extra for. Its a superb camera, and if I did it over, I'd buy it again in a heartbeat. This thread was simply one for information. Admittedly, I'm still learning (self-taught), and I just wanted to gain more understanding of the situation. Thanks everyone. Brian Rose Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
A.Oliver Posted July 20, 2006 Share Posted July 20, 2006 Hi, could the answer be the filter has not been modified to accept the sd8 image, it is the only answer i can think of!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Leo Anthony Vale Posted July 20, 2006 Share Posted July 20, 2006 .Brian Rose ---Since it's a C-mount Beaulieu, you can try other lenses. 16mm primes will certainly cover the new aperture. SD8 is only about 1.58 or 1.55/1, more like 35mm slides than 1.78/1 widescreen TV. ---LV Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
A.Oliver Posted July 20, 2006 Share Posted July 20, 2006 Me again, just removed the lens (6-70) from my 5008 ms, ran the camera and turned the power off so the shutter remains in the open position. Now i know nothing about sd8, but looking at the filter and path the image will take to get onto the emulsion, i can't see there is enough room to convert a 5008 to sd8. It is very tight for space. The gate may of been widen, but the image gets cropped by shutter/filter assembly before it reaches the image. Again i am no expert. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rick Palidwor Posted July 20, 2006 Share Posted July 20, 2006 Brian, SD8 has nothing to do with the film itself in the sense of a physical manipulation/handling. All it means is that the camera's film gate has been widened out so that "normal" Super 8 film will capture a wider image than normal film. Now whether you will physically see this with your own eyes depends. Unless a projector has had it's film gate widened out, you will see no difference. The amount of extra image will be very small when looking directly at the film yourself, say by holding it up to the light or using a light box. A light box or light table may make it easier to observe the extra image area. So to answer your question, SD8 has nothing to do with processing or the lab. However if you have the film transferred to video you will need a lab that has the ability to record the widened image. They will need a gate that is wider than the normal S8 gates. Lastly, if you do find there really is no actual difference, then I'd say the camera has not been modified. However, it sounds to me that you might be very new to film in general. My guess would be that the extra image is there, but you are unable to see it because of your equipment, i.e. projector, and perhaps because your not sure what to look for. I would contact the person or company that modified your camera and ask them for assistance in figuring out if your camera has been widened properly. All of the above is true to my knowledge. Definitely not a lab issue especially with reversal (whole film runs through chemical bath - no way to not reveal image in all areas it was exposed). Sounds like the projector has not been widened. I shoot a lot of super duper 8 and have never projected it as a wide image. I always get it wide during telecine, which has to be the right set-up. I have heard there are issues wtih Beaulieu's but I don't know the ins and outs. I know the person who probably did the conversion and will ask him to join this thread if he has anything to say. Rick Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Premium Member John Pytlak RIP Posted July 20, 2006 Premium Member Share Posted July 20, 2006 Measure the image on the processed original film. Standard SMPTE 157 specifies an image area of 6.22 x 4.22 millimeters on the film. "Super Duper 8" is not a standard format, but will be wider, extending into what was the soundtrack area. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mike Rizos Posted July 22, 2006 Share Posted July 22, 2006 The gate may of been widen, but the image gets cropped by shutter/filter assembly before it reaches the image. I think the problem is exactly as described above. The extra image simply doesn't reach the film as it's path is blocked by the mirror/shutter housing assembly. This is the major reason why the R16 cannot be converted to super 16, as it's shutter is similar. 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