This IS what Santo was talking about.

[John Adolfi]

Just take a look at these still shots and tell me this is not the future of super-8. Do we have to settle for that "super-8 look"? Let's have both and more. Let's stop cutting our selves off of the technology that can bring super-8 to the next level of professional motion picture quality. Santo was right, it can be done. But with great lenses, a stable camera and wonderful Kodak film. I'd like to see some clips of these stills, how about it? http://www.filmshooting.com/scripts/gallery/album08

[Leo Anthony Vale]

Just take a look at these still shots and tell me this is not the future of super-8. Do we have to settle for that "super-8 look"? Let's have both and more. Let's stop cutting our selves off of the technology that can bring super-8 to the next level of professional motion picture quality. Santo was right, it can be done. But with great lenses, a stable camera and wonderful Kodak film. I'd like to see some clips of these stills, how about it? http://www.filmshooting.com/scripts/gallery/album08

 

2K D/Is and lenses that rent for $150/ day?

 

Lenses that weigh more than the camera and will tear out the C-mount with out some custom built support.

The small size of the cameras which don't need a crew to operate is the big advantage of S8, along with price.

This throws that away.

Plus the shortest focal length will be on the long side for S8.

 

This is not practical. What world was Santo living in?

[Rod Otaviano]

John, this link below might help you a bit on your research:

 

http://www.cinematography.com/forum2004/in...?showtopic=4647

[Douglas Hunter]

Just take a look at these still shots and tell me this is not the future of super-8. Do we have to settle for that "super-8 look"?

 

 

I'm confused, these stills clearly have that "super-8 look" to my eye, with the possible exception of the girl. All the others look exactly like I expect typical super-8 to look in different situations.

[Anthony Schilling]

Bringing 50D into the mix with 200T & 500T would be the kicker. A decent camera, and decent transfer... no need to go full overboard.

[David Sweetman]

Scanning s8 at 2k? What the heck for? As it has been said, do all that junk to super-8 and you might as well shoot 16 on the cheap, get a better image especially at 500T, plus have a film completed in a format that people respect as viable. I won't tell anyone what format to shoot, shoot what you want, but it doesn't make sense to me to do it that way. It certainly isn't the cheap or the easy way out! And another thing, if you don't want the super-8 look, why the heck do you want to shoot on super-8?

[Matthew W. Phillips]

Scanning s8 at 2k? What the heck for? As it has been said, do all that junk to super-8 and you might as well shoot 16 on the cheap, get a better image especially at 500T, plus have a film completed in a format that people respect as viable. I won't tell anyone what format to shoot, shoot what you want, but it doesn't make sense to me to do it that way. It certainly isn't the cheap or the easy way out! And another thing, if you don't want the super-8 look, why the heck do you want to shoot on super-8?

 

I think youre right David. I shoot mostly on Super 8 but Im not going to get 2k scans and try to look like 16. I personally like the aesthetic look that comes along with super 8. And I find that standard def. scans are plenty good enough. Also, Super 8 should be a value.

[Marty Hamrick]

Do we have to settle for that "super-8 look"? http://www.filmshooting.com/scripts/gallery/album08

 

 

 

What exactly is "a super 8 look?"Does this mean the image has to be unsteady with shaky,handheld camera movement?Does the image have to be soft with breathing focus and exposure?

 

The whole reason to shoot super 8,or any other format for that matter is because it's look gives you what you need for a particular project.Some of the wonderful flashback scenes in shows like "Cold Case Files" and certain music videos,these looks are unique,and that unique look is the reason to shoot super 8 in the first place.

[David W Scott]

What exactly is "a super 8 look?"Does this mean the image has to be unsteady with shaky,handheld camera movement?Does the image have to be soft with breathing focus and exposure?

 

The whole reason to shoot super 8,or any other format for that matter is because it's look gives you what you need for a particular project.Some of the wonderful flashback scenes in shows like "Cold Case Files" and certain music videos,these looks are unique,and that unique look is the reason to shoot super 8 in the first place.

 

 

Everything else being equal, the "Super 8 look" is the look of 35mm -- blown up to show only a tiny percentage of the frame.

 

Breathing focus and apertures, shaky camera work... those are stereotypes. But Super 8 has an undeniable aesthetic that is present no matter how well, or how poorly, it is shot.

 

To me, the defining feature of Super 8 is the sense of being closer to the texture of the medium. Looking at Super 8 is the equivalent of standing 12 inches from an oil painting. It doesn't matter whether it's the Mona Lisa or not -- you are going to see the brush strokes.

[Andrew Means]

To me, the defining feature of Super 8 is the sense of being closer to the texture of the medium. Looking at Super 8 is the equivalent of standing 12 inches from an oil painting. It doesn't matter whether it's the Mona Lisa or not -- you are going to see the brush strokes.

 

wow, good analogy.

[Hal Smith]

To me, the defining feature of Super 8 is the sense of being closer to the texture of the medium. Looking at Super 8 is the equivalent of standing 12 inches from an oil painting. It doesn't matter whether it's the Mona Lisa or not -- you are going to see the brush strokes.

Having had the intense pleasure of standing 6" from Van Gogh's "Portrait of Alexander Reid" last year, and allowed to loiter for as long as I cared, I only wish Super-8 had that kind of esthetic. The imperfections of Super-8 are random, the "imperfections" of a Renoir (I've been 6" from a couple of Renoirs also), Van Gogh, Lautrec, Picasso (used to sleep over at a girlfriend's parent's house on their sofa underneath a Picasso Blue Period), etc. are crafted by the artists, those brush strokes are there on purpose.

[Andrew Means]

I do not know of these clips, but I have come very good super 8 black and white on the Google video after much much searching. I too have been searching for good clips of super 8 today. There are not many! It is very amazing how many clips that look the worst are up there all from a merchant there on Google but finally I came to a good one from somebody else. Here is the best super 8 clip I have found on the internet today after looking everywhere all day but it is very short and is very weird but beautiful.

http://video.google.ca/videoplay?docid=-79...55&q=plus-x

 

Here is one that is more like as you say that super-8 look from the merchant with a hunred worst examples! http://video.google.ca/videoplay?docid=-86...57&q=plus-x

 

I will be studying why one is so beautiful and one is so ugly and the same film format!

 

 

Haha, I'm pretty sure that first one is Santo's.

[Stuart McCammon]

With regard to why people do all of this crazy stuff with 8 MM cameras -

 

I met a guy at a party a couple of weeks ago who put a 350 HP, 1 liter snowmobile engine in a Geo Metro to do speed runs on the Bonneville Salt Flats.

 

Personally, I would have just bought a Corvette if I wanted 350 HP, and would shoot 35MM if I wanted beautiful film.

[John Adolfi]

I get what you all are saying but I find it a bit disconcerting that that mediocre looking film, because it's super-8, is where the bar has to lay. If you could get 16mm to look better, would you? If 35mm could look like 65mm I would shoot it with what ever set of tools and protocol necessary. However if I wanted 35mm to look like 35mm then I'd follow that path when desired. The fact we can make super-8 look better than ever before, why so much resistence? We should instead rejoice!! No?

[Alessandro Machi]

I get what you all are saying but I find it a bit disconcerting that that mediocre looking film, because it's super-8, is where the bar has to lay. If you could get 16mm to look better, would you? If 35mm could look like 65mm I would shoot it with what ever set of tools and protocol necessary. However if I wanted 35mm to look like 35mm then I'd follow that path when desired. The fact we can make super-8 look better than ever before, why so much resistence? We should instead rejoice!! No?

 

 

It would help if Kodak would release the 50D, then those of use that want strive for good looking visuals created from amazingly sophisticated yet to simple to use cameras could have it all.

[Leo Anthony Vale]

Here is another very good super 8 clip on the internet but it is not quite as sharp as the first black and white one I had found and posted earlier in this line. Technical details worth studying. How and why does it looks so good almost like the first black and white film? Not as steady or quite as sharp, but very nice looking. Second best super8 film on the internet so far, but so small images.

 

http://www.fo-video.com/fotocinevideo/contratiempo%20S8.htm

 

The first B/W clip says itwas Xfered on a Rank to uncompressed hard drive.

 

The other B/W was probably Xfered on a film chain; projector into, probably. a DV camera.

 

The color clip has some flicker in the highlights of the first shot, which makes me think a film chain.

But onto something of higher quality than a DV camcorder.

 

Could have made better use of the statues.

[Guest romeo jesus]

here is a music clip i did using a leicina special, rank telecine

 

k40, ektachrome 7240, tri-x

 

http://www.entourage-business.de/download.html

 

 

 

have fun and post some feedback

 

 

christian

[Douglas Hunter]

The color clip has some flicker in the highlights of the first shot, which makes me think a film chain.

But onto something of higher quality than a DV camcorder.

 

Could have made better use of the statues.

 

Of course it could have, the shot selection is pretty poor, as are other things about it but the film itself looks very nice. It just goes to show that part of "that super-8 look" includes the framing, camera movement etc. the aesthetic choices made by non-professionals. Which isn't a bad thing, its just different.

[Alessandro Machi]

Of course it could have, the shot selection is pretty poor, as are other things about it but the film itself looks very nice. It just goes to show that part of "that super-8 look" includes the framing, camera movement etc. the aesthetic choices made by non-professionals. Which isn't a bad thing, its just different.

 

No need to stereotype Super-8 filmmaking as being a certain style, is there?

[Douglas Hunter]

No need to stereotype Super-8 filmmaking as being a certain style, is there?

 

Obviously people work with all different level and types of filmic aesthetics in super 8. But its certainly no stretch at all to say that the vast majority of super 8 footage ever shot has been by people who are not working professionals, or artists, and therefore they don't make the same dicisions as pros or artists. That's not stereotyping, its just the way it is, its not even a statement about style, in fact its really the opposite.

[Alessandro Machi]

Obviously people work with all different level and types of filmic aesthetics in super 8. But its certainly no stretch at all to say that the vast majority of super 8 footage ever shot has been by people who are not working professionals, or artists, and therefore they don't make the same dicisions as pros or artists. That's not stereotyping, its just the way it is, its not even a statement about style, in fact its really the opposite.

 

Most of the footage ever shot in 8mm and Super-8 was done by "amateurs", however most of the footage that ends up on the internet, in film festivals, or broadcast television, is done by artists, professionals and film students.

[John Adolfi]

The point of this whole thread is to encourage the people who have placed limitations on Super8 and to "allow" the some the creative leeway to create beautiful, sharpe, steady pictures boarding the 16mm look. If I want to trick out a camera with a digiprime and use the metal pressure plate and have the film transfered to 10 bit HD onto a harddrive so I can have a small medium with all its benefits look good enough to release on DVD and appear professional, then hey why not. But the opposite is taking place. People are crying, "No its over kill, too expensive, not necessary, go to 16mm why don't you, that's not super-8's function in the past and certainly not now either." Well let me end here and sum it up with the famous line of that former beatle song "All we are saying is give super-8 a chance" John Lennon - Bed Peace.

[Bruce Taylor]

here is a music clip i did using a leicina special, rank telecine

 

k40, ektachrome 7240, tri-x

 

http://www.entourage-business.de/download.html

have fun and post some feedback

christian

Hey- I like it! I haven't shot super8 in a long time, but I do recall that if you keep it in medium shot or tighter, it really looks great. In long shots a lot of detail just isn't there- but that can be an aesthetic choice too. I can certainly tell it is film and not video, beyond that I am more interested in what the images are telling me than trying to guess which guage it is. I do think the film artifacts thing with scratches and dirt is overdone- mostly by people applying it to video originated stuff. The moving camera and zooms certainly have a super8 feel- the camera's portability and amateur use gave it that- it also gives it a feeling of reality. I like the simplicity of the lighting, it works for me.

Bruce

[Douglas Hunter]

If I want to trick out a camera with a digiprime and use the metal pressure plate and have the film transfered to 10 bit HD onto a harddrive so I can have a small medium with all its benefits look good enough to release on DVD and appear professional, then hey why not.

 

I think this is being said because by the time you've done all that obviously you can be shooting 16mm on a bolex purchased on Ebay and it will look better and be LESS expensive than super 8. Bolexes are also small, and easy to use, there are still pleanty of good parts available for them, and you can get them serviced. R. O. has made similar points a few times and its a legit point.

 

But things such as "good enough for DVD" and "appear professional" are strange things to say because they are completely subjective while at the same time attempting to make it sound like there is a single aesthetic standard that "professionals" use. But professionals don't have a fanatic's loyality to a specific format (not the good one's anyway) they are trying to address one question: what is the best format for this project?, or shot, or effect?

 

The idea that one medium has to be capable of doing everything seems to be unique to people who are deeply invested in a specific format such as Super 8, or HD even. Man, how many times have I had to listen to HD reps saying that their cameras can shoot anything and do the dishes, and slice and dice all while looking "as good as film." Talk about missing the point.

 

on one level santo was merely stating the obvious but the way he did it was so strange, the idea that specific post production technology provides a "revoultionary" force for image making is pure bunk, doesn't matter what format one is discussing.

 

I remain a huge fan of super 8, good lenses and excellent telecine. But not for reasons that a nut like Santo would have us believe.