Matt Stevens Posted March 26, 2013 Share Posted March 26, 2013 Ektachrome is cheaper if you are only using reversal are not in need of 2k and get a transfer from one of those places with a work-printer (higher ends units). Those setups are outstanding with reversal and can produce glorious looking 1080p video. I have always done that with the weddings I've worked. Or with material meant only for the internet. No need for scanning at greatly increased pricing. There are two projects I am involved with right now that will likely end up using S8 and one has no need of a high end scan. the other must (in my view) be shot on negative stock and given the royal scanning treatment. it all depends on the project. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Premium Member Will Montgomery Posted March 26, 2013 Premium Member Share Posted March 26, 2013 There is also the little thing called a projector which is amazing if you haven't tried it. 16mm reversal projected is out of this world if you are used to watching it on video (HD or SD). I don't do it very often out of fear of damaging the film, but as long as you have a good transfer first I suggest throwing that film on a projector so you can really see what it was meant to look like. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve Saraceno Posted March 27, 2013 Share Posted March 27, 2013 Matt can you recommend a telecine place with the high end work-printer? I've got a 48-minute-long Super 8 feature I produced back in the 1970s -- do you think the high-end work-printer would do it justice? Or would it best benefit from the "royal scanning treatment" (I'm thinking Cinelicious at the moment). Any thoughts from anyone appreciated! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matt Stevens Posted March 27, 2013 Share Posted March 27, 2013 PM sent. For true scanning, Cinelicious or Lightpress are exceptional, but Spectra, Cinelab and others can also deliver. Most of the very best of the best can be seen here advertising or posting. Just don't use Pro8mm. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mitchell Perkins Posted April 5, 2013 Share Posted April 5, 2013 When shooting 500t I found it to be extremely important to use a tripod and when exposing, zoom all the way in on whatever it was in the frame I wanted to be properly exposed. I took my reading there and manually set for 1/2 a stop over. My short film Miscommunications was shot almost entirely on Kodak Vision3 500t. The exteriors were shot on a single roll of Ektachrome 100D. By the way, one of the seven rolls of 500t was from Pro8m and naturally, that was the only roll that came out like poop. I despise Pro8. https://vimeo.com/27267624 Very humourous film you made there! Congrats on getting full frontal nudity on a Super 8 project! Only one quibble - I felt the music was waaay too loud, others may disagree.... I always add 25% sharpen on the NLE to S8 destined for the web - what with all the added compression it doesn't make it look video-y-fake-sharp, and it makes it....sharper. I did it to Sleep Always, the link to which is posted here in general discussion, so you can decide for yourself.... Mitch Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Miguel Loredo Posted April 6, 2013 Share Posted April 6, 2013 Wow, I never thought my camera would be compatible with those films! In fact, they look pretty good! But is there any reversal colour stock available? Cause the costs of processing negative stock are quite higher... You can take a look at this to check all available stocks: www.super8-spain.com and the Spanish forum www.super8.es :) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matt Stevens Posted April 6, 2013 Share Posted April 6, 2013 Very humourous film you made there! Congrats on getting full frontal nudity on a Super 8 project! Only one quibble - I felt the music was waaay too loud, others may disagree.... Thanks. I was very pleased to get the full frontal in there. :) But seriously, the actress and i discussed it and for the character and her story, it's needed. That's why we chose Super8. There was a version with full frontal on the actor, but anyone I showed it to either yelled "Penis!" or was clearly yanked out of the film because of it. The music volume was highly debated. I'm still not happy with it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mitchell Perkins Posted April 8, 2013 Share Posted April 8, 2013 (edited) Thanks. I was very pleased to get the full frontal in there. :) But seriously, the actress and i discussed it and for the character and her story, it's needed. That's why we chose Super8. There was a version with full frontal on the actor, but anyone I showed it to either yelled "Penis!" or was clearly yanked out of the film because of it. The music volume was highly debated. I'm still not happy with it. Yep, there's no scene where the actor is examining his body, debating the merits thereof....and it would be distracting simply by virtue of being so rare heh. I felt the music would have been funnier, almost cute, if that makes sense, if it had been lower in volume - it would be something you notice almost subconsciously....anyway nice work. Mitch Edited April 8, 2013 by Mitchell Perkins Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matt Stevens Posted April 9, 2013 Share Posted April 9, 2013 Thanks, Mitch. The full frontal male nudity was in the shower. But in the end I used a take where I was closer to the actor. 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