New stock s8

Jose luis villar · May 10, 2014

Hey guys, looks like we have a new stock s/w s8, ADOX CHS 100 II.

The link here, http://www.wittner-cinetec.com/katalog/04_filmm/s8_filmm.php

Edited May 10, 2014 by Jose luis villar

Anthony Schilling · May 10, 2014

Looks like processing is included but translates to $55USD per roll.

Matthew W. Phillips · May 10, 2014

Looks like processing is included but translates to $55USD per roll.

Wow!

Martin Baumgarten · May 11, 2014

I just checked their website and it only mentions that the film is coming soon, no pricing or processing details. Since it's ADOX B&W, the pricing will most likely be similar to their ADOX Pan-X 100 Reverso. Probably not much more than a 5 Euro difference. It is nice to see Wittner supporting the 8mm film gauges with all that they offer. The only issue for us in the USA or North America is the cost to import these on a small scale.

Andries Molenaar · May 11, 2014

ADOX, super-8 and other still film, comes from a Fotoimpex enterprise and is not from WIttner.

Fotoimpex commission their own paper en film emulsions.

It can be bought from several sources. EU consumer prices are usually listed including sales tax.

In the USA 200D can be had from http://internationalfilmbroker.com/

E6 processing nice and cheap by Dwayne's

Anthony Schilling · May 11, 2014

From what i've seen and heard, i wouldn't bother with the 200D. And since i can scan my own negative S8 films now, I have no interest in reversal films especially at a premium price. I can get just as much color from the V3 50D if I want but with a lot more dynamic range. I know the cost of scanning is what keeps people looking to reversal, but there are more and more cheaper options for scans and scanners these days. The head room that you have with V3 stocks opens up a whole new creative palate in terms of doing your own color grading. Most S8 neg samples out there look closer to the raw images in order to show off the dynamic range, but there are so many different directions you can go. And it's really exciting to do, as to where reversal film in the digital realm is more of a mild disappointment.

David Cunningham · May 11, 2014

For me the big difference with reversal stock is the way it scans if done right. The grain is darker and this less distracting. It's also finer and just generally looks better. Also, dust and hair show up dark rather than bright white and blend in to the footage more. Those are my biggest reasons for reversal. It's just a different look.

Jose luis villar · May 11, 2014

I think the first reason to shoot reversible, is for s8 projection.

Anthony Schilling · May 11, 2014

I would agree that the white dust specs on neg are more distracting than reversal. And I love projecting too, but in the age of digital sharing projecting feels a lot more reclusive these days. For grain I'd say V3 50D is on par or slightly better than K40 or 100D. I was doing some grain reduction for a while, but stopped because I find the 50D/200T grain to be just right. Watiching it on a Bluray and flat screen is actually pretty awesome. I would have called it blasphemy 5 years ago, but enjoy watching S8 on a flat screen TV just as much (or maybe a little more) than projecting.

Will Montgomery · May 12, 2014

For me the big difference with reversal stock is the way it scans if done right. The grain is darker and this less distracting. It's also finer and just generally looks better. Also, dust and hair show up dark rather than bright white and blend in to the footage more. Those are my biggest reasons for reversal. It's just a different look.

Definitely a different look but negative is almost completely up to the colorist on how it looks. Kodachrome never scanned well due to the nature of the stock but it was hands down amazing projected.

David Cunningham · May 12, 2014

The colorist can change the color and contrast to look like reversal but cannot change the hair and dust to be dark rather than white and can't change the grain to a darker shade without removing and readding which is just silly.

Philip Kral · May 14, 2014

I don't even let the colorist do any of the color correcting anymore, as I have them send me everything flat when shooting negative.

That being said, I still like shooting reversal for projecting actual film. For some strange reason, I never felt reversal film ever scanned right. A projected Kodachrome or Ektachrome image always looked amazing to me in person and looks like a noisy mess when scanned.

I don't think I'm alone, otherwise there wouldn't be so many super8 videos from custom-made and personal machines on vimeo and youtube.

I haven't been able to shoot any 200D yet.. I should get on that.

Will Montgomery · May 14, 2014

For some strange reason, I never felt reversal film ever scanned right. A projected Kodachrome or Ektachrome image always looked amazing to me in person and looks like a noisy mess when scanned.

Kodachrome doesn't scan well; even 35mm slides don't do well due to the multilayered approach to Kodachrome. Ektachrome can do better in scanning but of course projecting it is the best.