Jump to content

I'm New to Super 8, Could Use Some Advice!


Leo Garcia

Recommended Posts

Hello, everyone! I know there's probably a bunch of "I'm new" threads on here every so often, but I'd really appreciate it if I could get some help from the people who know this format way better than I do.

 

I recently purchased a Canon Autozoom 518 as my first Super 8 camera. I admit that I might not have done as much research as I should have, because only now am I finding out that it only goes as high as 160 ASA. I don't think it will be a big deal to overexpose 200 ASA film by 1/3 of an f-stop, but then again, I don't really understand much about exposure and film speed.

 

I'd be filming mostly in daylight, with some interior shots added here and there. As far as I understand it, Vision3 50D works best for natural light, while 200T is better suited to bright interior lighting (though it can also be shot in daylight with the camera's filter). I plan to scan all the footage I shoot. With this in mind, my questions are:

 

1. How much would the overexposure on 200 ASA films (Vision3, Wittnerchrome) affect the footage?

2. Would it be possible at all to shoot 500 ASA film on the camera? Should I get an ND filter if I choose to do so?

 

3. Would I be better off letting the camera set the exposure automatically or should I look into manual exposure?

 

4. Would I need to notch hack any of the cartridges? I plan on buying Kodak's 50D and 200T, in addition to Wittnerchrome 200D. In addition, I'm kind of lost when it comes to the camera's Tungsten and Daylight filters and what they do.

 

5. What film stock would give me the best results in my scenario? I'm looking for a fair amount of grain (though maybe not quite as much as the Wittnerchrome stock has) and vivid colors. I'm looking to stay away from a flat image as much as possible.

 

6. What processing and scanning service provide the best results? I was planning on having the reversal stock developed at Dwayne's Photo or Pro8mm, the color negatives processed at Cinelab and the scanning done at Gamma Ray Digital @ 2K, but if there are better options I'd love to know about them!

 

7. Is there any general advice I should know before shooting my first roll? Despite having read a lot about the format, I feel like you can never be too careful when trying out something new and unfamiliar.

 

Thank you!

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Neg overexposure is no problem, but I'd want to be able to get it right for the Wittnerchrome (actually Agfa Aviphot). Exposure is much more critical for reversal.

There isn't actually a setting for 200 in any Super-8 camera so you are probaly limited to manual exposure.

Flatness is more a matter of lighting than stock choice.

Edited by Mark Dunn
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think the 200T would work best since it has enough grain but still looks awesome. A 1/3rd stop over-exposure on negative film is actually recommended a lot of times for super 8 because it will add a little bit of density, then you can make it pop in post very easily. I wouldn't even waste my time with the Agfa 200D reversal, it looks like garbage on every scan i have seen so far. If you want color reversal, wait a few months and see how the new Ferrania 100D is.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, the Ferrania will be very grainy. RMS 13 @ 100 ASA. The Agfa/Wittner 200D is finer in grain at double the speed (RMS 12 @ 200 ASA). A very forgiving stock for decent reversal results in Super 8 and 16mm even at night or in mixed light situations. Very nice, natural colors.

 

Examples Super 8

 

http://vimeo.com/68405828

 

http://vimeo.com/70450821

 

 

Example 16mm

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UgWLgok_tQc

 

 

Buy here: http://www.buy8mmfilm.com

Edited by Maik Lobborn
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Premium Member

Well, the Ferrania will be very grainy. RMS 13 @ 100 ASA. The Agfa/Wittner 200D is finer in grain at double the speed (RMS 12 @ 200 ASA). A very forgiving stock for decent reversal results in Super 8 and 16mm even at night or in mixed light situations. Very nice, natural colors.

 

Examples Super 8

 

http://vimeo.com/68405828

 

http://vimeo.com/70450821

 

Sorry, Maik, but the two Super 8 clips you posted are also quite grainy. Judging by the videos some other members have posted (in previous threads,) the Kodak stocks still seem to be the winners when it comes to fine-grained film.

Edited by Bill DiPietra
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks for all the replies, everyone!

 

I'm a little mixed on the Afga/Wittner because I like its grain but the colors are quite desaturated... I feel like I'd be better off sticking with Kodak and waiting to see what the Ferrania stock looks like.

 

Thank you for all the sample clips, too. I think I'll stick with 200T and 50D! I'm still wondering if 500T would be usable at all with all the overexposure my camera would do to it. Maybe under extremely low light...?

 

Also, if anyone has any input on processing and scanning, I'm all ears!

 

Leo - I absolutely love your profile picture!

 

Thank you!! I drew it myself.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, the Ferrania will be very grainy. RMS 13 @ 100 ASA. The Agfa/Wittner 200D is finer in grain at double the speed (RMS 12 @ 200 ASA). A very forgiving stock for decent reversal results in Super 8 and 16mm even at night or in mixed light situations. Very nice, natural colors.

 

Examples Super 8

 

Hopefully not, they say the first order of business is to lower the granularity so we shall see. Your samples are the best i've seen so far but still falls too short of the other E6 films and K40.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, the Ferrania will be very grainy. RMS 13 @ 100 ASA. The Agfa/Wittner 200D is finer in grain at double the speed (RMS 12 @ 200 ASA). A very forgiving stock for decent reversal results in Super 8 and 16mm even at night or in mixed light situations. Very nice, natural colors.

 

 

Says who? Why do people bring up this dysinformation. As if all will be the same as twenty years ago.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Because they themselves have said it will be the same emulsion as 20 years ago.

It will but it's going to be an updated version in which improving grain is the first priority. They know everyone wants something in the ballpark of K40, E100D, or Velvia so we'll see what they come up with here soon. My reasonable expectations are something similar to E64T's grain... Not as tight as 100D/K40 but better than VNF and Agffa 200D.

 

The V3 50D is very fine grain, but will still have some visible grain in S8. 200T will give you slightly more if you're looking for lower-fi

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Premium Member
The V3 50D is very fine grain, but will still have some visible grain in S8. 200T will give you slightly more if you're looking for lower-fi

 

Granted, I'm speaking in 16mm terms, but these days all of Kodak's stocks are pretty fine-grained. I had to push 7219 (500T) two stops to get noticeable granularity, so it's almost non-existent in 50D. With Super 8, you will always more grain. But I suspect it's a loss less than when I last shot it (about 15 years ago) with the way Kodak has improved the Vision 3 stocks.

 

As for the Ferrania stocks, we will just have to see what kind of product they come up with.

Edited by Bill DiPietra
Link to comment
Share on other sites

It will but it's going to be an updated version in which improving grain is the first priority. They know everyone wants something in the ballpark of K40, E100D, or Velvia so we'll see what they come up with here soon. My reasonable expectations are something similar to E64T's grain... Not as tight as 100D/K40 but better than VNF and Agffa 200D.

 

The V3 50D is very fine grain, but will still have some visible grain in S8. 200T will give you slightly more if you're looking for lower-fi

They will be producing the original to start and improving later. The initial release will be the classic Ferrania Chrome 100D.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

The Ferrania datasheet was just for reference. The following is a quote from the intro to that datasheet:

 

The new film is a re-engineered version of the Scotch Chrome 100 previously produced by the IMATION company and it does not have anything in common with the old 3M slide film from '70s. Is was a modern film available in three speeds: 100, 640 and 800/3200 ISO that we are going to reintroduce on the market in an improved version and finished also in motion picture small formats.

 

http://www.filmferrania.it/news/chrome

Edited by Carl Looper
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sure, but I have asked this question and got this reply from Dave Bias from FilmFerrania only a few weeks ago:

 

"A data sheet for ScotchChrome was posted a while back: http://www.filmferrania.it/news/chrome

The factory team will be closely reproducing this formula in producing our new film."

 

What was the question you asked of them?

 

I assume from their answer that you were asking them for a data sheet - which they don't yet have - obviously - otherwise they wouldn't be posting an old one. So I'd be interpreting their answer as saying the datasheet is as close as possible to what the film will be, rather than the film will be as close as possible to what the data sheet is.

 

That's the only way to reconcile their answer to you, with what they are otherwise saying.

 

I'd suggest.

 

C

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Improving on a formula will be difficult of course. They may not achieve it in a first run. Could very well be wishful thinking - but wishful thinking makes a lot more sense than any other approach!

 

For example, if they work out how to improve the grain (as an example) I doubt they'll be saying to themselves - "oh we better not do that because that will invalidate the datasheet we posted on the website, and would contadict that email we sent to whatshisname"

 

Rather they'll update the datasheet to reflect the improvement.

 

I imagine.

 

C

Edited by Carl Looper
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

What was the question you asked of them?

 

 

The question was if they will produce again an already existing product or if there will be modifications in regards of the grain.

 

The answer was:

 

"A data sheet for ScotchChrome was posted a while back: http://www.filmferrania.it/news/chrome

The factory team will be closely reproducing this formula in producing our new film."

 

Which means they will start with exactly THIS emulsion - and we can all be very, very happy if it will show the same values which are visible on the data sheet (and not worse).

 

Producing (again) a photographic emulsion after it was stopped years ago is an enormous task. If they succeed to get the same quality in a first coating - it would be like a miracle.

Edited by Maik Lobborn
Link to comment
Share on other sites

What I would like to say:

Please keep your expectations low to give them a real chance to succeed.

It would be great to see an even improved product. But this is not realistic.

If they will meet the quality of the "old" product in a first attempt - this would be a miracle.

My best guess is they will improve the product (like Impossible) in the years to come. But do not expect this for now. Give them a real(istic) chance.

Edited by Maik Lobborn
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hello, everyone! I know there's probably a bunch of "I'm new" threads on here every so often, but I'd really appreciate it if I could get some help from the people who know this format way better than I do.

 

I recently purchased a Canon Autozoom 518 as my first Super 8 camera. I admit that I might not have done as much research as I should have, because only now am I finding out that it only goes as high as 160 ASA. I don't think it will be a big deal to overexpose 200 ASA film by 1/3 of an f-stop, but then again, I don't really understand much about exposure and film speed.

 

I'd be filming mostly in daylight, with some interior shots added here and there. As far as I understand it, Vision3 50D works best for natural light, while 200T is better suited to bright interior lighting (though it can also be shot in daylight with the camera's filter). I plan to scan all the footage I shoot. With this in mind, my questions are:

 

1. How much would the overexposure on 200 ASA films (Vision3, Wittnerchrome) affect the footage?

 

2. Would it be possible at all to shoot 500 ASA film on the camera? Should I get an ND filter if I choose to do so?

 

3. Would I be better off letting the camera set the exposure automatically or should I look into manual exposure?

 

4. Would I need to notch hack any of the cartridges? I plan on buying Kodak's 50D and 200T, in addition to Wittnerchrome 200D. In addition, I'm kind of lost when it comes to the camera's Tungsten and Daylight filters and what they do.

 

5. What film stock would give me the best results in my scenario? I'm looking for a fair amount of grain (though maybe not quite as much as the Wittnerchrome stock has) and vivid colors. I'm looking to stay away from a flat image as much as possible.

 

6. What processing and scanning service provide the best results? I was planning on having the reversal stock developed at Dwayne's Photo or Pro8mm, the color negatives processed at Cinelab and the scanning done at Gamma Ray Digital @ 2K, but if there are better options I'd love to know about them!

 

7. Is there any general advice I should know before shooting my first roll? Despite having read a lot about the format, I feel like you can never be too careful when trying out something new and unfamiliar.

 

Thank you!

 

The 500T with an 85 glass filter up in front of the lens with the internal filter "disengaged" OUTDOORS on a cloudy day will be ideal. The camera will be rating it one stop over, which will be perfect in a mid winter exterior. Cinelab and Gamma Ray digital do great work and it is probably the very best quality you will get from Super 8 right now. Depending on the look you are going for, the 500T may be your best choice. It has THE most latitude of all the stocks and is no where near as grainy as you may think. If you are shooting in moderate daylight with minimal clouds, shoot the 200T (the sharpest), if in full bright daylight 50D. Never use the internal filter, It is old and worn out. Unless you want to degrade your image, don't use it. Use quality external filters. If you can't afford those, don't sweat it, it's no bid deal.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

The question was if they will produce again an already existing product or if there will be modifications in regards of the grain.

 

The answer was:

 

"A data sheet for ScotchChrome was posted a while back: http://www.filmferrania.it/news/chrome

The factory team will be closely reproducing this formula in producing our new film."

 

Which means they will start with exactly THIS emulsion - and we can all be very, very happy if it will show the same values which are visible on the data sheet (and not worse).

 

Producing (again) a photographic emulsion after it was stopped years ago is an enormous task. If they succeed to get the same quality in a first coating - it would be like a miracle.

 

Hi Maik,

 

I really think you are over fetishising the datasheet. The datasheet doesn't define the filmstock. It's the filmstock which defines the datasheet. As they update the filmstock they'll update the datasheet.

 

Furthermore, I can't see how the line "closely reproducing this formula" means "exactly THIS emulsion".

 

Perhaps if they had said "The factory team will be exactly reproducing this formula" there might be some room for such an interpretation. But if they follow the formula exactly they'll just be reproducing the same filmstock described by the datasheet.

 

The website link they sent you (in addition to their addendum) clearly states that they intend to introduce an improved version:

 

we are going to reintroduce on the market in an improved version and finished also in motion picture small formats.

 

How do you interpret these words?

 

The only way of making any sense of both statements is to assume their aim is somewhere between the "same and better", rather than somewhere between "worse and the same".

 

C

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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 account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...