good super 8/ not good 16 mm...

[Guest danzyc]

hello! i m am an italian filmaker...i have two question to ask..

 

is true that a very good super 8 mm (beaulieu,leicina,nizo) is better than the cheapest 16 mm? (kransorsk,bell..ecc) ??

 

p.s. not for the projection

 

thanks

[John Pytlak RIP]

hello! i m am an italian filmaker...i have two question to ask..

 

is true that a very good super 8 mm (beaulieu,leicina,nizo) is better than the cheapest 16 mm? (kransorsk,bell..ecc) ??

 

p.s. not for the projection

 

thanks

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

It really depends on the camera features offered. Certainly a high-end Super-8 camera may offer more features than a low-end 16mm camera. But overriding this is the fact that "Size DOES Matter" when it comes to film formats. Larger film formats usually offer better image quality (sharpness, granularity, steadiness). Choice of format also depends on the lab and post production facilities available in your area:

 

http://www.kodak.com/US/en/motion/support/...=0.1.4.13&lc=en

 

http://www.kodak.com/US/en/motion/support/...=0.1.4.15&lc=en

 

http://www.kodak.com/US/en/motion/about/ww...4.5&lc=en#italy

 

http://www.kodak.com/IT/it/motion/;jsessio...requestid=24975

[Robert Hughes]

Of course a Filmo is entirely manual, no lightmeter, nothing extra, just a springwound camera, and the good Super 8 cameras are much more sophisticated, and can take good pictures with the modern film stocks.

 

But from my experience, a Bell & Howell Filmo or Bolex H16 with a decent lens will capture a good 16mm image, which by nature of its dimension will give you a better picture than any Super 8 image.

[Scot McPhie]

I've seen Super 8 on a tv screen which looked alot like 16mm - check some stills from my film

 

http://www.mango-a-gogo.com/inmyimage/making.htm

 

If you want to do anything serious I wouldn't suggest Super 8 though because of the faulty cartridges which Kodak have admitted to but still refuse to fully correct - see

 

http://www.filmshooting.com./scripts/forum...pic.php?t=10732

 

The best option for someting serious but cheap is probably 16mm - if you want widescreen see this thread

http://www.filmshooting.com./scripts/forum...pic.php?t=10972

 

 

Scot

[Machado]

No, I would not say that is completly true. For starters, a good (really good) super 8 camera is going to cost about the same as a moderatly priced reflex 16mm.

 

Now, none of those super 8 cameras has a metal pressure plate which all 16mm cameras do (how good it is another question). In super8 the pressure plate is simply provided by means of your plastic super 8 cart. You can buy an expensive machined plate if you wish, but your still at the mercy of the carts quality regardless.

 

Anyhow, just keep in mind that no matter how good a camera, you still depend on the quality of the cart.

[Alessandro Machi]

You can shoot Super-8 to kind of sort of emulate 16mm, but basically what you will be doing is lowering contrast whenever possible, using head and shoulder shots as your medium shots, ignoring the background unless it's a nice beautful blue sky, shooting lower ASA film stocks exclusively.

 

Oh wait, you can't get those yet in Super-8. :blink:

[Nate Downes]

To me, Super8 is a tool, and like any other tool, you need to use it properly. Yes, it will not deliver as sharp a picture as 16mm, but for me it's not about delivering the sharpest picture, it's about delivering the picture I want. And for my next project, I want Super8. In the future, I fully expect to be on 16mm, 35mm, and I really want to make my 70mm epic, but for this project, Super8 is the right tool for the job. Most people with the same project would go DV, I find DV too limiting for me.

[John Hyde]

It really comes down to BOTH the camera and the film. A poor quality 16 camera will never deliver as good of a result as the best super 8 camera. Optics, transport and exposure are just as important as the film. Believe it or not, I have seen the super 8 actually look better than 16 on some jobs. In this case, it comes down to the camera equipment and the one using it. It should also be noted that super 8 also offers superior portability and ease of use. Slapping a light tight cart into a camera with no threading is great for getting footage on the run.

 

That being said, an excellent 16mm camera with a good film stock will ALWAYS out perform the best camera and film in super 8. This relates directly to film size. Nothing in the world can change that. 16 will also provide more exposure tolerance without affecting the picture as drastically as super 8.

 

I think of super 8 as an excellent offering for novice filmmakers. Cameras and film are relatively cheap, and the system is very user friendly. You can also learn a tremendous amount from super 8 about the larger formats. For myself and other professionals, I think it is primarily the beauty of the grain and texture that makes super 8 interesting. It is entirely different than the video formats and makes for an excellent contrast. Plus, you can hand out cameras on the set for almost anybody to use. If the footage works you can use it. If not, you throw it away because it was cheap to begin with.