Jump to content

Comparing 8mm Footage. Quality Looking very different. Why?


Gerald Martindill

Recommended Posts

Hey everyone,

So I just got back some Super 8 footage I shot last week. I was pretty disappointed with my results compared to what i got a while back Wondering if the issue is the new camera/lens I got, improper exposure, or if maybe the film lab has just been lacking. I will provide stills from each project so you can see the difference in quality.

Project A (shot in 2020)(interior): Rented Pro8's Pro814 camera (in Burbank, CA). Shot with their film 200T film, 18fps.  Followed their in-camera metering system. Used basic fresnels.This is the footage with blue curtain backdrop, over the top set decoration. Colors look so rich, expoure is right, nice contrast. This is exactly how it came back from the lab's processing/scan. Made me fall in love with Super 8 film. There was a long wait to purchase this camera. 

Blue1.jpg.58f4b14b0f42bd61e4ce3f5dce02f69a.jpg

blue2.jpg.bd62c434101dc24cb4f1ffc2e6c7095f.jpg

Project B (shot in 2023) (exterior poppy fields):  Shot with a Beaulieu 4008ZM ii, Angenieux lens. This was re-calibrated by the team at Re-Voir in Paris. I used a handheld light meter, using spot metering. shooting at an aputure between 16 and 22. Shot with 50D Pro8 film, 18fps. Everything seems faded, colors are off. Low contrast. Just looks amature compared with footage from 2020 shoot. I have other disappointing footage from this camera but wrote it off as getting used to it. But this time, I was doing everything correctly. 

lea1.jpg.3d91ba042776cd2f776f80f2152aaa58.jpg

lea3.jpg.8050ccb8d8f27aae7ceac268b244bc5c.jpg

What do you guys think is the issue?  I bought this Beaulieu + Angenieux after doing research and finding lots of amazing footage. Felt like it was the camera for what I was trying to do. It cost a pretty penny. Would be sad to see that it's a camera/lens issue. If it's a lab issue, what is it you think they are doing differently now than before. 

 

Thank you! 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Premium Member

The first example looks like it has been color graded and the second looks like a flat-pass scan with little to no color correction.

Just a few seconds in GIMP gives me this:

 

flatpass.jpg.daeb77ae28dc252144d6c3c30978ebd5.jpg

You need to color grade your footage...

Edited by Frank Wylie
inserting image
  • Like 1
  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

My understanding is that Pro-8 is used mainly by amateurs, who need something good-looking "out of the box", as it were, as if they'd just put a roll of Kodachrome on a projector.

As Frank says, B is a professional scan. A looks fine as it is, but if you needed to match other footage, for example, it would be very difficult to grade.

Colour rendering has nothing to do with the camera. This is film, not digital.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Pro8 has grading/colour options you select when you file in your info.

Amongst these options are things like a scene to scene grade, single grade and a flat/log scan. There may be more options.

Looks like you selected the LOG option. This is meant to be very flat so there is no clipping in the highlights and shadows.

So this scan needs to be graded in something like davinci resolve before it looks like something projected with reversal.

Edited by Niels kakelveld
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Gerald Martindill said:

So they must've color corrected the 2020 scan by accident and spoiled me (I never made that request).

Some of Pro8mm‘s scanning packages only include a single option for color timing. E.g. the „basic scan“ only has „best light“ (=color graded) as option. Also when using their website, „best light“ seems to be the default for all other scanning options. Hence I fear that you have accidentally selected some graded output…

F7997F63-1864-4367-BDB9-CCBCA712F3AE.jpeg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

I think what was achieved in GIMP looks good with that frame grade. 

By the way, was it necessary to shoot between f16 and f22? I guess you wanted to maximise the depth of field. Also guessing there was no ND filter. Using such a small aperture with a very small format like super 8 can be a risk with regards to diffraction. Though your frames look reasonably sharp so no issues there. 

I must say that the light conditions must have been very bright. Ive shot 50D once on a sunny day with no ND filter at 24fps though my aperture wasn't anywhere near as small. May have been closer to f8 but I can't remember. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 5/10/2023 at 6:53 PM, Patrick Cooper said:

I think what was achieved in GIMP looks good with that frame grade. 

By the way, was it necessary to shoot between f16 and f22? I guess you wanted to maximise the depth of field. Also guessing there was no ND filter. Using such a small aperture with a very small format like super 8 can be a risk with regards to diffraction. Though your frames look reasonably sharp so no issues there. 

I must say that the light conditions must have been very bright. Ive shot 50D once on a sunny day with no ND filter at 24fps though my aperture wasn't anywhere near as small. May have been closer to f8 but I can't remember. 

 

When I'm shooting Super 8 Ektachrome color reversal outdoors on a sunny day I always use a ND filter. My goal on bright days is to obtain exposure somewhere between F8 to F11. The sweet spot for projecting Ektachrome is F8 on sunny days. I've found my films are much sharper on screen at this sweet spot. For less sunny days F 5.6 is excellent! F stops definitely have an effect with such a small format as Super 8. But understanding how Super 8 reacts to light, etc helps for sure. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 5/11/2023 at 12:53 AM, Patrick Cooper said:

By the way, was it necessary to shoot between f16 and f22?

Hi!

I guess that you can easily end up at f22 on a bright, sunny day even with an ISO50-film when not using any additional filter. (That’s probably the reason why Agfa, Fuji and Kodak stuck to ISO25 for decades.)

https://www.pointsinfocus.com/tools/exposure-settings-ev-calculator/

 

16F6551C-E835-4254-AACD-65BBC46A4B50.jpeg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Shane C Collins said:

….F8 on sunny days. I've found my films are much sharper …

BTW: That’s not a unique feature of Super8: Most lenses are designed in a way that their sharpest results are somewhere close to f5.6 or f8. Even on (digital) still cameras. To quote https://www.photographyblog.com/reviews/sony_fe_24_105mm_f4_g_oss_review/sharpness_1 : „…Centre sharpness remains impressively high through from f/4-f/16, with f/22 being slightly affected by diffraction. The edges aren't quite as sharp as the centre, with f/5.6-f/16 producing the sharpest results.…“

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Premium Member
1 hour ago, Joerg Polzfusz said:

That’s probably the reason why Agfa, Fuji and Kodak stuck to ISO25 for decades.

No, the point about film speed with home movie making was coarseness or finesse of grain.

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...