SUPER 8 TODAY magazine first issue in the mail

[Chris Cottrill]

The first issue of SUPER 8 TODAY is in the mail, so if you have subscribed it should arrive within days.

 

The deadlines for the next issue are:

Writers/Contributors -- December 5th

Display Advertisers - December 8th

Classified Ads -- December 12th

(classifieds are only 15 center per word)

 

There is still time to subscribe and receive the premiere issue,

or just to purchase the premiere issue

 

for details see www.super8today.com

 

Chris Cottrill

Editor

[Machado]

I just ordered the subscription, cant wait..

 

 

thanks chris...

[andres victorero]

good news. :D

[Alessandro Machi]

I don't completely understand why the Small Format Magzine Subscription drive topic thread was deleted, but at the very least why not give the Super-8 Today topic thread a boost from the very bottom of page one back to the top while I discuss the Small Format Magazine topic thread elimination.

 

I guess Santo's complaint and I quote...."the elimination of some guy flogging his personal business magazine like spam (ad nauseum) on one of the boards."

 

......had something to do with the removal of the Small Format Magazine subscription drive topic thread from this forum.

 

---------------------------------------

 

Santos next quote incoporated the all too familar "show you the money" promise that Santos has used before....

 

"I am amazed and am now willing to become a "paying member" of this site. A little at first, a lot later on if things continue like this! I can't seem to find the contribution levels form".......

 

Several months ago Santos had promised a $10,000 dollar donation to the Shooting 8mm forum but when called on that promise the $10,000 promise turned into a T-shirt design that Santos claimed would raise 10 thousand dollars in donations if sold on Shooting 8mm website. Anybody got a picture of the T-shirt design that Santos claimed would raise 10,000 dollars that we all could see?

 

--------------------------------------

 

I do not agree that Film Fruend was "flogging his personal business magazine like spam "(ad nauseum)" as Santos states.

 

Film Fruend's topic post about Small Format magazine needing 200 subscriptions to survive and then the periodic updating of that topic thread has precedence from a previous topic thread in which Film Fruend was tallying the number of purchase commitments to kodachrome 40 and then periodically updating that thread in an effort to try and save Kodachrome 40. Film Fruend was simply following the same procedure as before with the now deleted Small Format Magazine Subscription thread. No one complained before, and the only one complaining now was someone who won't even use a real name ID.

 

Both the Kodachrome sales drive topic post and the Small Film Magazine sales updates are issues completely pertinent to the Super-8 scene.

 

It is my opinion that there has been no trade out with this forum because if there is no second issue, there won't be anything to trade out, and there is no marketing budget, yet. Small Format magazine is simply trying to minimize it's losses while it trys to grow.

 

There were over 100 color photos in the premiere Small Format issue, that is why Small Format Magazine is operating at less than break even while they try and grow subscription sales.

 

----------------------------------------

 

Is it wise for this forum's administration to grant the wishes and requests of members who don't even use their real name in their forum ID?

Edited November 11, 2005 by Alessandro Machi

[Maulubekotofa]

I don't completely understand why the Small Format Magzine Subscription drive topic thread was deleted, but why not at least give the Super-8 Today topic thread a boost from the very bottom of page one back to the top while I discuss the Small Format Magazine topic thread elimination.

 

I guess Santo's complaint and I quote...."the elimination of some guy flogging his personal business magazine like spam (ad nauseum) on one of the boards."

 

......had something to do with the removal of the Small Format Magazine subscription drive topic thread from this forum.

 

---------------------------------------

 

Santos next quote incoporated the all too familar "show you the money" promise that Santos has used before....

 

"I am amazed and am now willing to become a "paying member" of this site. A little at first, a lot later on if things continue like this! I can't seem to find the contribution levels form".......

 

Several months ago Santos had promised a $10,000 dollar donation to the Shooting 8mm forum but when called on that promise the $10,000 promise turned into a T-shirt design that Santos claimed would raise 10 thousand dollars in donations if sold on Shooting 8mm website. Anybody got a picture of the T-shirt design that Santos claimed would raise 10,000 dollars that we all could see?

 

--------------------------------------

 

I do not agree that Film Fruend was "flogging his personal business magazine like spam "(ad nauseum)" as Santos states and which resulted in the successful removal from this Super-8 forum.

 

Film Fruend's topic post about Small Format magazine needing 200 subscriptions to survive and then the periodic updating of that topic thread has precedence from a previous topic thread in which Film Fruend was tallying the number of purchase commitments to kodachrome 40 and then periodically updating that thread in an effort to try and save Kodachrome 40. Film Fruend was simply following the same procedure as before with the now deleted Small Format Magazine Subscription thread. No one complained before, and the only one complaining now was someone who won't even use a real name ID.

 

Both the Kodachrome sales drive topic post and the Small Film Magazine sales updates are issues completely pertinent to the Super-8 scene. It is my opinion that there has been no trade out with this forum because if there is no second issue, there won't be anything to trade out, and there is no marketing budget, yet. Small Format magazine is simply trying to minimize it's losses while it trys to grow.

 

There were over 100 color photos in the premiere Small Format issue, that is why Small Format Magazine is operating at less than break even while they try and grow subscription sales.

 

----------------------------------------

 

Is it wise for this forum's administration to grant the wishes and requests of members who don't even use their real name in their forum ID?

 

perhaps snatos is the moderator and freinds with the other magazene. I think the small format magazine looks very good. is this forum heavly moderated liek that? its a shame.

[David Mullen ASC]

I assume Tim does not want to set a precedent for someone ELSE in the future repeatedly promoting some product without paying for ad space, whether or not he thinks your magazine is a worthy enterprise. He certainly gave you multiple chances to raise awareness of your magazine rather than from the start deleting your posts, so I think he was being generous.

 

We should all be grateful to Tim for this site, which I doubt is a major moneymaker for him, and certainly it represents an enormous commitment in time & effort over the years.

 

Super-8 Today is paying (I assume) for a banner and it might be hard to convince them to pay anything at all if a similar magazine was allowed to promote itself for free here. It would be like Kodak buying a banner but Fuji being allowed to promote its product continually in posts free of charge -- why would Kodak spend the money then?

 

I've been posting here for something like seven or eight (Tim?) years (!) -- I can tell you that this forum is relatively loosely moderated, sometimes to a fault, rather than over-moderated.

Edited November 11, 2005 by David Mullen

[Maulubekotofa]

Ahhh, I see. Super 8 today is a paying subscriber to t B) hie forum. OK. Still, if something promotes super 8 and pepole come here to read about it then people like interactive film school benefit from there popup ad being seen? with kodachrome going out of business it seems like anything related to super 8 should be helped. OK I understand. Thnaks for youre reply. B)

[Alessandro Machi]

I'm just concerned that someone who doesn't even use their real ID can hold sway over forum content.

 

I agree that at some point it's not fair to Super-8 Today to pay for an ad banner whereas Small Format has not, but until issue two is a go, and that decision is only 12 days away, it probably would have been best to leave the Small Format topic intact because if Small Format publishes an issue number two, then they do have the possibility to cross promote this website in their magazine, (although that is not up to me to decide in anyway).

 

 

I learned from Small Format that Kodak is moving it's film making operations to China, that is pretty big news.

[Chris Cottrill]

Just for the record, there was never any complaint by me about Small Format's postings on this or any other forum.

 

Chris Cottrill

Editor, Publisher

Super 8 Today Magazine

[James Grahame]

Just for the record, there was never any complaint by me about Small Format's postings on this or any other forum.

Chris, my copy of Super 8 Today arrived yesterday. Congratulations on getting it out of the door.

 

And now let's take a sharp right turn, folks.

 

As far as dumping the small format thread goes, that kind of destructive behaviour from Santo is beyond reprehensible. With one hand this character openly questions the intelligence of people who participate in the filmshooting.com forum, and with the other he attempts to eviscerate an attempt to start a new English language film magazine.

 

I for one put in a few weeks of work after my son had gone to bed -- between 10 and 2 in the morning -- to help get that first issue out. The reality is that smallformat is very much a part-time enterprise. The only "big guns" involved are Schiele & Schoen, the publishing company that prints and distributes it. I think our anonymous friend would do well to remember that just because something looks like it was put out by a huge corporation doesn't mean that it is so.

[Guest filmfreund]

I thought this to be an open forum. It is the second time a topic of mine has been completely deleted. For me, this is nothing else but censorship. A little bit strange - do you play the long arm of KODAK taking revenche for my critical statements concerning K40?

 

Juergen Lossau

www.smallformat.de

[Guest etimh]

Santo, I'm coming to get you. :angry:

 

Tim

[Guest santo]

:rolleyes:

 

Just a few corrections.

 

1) Sorry about the typo/spelling error. It's ad nauseam not ad nauseum.

 

2) David is right on this issue.

 

3) I never said a darn word about small format to Tim.

 

4) I thought the first issue was pretty decent and have recommended it on this webboard as can be varified by a search.

 

5) Sorry, but I'll keep my loosly held secret identity to myself. Having had one internet wacko park themselves at my doorstep after tracking me down a few years back, another sending me stacks of pictures from their time in psychologically disturbed half-way houses, and various other activities of mine disrupted via internet, ebay for one example -- no thanks. I learned my lesson.

 

6) This thread is an excellent argument for 5. It even includes somebody claiming they're going to come and "get me". Hopefully site administration does read this thread. This one I will quite likely report.

 

7) On the general discussion board from where my quote was taken, I was merely expressing the excellence with which this website is handled. The forum rules are superb and enforced and the site is professional in nature. Let's keep it that way!

[Alessandro Machi]

:rolleyes:

 

Just a few corrections.

 

2) David is right on this issue.

 

Then David is also right when he thinks it's a stretch to be afraid someone is out to get you, unless you have a perpetual style of provoking that never changes over the years.

 

3) I never said a darn word about small format to Tim.

 

In that case I apologize for suggesting you did, it's just the way you gloated about the elimination of the Small Format Topic thread that seems to imply you were/are the instigator of it's closure.

 

4) I thought the first issue was pretty decent and have recommended it on this webboard as can be varified by a search.

 

Which is why it's odd you would post about the Small Format topic removal in your general discussion post, and post about its removal in such a positive way.

 

7) On the general discussion board from where my quote was taken, I was merely expressing the excellence with which this website is handled. The forum rules are superb and enforced and the site is professional in nature. Let's keep it that way!

 

I agree this site is professionally moderated.

 

I seem to recall there is a requirement that posters use their real name when posting on Cinematography.com. Perhaps if you had started using your real name rather than Santos from the beginning, no one would have known you were the Santos from the other forum.

 

Is it possible you are pleased by rules that please you, and the ones you don't like you just pretend don't exist?

[Tim Tyler]

I don't completely understand why the Small Format Magzine Subscription drive topic thread was deleted...

 

Is it wise for this forum's administration to grant the wishes and requests of members who don't even use their real name in their forum ID?

 

Firstly, I did not delete the thread. There were two threads posted by filmfreund (crossposting=bad) and I merged them into one at http://www.cinematography.com/forum2004/in...?showtopic=9680 If I'd had known the magazine's focus was on Super-8 I would have put it in the Super-8 forum category. I'll move that thread there shortly.

 

Secondly, it is wise for the forum administrator to do whatever the hell he wants. :) This forum does not require the use of real names, and it is likely that some users' real names are not even their real names, but that ultimately hurts the user. Using real names is highly encouraged and there are other threads here better suited for that discussion.

 

Buying an ad banner on cinematography.com does not give anyone the right to turn the forum into a sales floor. Nor does becoming a Sustaining Member.

 

If you are trying to publisize a magazine (I mean anyone, not just Alessandro) consider contacting me and offering an article from an upcoming issue for publication on this site. Your content, published on Cinematography.com, will get you some attention, give other users something good to read, and provide an incentive to users to buy the whole magazine.

[John Pytlak RIP]

I learned from Small Format that Kodak is moving it's film making operations to China, that is pretty big news.

 

Sorry, you learned WRONG! :rolleyes: Almost all Kodak motion-picture film products are now made in Kodak's USA facilities, mostly in Rochester NY. Even Super-8 films are transitioning back to USA manufacture.

[Alessandro Machi]

Firstly, I did not delete the thread. There were two threads posted by filmfreund (crossposting=bad) and I merged them into one at http://www.cinematography.com/forum2004/in...?showtopic=9680 If I'd had known the magazine's focus was on Super-8 I would have put it in the Super-8 forum category. I'll move that thread there shortly.

 

Secondly, it is wise for the forum administrator to do whatever the hell he wants. :) This forum does not require the use of real names, and it is likely that some users' real names are not even their real names, but that ultimately hurts the user. Using real names is highly encouraged and there are other threads here better suited for that discussion.

 

Buying an ad banner on cinematography.com does not give anyone the right to turn the forum into a sales floor. Nor does becoming a Sustaining Member.

 

If you are trying to publisize a magazine (I mean anyone, not just Alessandro) consider contacting me and offering an article from an upcoming issue for publication on this site. Your content, published on Cinematography.com, will get you some attention, give other users something good to read, and provide an incentive to users to buy the whole magazine.

 

 

The original topic in question was not mine. I doubt I have tryed to profit from this forum. I recall listing locations in one topic thread where Small format is available but I doubt I over did it, I haven't even posted to that topic in probably two months now.

 

Sometimes when a topic is moved to a different forum the topic title is left intact and there is an arrow that indicates the actual thread has been moved, not seeing that here can lead one to think it was just deleted.

Um, thanks for not deleting it!

 

Back in the day, maybe a year to two ago, were the rules different in regards to using real names?

 

This link below sends a different message regarding the use of real names, although it is only 5 months old.

http://www.cinematography.com/forum2004/in...?showtopic=7863

 

I seem to recall some type of wording that desired members register using their real name but I'm not sure because it's been a while since I registered.

 

I think the suggestion to offer an article to this website is a tremendous idea.

[Guest santo]

Sorry, you learned WRONG! :rolleyes: Almost all Kodak motion-picture film products are now made in Kodak's USA facilities, mostly in Rochester NY. Even Super-8 films are transitioning back to USA manufacture.

 

maybe somebody ought to ring a little bell over at that filmshooting/quack engineering/political debate/slot car board. i took a look around there the other day and it's the gospel. they probably already have an imaginary map of where the motion picture film factory is going to be located in China by now.

[Machado]

I recieved my copy of Super8today the other day :D I must say I'm very happy with the magazine. Well worth the money I spent, look forward to the other issues.. About the Kodak thing, maybe everyone has just been thrown off by the deal with lucky films and read the whole thing wrong??? Afterall, there is nothing wrong with having film made abroad if its destined for those markets anyway..

[Anthony Schilling]

Got mine yesterday and am pretty happy with it. some great articles, especially the interview with Colette Scott of Kodak... she gives some insight that makes the future of S8 sound promising.

Edited November 18, 2005 by Skratch

[Guest Frustrated indie filmmaker]

Hi everyone

Like most of you in this forum I am to a cinefanatic,hoping to shoot my Indie film on my new El super 16 Bolex.I am also interested in getting together with some of you who are interested in manufacturing or reverse engineering a new movie camera.I do plastic moldings and have engineers make me all sorts of things.I wish to make a clone of the Nizo 6080.I have read with great interest what some film grads and Pro 8 are doing with doing widescreen machining of gates (1.33 to1.58).Some people tell me the Chinese got some Nizo and other super 8s and copied them.They cut 35mm stock in 4 and made them 8.75mm(8 3/4).

This interests me as that can give a aspect ratio of 1.85.I was trying to do this with some friends with 16 but at that time the 2 ways I thought of was 1 (17.5mm) modify a Bolex to accept it to get 1.85 or wider.

or get Kodak to supply double 8 with holes perferated on one side only ,this would give a wider picture area.

Hope to hear from you with advice or critercisms

[Guest santo]

Hi everyone

Like most of you in this forum I am to a cinefanatic,hoping to shoot my Indie film on my new El super 16 Bolex.I am also interested in getting together with some of you who are interested in manufacturing or reverse engineering a new movie camera.I do plastic moldings and have engineers make me all sorts of things.I wish to make a clone of the Nizo 6080.I have read with great interest what some film grads and Pro 8 are doing with doing widescreen machining of gates (1.33 to1.58).Some people tell me the Chinese got some Nizo and other super 8s and copied them.They cut 35mm stock in 4 and made them 8.75mm(8 3/4).

This interests me as that can give a aspect ratio of 1.85.I was trying to do this with some friends with 16 but at that time the 2 ways I thought of was 1 (17.5mm) modify a Bolex to accept it to get 1.85 or wider.

or get Kodak to supply double 8 with holes perferated on one side only ,this would give a wider picture area.

Hope to hear from you with advice or critercisms

 

With all due respect, you're on the wrong thread and even on the wrong webboard! You need to go to where they are more interested in this sort of topic, and there are a lot of people ready to get into an in-depth discussion on the pros and cons of it. Head directly to: http://www.filmshooting.com/scripts/forum/viewforum.php?f=1

and sign up to begin discussing your new super 8 camera plans, fuji film for redesigned super 8 cartridges with multi-coil spring pressure plates, DIY projector/camcorder transfer machines -- all kinds of stuff like that. Tell them Santo sent you.

[John Pytlak RIP]

Hi everyone

Like most of you in this forum I am to a cinefanatic,hoping to shoot my Indie film on my new El super 16 Bolex.I am also interested in getting together with some of you who are interested in manufacturing or reverse engineering a new movie camera.I do plastic moldings and have engineers make me all sorts of things.I wish to make a clone of the Nizo 6080.I have read with great interest what some film grads and Pro 8 are doing with doing widescreen machining of gates (1.33 to1.58).Some people tell me the Chinese got some Nizo and other super 8s and copied them.They cut 35mm stock in 4 and made them 8.75mm(8 3/4).

This interests me as that can give a aspect ratio of 1.85.I was trying to do this with some friends with 16 but at that time the 2 ways I thought of was 1 (17.5mm) modify a Bolex to accept it to get 1.85 or wider.

or get Kodak to supply double 8 with holes perferated on one side only ,this would give a wider picture area.

Hope to hear from you with advice or critercisms

 

Motion picture formats are well documented and specified by SMPTE and ISO standards. Standardized formats allow a common infrastructure for equipment design, film finishing, processing, printing, scanning and telecine transfer. Developing a totally new non-standard film format would face considerable difficulty, as there would be no infrastructure to support it.

 

Even "revolutionary" formats like Super-16, VistaVision, or IMAX 15-perf 70mm used existing film formats that could utilize much of the existing infrastructure of film manufacturing and lab processing and printing.

[S8 Booster]

maybe somebody ought to ring a little bell over at that filmshooting/quack engineering/political debate/slot car board. i took a look around there the other day and it's the gospel. they probably already have an imaginary map of where the motion picture film factory is going to be located in China by now.

 

you should check you sources before making conclusions from your imaginary world. see it is a big problem for you that you are kicked out of filmshooting.com forums 3 times but your information does no way hold water:

 

the information about kodak moving all motion film to china was in fact given by kodak germany to the editor of "small format". unfortunately it was wrong and this was later corrected by Mr Pytlac.

 

unfortunately as well, this just one of quite a few contradictive statements coming from kodak regarding s8 over the past years. in the end Mr. Pytlac seem to draw the longest straw though.

 

s/hoot

Edited November 30, 2005 by S8 Booster

[Guest santo]

you should check you sources before making conclusions from your imaginary world.

 

...your information does no way hold water.

 

:blink: :lol: Anybody can simply do a search for the key word China on that webboard and follow the posts. That is if they have nothing better to do.

 

First you say that my information "holds no water" and is "imaginary" and then you acknowledge that Mr. Pytlak went and corrected all the China rumours! :rolleyes: You are one whacked out character S8 Booster. Now go back to where you belong -- the filmshooting/quack engineering/political debate/slot car board -- and leave this place to serious filmmakers, both professional and sincerely aspiring.