Chris Burke

Everything is accurate except they are saying that K-40 is a moderate speed film, it is not. It is a very slow film, 40 ASA, hence the name. If shooting indoor you will need loads and loads of light to get a properly exposed image. It is a classic stock that has extremely long archival qualities. chris

You will get color, although it may be very desaturated. I shot part of a short with about 11 rolls of Ektachrome and I could not have been happier. Keep in mind that the image will be less than perfect, but that is relative. I wanted the old film look and that is what I got. No plugin in the world can match what you can get from old emulsions. Embrace what it is and have fun with it. chris :rolleyes:

My camera has the intergrated lens, it can not be removed. Not at least with out taking the camera apart. I have not heard of a Yashica that had removable lenses. Can you post an image or email me a photo? I am quite interested. chris :D

I own a SuperElectronic 40, admittedly not the same camera, but close enough. It never lets me down. It is always my back up camera. It always has worked. Yes, it is not as proffessional a camea as a Nizo or Beaulieu, but it is extremely reliable. I bought mine for $10 and have never serviced it and it still works. What else can I say; the lens is pretty sharp, good contrast. Buy it, you won't regret it. Chris B)

I have to agree that a Super 16 budget is going to compete very closely with a HD budget. The very best HD is very expensive. Lots of labs are offering telecine to Hard drives and they deliver it in uncompressed HD. chris

35mm still frame is 1.5:1, 16mm is 1.33:1 as is super 8. If you are trying to get stills from the film and have access to a flatbed scanner that can handle transparencies, then I would strongly suggest scanning the frames. You will get a much, much better photo. Also, many service bureaus offer this service. I am not sure where you are, but here in Boston, Spectrum Color labs will do this. Good luck chris

I couldn't agree more. WHy not have some of it printed? That would answer a lot of questions. chris

Am I wrong or was Altman's Gossiford Park shot on 5284? Exclusively, I might add. chris

Will you provide travel expenses from the US? I have shot many a wedding this way and edited them to DV. Shot either 16mm or super 8, truly timeless. :rolleyes:

I believe that it is actuallly 35mm. I saw a behind the scenes shot on some TV show and there was a 35mm camera, not sure what make or model, I think Aaton, but not sure. Definitely not video. Though I can see how one may be confused. they are going for a documentary feel. Deep focus, hand held.

Sonya, Which lab are you using? I am shopping around for labs that offer telecine to an uncompressed file format and would like all the info I can gather. Thanks. chris ;)

http://www.blackandwhitefilmfactory.com They will do a Super 8 print of your digital file. Color or black and white. Getting a sound stripe is another thing entirely. I have shot off a LCD screen and have had great results. I used Kodachrome, it looked really good. In terms of frame rate; Is your movie in 30fps or 24fps? If the later, then no problem, you will get a one to one transfer. If 30fps, then follow the math given above, I am not sure what it is but the info is out there. Good luck. :rolleyes:

Kodak makes a 500 speed tungsten balanced super 8, 7218. Check out their website. Also check out www.super8sound.com, they cut down 35mm stock to super 8 and have many emulsions available. B)

How do you intend the finished product to be screened? What is your budget? There are many routes to follow, nowing what you intend to have as a final product will help you make a descision as to your post production path.

It seems like you are taking what Ken and others have said and moving in a positive direction. Start with a great script, not a good one, a great one, get a good DP, get a talented cast. Now, as you have stated already, there is no need to rush into it. So many people have dv camcorders and are making movies so much so, that the film world, for better or for worse, is now quiet full of people making mediocre films. You want yours to be special, stand out from all the rest. Having said that, take the time, fine tune your script, find the right DP, perhaps with a camera, then with the stellar, do a budget up to shoot it on film. If indeed you want to strive for the best and black and white is the way you have to go, then shoot film. Nothing in the DV world can match it, especially when it comes to black and white. You have many options, you could shoot Super 8, if that looks suits your needs, or regular 16, negative or positive. The look will not disappoint you like DV quite probably will.

Is shooting Super 35 the same as shooting 3 perf? If so, doesn't 3 perf save you money all around? I am considering this format for two upcoming projects. :D

I recommend any Nizo, especially the 6080.

They do black and white and color negative processing of Super 8 as well. They have a drop in the South End, I think on Harrison. check the website. Really cool people to deal with. chris

The power on my 6080 cut out sometimes for no good reason. The batteries are good. When it works it works good. Then, wham! Power goes out and I can not get it to work. It has a mind of it's own. Does yours behave this way?

I am not saying "why not make a car". Yes, I reckonize that there must be a whole load of work that goes into making a lens. But just the same. To those who could or maybe should. They are already set up to make lens.Why not? 1.33:1 is not 2:1 so, I guess that optical prints could be made. If you already have an anamorphic format which Super 16 is, than it wouldn't be that much of a jump up to 2.35.

How much R&D is needed? We all know that anamorphic lens work, so why not just grind one to 1.33:1? I truly think that if such a lens existed, the resulting image would be comparable to three perf 35, just a lot cheaper. thoughts??

I don't have the practical experience many of you do, but I ask, can a 1.33 anamorphic lens be made? Why not? I think it would make for a great experiment. would save on film cost as well.

The Nizo wide angle adapters are the best for this camera and easy to use. In terms of anamorphic; people have been doing all sorts of mods. Some have the gate widened, as I did. My camera shoots approximately 1.66, maybe a bit wider. Others have attached an adapter and had great success with it. Search these boards. Not too long ago a guy had a post with links to photos and all about how he did his with a Panasonic DVX100 16:9 adapter. He posted some stills as well. I have thought of adding this to my camera for a scope look. Anyone shot scope on Super 8? Not for super 8 projection, but transfer to digital.

I don't think that post would be a problem. Especially if you were to go the DI route. Is this canon adapter new or old? Can I find it on there website?

Is there such a lens that would be a 1.32xxxxxx:1 ratio for super 16 cameras? this would give an effective 2.35 image area and not waste any of the negative. Could be quite an alternative to shooting 35. $$$ Anyone ever heard of one? Could it be made? z