Alessandro Machi

Clarification, 60 minute broadcast TV shows might actually be 43 minutes and 30 seconds of content as opposed to 40 minutes.

If you do them in segments of 3 minutes times 3 segments, and can make it engaging enough every 3 minutes, then that's all you can do.

If you want to do the webisodes instead, i would suggest doing as many as possible before putting any on youtube so that you can be consistent in your delivery schedule for youtube. I also think your webisodes should realign into a 60 minute (40 min) version if necessary. If you were planning on doing a 60 anyways, than I assume you can afford do a 60's worth of webisodes? Or, the safest approach is to do 3 webisodes and based on the response look at doing more. If you do 3, post them all at the same time. The reason to do this is you can gauge how much of a drop off there is between segments 1,2, and 3. If you find a huge drop off in viewings (remember it's important to put all three up at the same time) between any of the SHORT webisodes, than you probably don't have a hit on your hands. If the viewership is steady among all three, with only a slight decline, than pat yourself on the back. I picked 3 minutes per webisode segment because almost anyone will give something a shot if it is 3 minutes or less in length. Once a video reaches four minutes or longer, people may get hesitant unless they were driven to your site by an actual recommendation.

I would focus on what you can actually create, and finish, versus simply creating. Finish means finished, down to the music track, sound design, and additional mix track along with color/density matched visuals. If you feel you could do the entire hour, finished (as described above), then possibly parsing out the 60 minute (or would that be 40 minutes plus commercials?) into 3 minute increments and posting those 3 minute segments onto youtube would be how I would proceed. The nice thing about having the entire 40 minute (plus commercials slots equals 60 minutes) already finished is then you can keep to a timely youtube posting schedule. Maybe post a new 3 minute segment twice a week? Then you can track how many subscribers you get, total viewers per segment, and so on.

A perfect illustration of what can happen when digital software is able to somewhat obstruct a companies business. Many brick and mortar business are comprised of voltage and hardware and knowhow, but if digital software glitches occur and don't get fixed, it can have grave consequences for a voltage/hardware based business. The business may disappear as a result but the digital software entity re-emerges as something new and different and allegedly better even though the reality is where there once was choice, now there is only one.

One solution to the youtube copyright issue (if what you say is true), is to post a version of your project on youtube with two text burn ins, one in the lower third, the other in at least one of the upper corners, not at 100% intensity, a bit lower than that. The idea being that a version of your show that has a permanent burn in in more than place does not have much value. The burn in should be a physical, rendered burn in that can't be undone by clever file editing.

I'll answer in a roundabout way. Be careful with vimeo, they lure users with higher quality settings which in turn creates a stroboscopic nightmare for older computers. So I was distracted by the constant stop motion. I would guess i was seeing it at four frames per second. But to clarify, I can watch video anywhere else and rarely get strobing. More specifically as to the film, I thought the writing was good. I was drawn in by the "29" comment and then found the script chatter to be combatively funny. Can't say much about the DP because of the strobing that I experienced when watching it.

If there was a way to know that the color was accurate, I would be for it.

If this product were magically developed, it would first possibly kill film, then, it would go away and we'd have neither. This is a common digital trap/technique. Apple's Itunes apparently screwed over their smaller market entrepreneurs when they came out with the next version of I-tunes. "Oh, you want the last version of I-Tunes, sorry, it doesn't work that way". "We gave it to you for free, so you appreciate what you get and shut up." The same think mode would probably apply if this product came out. That's the problem with software/digital based apps, they disappear overnight and there's nothing you can do about it. Digital Software vs Voltage Hardware, we actually need both, unfortunately Digital Software tends to wipe out Voltage Hardware and then the Digital Software tends to reinvent itself, rendering the prior version extinct.

I suppose what is possibly creepy about the colorizing of our BW past is making the skin color too "perfect" on the basis of where the photo was taken. Check out these examples.

There is a danger when being wide open at night of having a soft image, I suppose you would be wide angle and focus to infinity? Probably want your camera tripod mounted, assuming your tripod is a decent one with ease of pan and tilting at a moment's notice. Just for kicks, you should see if it is possible to adjust your f-stop to a 2.0 2.8 split for a short portion of the fireworks just to see if the picture looks sharper without too much loss of image. If you are open to treating this as an experiment, I would even go to f 2.8 and even 2.8 / 4 split. 18 frames per second versus 24 will get you an extra 1/3 of a stop of sensitivity. I forget how the manual shutter works on the camera, probably want to keep it as slow as possible to gain additional exposure time per frame.

I think it comes down to the fact that you are being paid. Just reverse the scenario. You are a producer paying your crew, but your crew expects to be able to use the footage for their own purposes at a later date. I would suggest that what might be just as important is getting a clause in that you can use a short excerpt for demo reel purposes. This too is not as easy as it sounds, because is the clip coming from the finished piece, or from raw footage? The producer probably does not want to allow raw footage to be given out, but then using a finished portion of the piece may or may not suit your needs or even be possible depending on other legal issues involving sound and location rights issues. The other issue to consider is "access". If the only reason you were able to get the shots you got was because the producer created the necessary access, or the funds to create the scene that you are filming, than most likely that won't be given up. So much for the "no" side, would love to read comments from the "yes" side as well.

I would like to co-opt this topic rather than start another one because the video sample provided above is terrific. Is it time for the labs to start charging two processing rates? 50 bucks a reel if one just wants processing only, or 25 bucks a reel if one is doing the transfer with the lab? And if that were done, than maybe labs could start selling these transfer units. It would be a weird transition, but if there were a thousand of these units out there, that might generate enough lab business to keep a super-8 lab in business simply by the processing only. This is a common problem with technologies just before they potentially fade away, they optimize and are surprisingly good, but then sort of disappear overnight. In this instance, these types of transfer units could increase the use of super-8 again. But if at the same time super-8 usage is going up labs get hurt financially because their prior investment in transfer gear can no longer be justified due to loss of transfer business, then it becomes a catch-22.

The sound of the projector turning off, a cruel sound indeed. Amazingly awesome looking stuff. Looks like you shot in soft but flat light outdoors which just seemed to turn some of it into 16mm. How much is Spectra charging for negative processing these days? I hope it is enough to stay profitable because it would be a shame if the thing that makes super-8 look so good and potentially affordable also bankrupts the labs due to less transfer business.

Thanks for sharing the pictures. As a general guide for super-8 filmmakers to consider, we each can interpret what it means to spend more on a camera part than the camera actually cost to purchase. We can be unhappy, or grateful that the camera sold so cheaply and we were able to use some of the saved money to replace a part, for free.

It is possible that either your viewfinder is not properly set or that there is a macro setting that is hobbling your efforts.

Eventually, no form of media will be safe from outside eyes because it will all be within the computer, and easily back door hackable. The problem with this is filmmakers should be allowed to reveal their project when they want to, not have it purveyed by others looking for security breaches. Film (to a certain degree) and Tape (to a larger degree) offer these artistic privacy protections and should be celebrated as viable options even if they become a very small piece of the pie.

I looked at the first BW video. I applaud that you set something up, tried it, and then shared a video of how it actually works. Very few people ever do that. I keep expecting car repair places to allow people to see the mechanic work on their car via the internet, but I don't think that has happened yet. I do think your first BW transfer is nowhere near the sharpness capacity of the film itself. It felt like VHS resolution at best so maybe now you can focus on how to take advantage of the additional resolution that one can get from Super-8 film, especially BW, which gains 50 lines simply because there is no additional color to deal with.

The demo felt like the opening to a slasher movie. I was waiting for a cut-away to a conveyer belt and a person wrapped head to toe in mummy style bandages moving over the conveyor rollers, a muffled yell coming from them as they were inched forward towards the dreaded super-8 compacto device. I guess our victim ends up in a frame of film. Now its time to lure our next victim into the next frame of super-8 film.

I don't want to shift the discussion to other 8mm cameras, however, some super-8mm cameras have time-exposure and also have different film shutter speeds depending on which film per second mode you use while then using time-lapse mode. Limiting one self to a specific shutter speed may reduce one's ability to get the optimal single frame result that you desire.

I would think a big issue would be suddenly losing the loop and nobody there to reset the loop. A second projector would probably be just as easy to get as assembling all kinds of logical spare parts for the first projector, assuming the second projector was as reliable as the first one.

not "you're" but your.

sell it on ebay! (a joke).

I'm pretty sure the Super-8 forum can handle a question about super-8 projectors, or at the very least give a nice link referral. In the meantime, DON'T use your projectors as they may be irreparably harming your film. I would be very careful with the bell & howell still frame function, if you leave it too long in still film it will literally "dissolve" your film, as in melt it. If you're bell & howell is a "dual" projector, then that would mean it can handle either regular 8mm or super-8mm and perhaps you have set it in the 8mm position instead of the super-8 position. There should also be a "reloop" switch which can take away the jitteriness, assuming your projector is either super-8 only or set to super-8 if it is a dual projector. The sears projector, I'm not sure why the front reel would be spinning so fast unless one of the switches is somehow stuck in a fast forward position. I would STRONGLY SUGGEST a movie viewer for viewing your films until you get a decently working super-8 projector. Definitely repost your question on the super-8 forum which you can find as a subheading on the main cinematography.com page under the category of film. And finally, the best way not to damage your film is to have a transfer facility transfer the film onto some type of digital recording format. Once the original film is damaged, it probably can't be undone.

If they supply all the gear, have a solid crafts services, and have extra help to make sure your car isn't vandalized while doing the shoot, then you can have them pitch you on what the benefits are. If they have a youtube page, a facebook page, a twitter page, and a couple others I have forgotten, and on each site are going to link to a site of your choosing, (with a pre-agreed upon message), and the project is not a long one, 2 to 3 days, and there are other cornerstone professional people also on the project, (gaffer, sound, wardrobe/make-up, A.D. and a competent post production person), then maybe its worth it if you have plenty of spare time and want to keep up with newer types of work flows.