Matthew W. Phillips

Ok, wait a sec...this is getting heavy and I wanted to point out that the least amount of technical skill necessary, the better. I dont want to try to make a RANK. Just trying to come up with a frame by frame projector capable of some decent scans. I am not an engineer and i dont wish to become one. Any electrical work would have to be cheap, easy to understand, and safe.

I like Super 8 over 16 for many reasons: 1) Dont have to worry about magazine changes and risk of exposing the film 2) Here in California, Super 8 is much cheaper than 16 in everything but RANK transfer which still doesnt offset the total savings of S8. 3) Super 8 has a look all its own where 16 looks like "baby 35" 4) I have found that, when comparing S8 cameras to hand cranked 16 cameras, S8 cameras hold sync much better for 24fps. I have a Sankyo Supertronic XL620 and I can actually do sync sound with it. I dont know if its because this was a sound camera initially or what, but it will hold sync for the short scenes I shoot. The hand cranked K-3 will not hold sync very well, in my experience. 5) Super 8 is great for Guerilla shooting, if that's your thing. 6) Many low cost S8 cams have great features available to you for prices that would be unheard of for 16 cameras. My Supertronic has dissolves, fades, intervals, slow, fast, and stop motion, and some other S8 cameras even have backwind capability. Try getting all that in 16 for less than $100. 7) For grindhouse horror, Super 8 cannot be beat. It can instantly give people the chills with most any setting. I think all horror movies should be shot on Super 8. This is all I can think of now, anyone else have any ideas?

I would recommend getting an incident meter and taking an average reading based on a few areas on or near the subject. I do this and it always worked well for me. Many people will tell you you need an expensive digital meter for "utmost accuracy" but I use an analog meter and it is still close enough. I dont think that the 1 micrometer you might be off will affect your exposure noticeably.

I may aim for this idea...it is more time concuming, but the payoff is worth it, I feel. I am definitely not expecting a marketable product out of this. Maybe something that I can benefit from or at least have fun doing when I drink... :D

Thank you Scott for the encouragement. However, anyone have an idea of how I can (cheaply) devise a method of syncing for 24fps (or any particular rate for that matter)? No idea is too silly for me to try! I also wish to tell Jim Jannard that I have posted my prototype so I would love to see his for RED. Dont be ashamed of the beast Sir, be proud of it!

Mike, you have a good attitude and I may like to utilize your services some day. Take advice from him, a good fellow indeed.

Auto should work fine...check out this link http://super8wiki.com/index.php/Super_8_EK..._meter_properly

You want it, you got it...although my digital camera is buried in storage so you have to settle for webcam grabs...so sorry. Here it is. I will try to get better images in the future, but this is the general idea.

Thanks Jim, finally I got your attention for once. My hypothesis was correct in thinking that you would not leave these boards afterall. I had previously asked you a question in another thread and I dont think it was ever answered. I was utmost sincere when I asked it and I still am. I will rephrase how I asked it before... Is RED a good value for the filmmaker who can only afford to shoot on 16mm? When I ask this, I mean total workflow and everything. Would the cost be reasonable considering shooting till editing on a computer? For instance, if I want to make a 90 minute feature, would the RED be a better cost/ value tradeoff than 16mm film? I mean this question with all sincerity. And I dont consider a fire sale of the RED after production as a true indicator of value. Afterall, you have to come up with money initially to fund a project. As far as my remark about him never having it in his hands, it is because I think as the project goes on, demand will increase such that he wont get one. Also, I feel that the price will go up as interest increases. A good thing never lasts for us poor folks, you can count on that. And I am assuming this will be a good thing. But if it is, there will be a catch.

Not a bad roll indeed. What method of transfer did you use? Also, wanted to say that the zoom in there was one of the fastest zooms I've ever saw! Nice color though. Also, someone on this site had posted this url before for comparison of Vision2 200t vs. 16 vs. S16 vs. DVX100. Here it is: http://www.philrosefilms.com/kodakfilmdemo.html

You're in UK right? That explains this statement...otherwise, S8 is considerably cheaper than 16mm, especially for large projects.

I wouldnt get my hopes up of having it in your hands.

I got the bright idea to build my own Super 8 projector from scratch and I want it to be capable of single frame projection for scanning. I have a ridiculous looking functional model that can now project single frames but cant sync and has no shutter. Is this a foolish venture? The images look pretty good bounced off of a black television screen. Anyone else try crazy stuff like this?

What about Standard 8mm and Super Duper 8? Heck, let's bring back the 17.5mm also! Hell, I think someone should invent a method of pulling the film through that doesnt take precious space from our 8mm stock so we can use the full surface. Ok, that was my soapbox for the day.

It's actually not four times when you are talking about regular 16mm. This is because 16mm originally had double perfs and has room for a soundtrack. To clarify, Super 8 frame size is 5.5mm x 4mm (22mm area) 16mm has frame size of 10.26mm x 7.49mm (76.85mm area) So, about 3.5 times the area. :P

On the video for IBC, a rep did indeed say that RED was holding detail with a light 15 stops hotter than the subject without blow out. I am extremely skeptical of that.

Later, you wont be missed...sorry if I am jerky but I don't think it is a huge deal to give your real name.

Comeon guys, get off of Max Jacoby's back. I can never understand anything that Manny says. No one is insulting him, but comeon...don't act all pious and start throwing out accusations about people being racist. I would bet most anything that many, if not all, of you have insulted fast food workers or others who do not speak good English. Don't be a hypocrite or someone may call you on it one day.

I'm not a person who would never consider using a video camera. I just think it is foolish for REDs site to tell people to quit shooting on 35mm now. The camera isn't even built yet and I'm supposed to put my life on hold and shaft film until Jim feels like releasing his super camera. That is a ridiculous notion and, quite frankly, a stupid marketing line. Maybe if the camera was available for sale now it might be ok, but comeon man. Also, I'm still waiting for someone to tell me how this camera is any better of a value than shooting on S16. S16 is easily 2k and the price is considerably cheaper than this camera with a decent lense. The camera + the $10k lense + hard drive = almost 30k. For that, I could shoot 16mm for days. The quality difference between s16 and RED would not be worth the extra money and workflow hassle IMHO.

Yeah, I been there too...

What an idiot...I want to come back in five years and ask what all those "film is dead" people what they think when film is still the origination medium on over 50% of all narrative productions.

Yeah, that would be me. :(

Okay, I stand corrected...I totally overlooked the fire sale idea. However, most people I know might have trouble procuring that much cash initially for gear even if they know they are going to get back a significant portion. And you're right about the great feeling of shooting on film. I think shooting on Super 8 is more exciting than shooting HD. Of course I am referring to low level HD like HVX200, etc. I wouldn't mind trying a shoot on a Genesis but that is way out of my range and I would rather shoot 35. Actually, I cannot think of any scenario where it would be better for me to shoot on video than on film. Unless the only thing I could afford was a cheap MiniDV cam and then I would probably shoot S8 and do a short instead.

I don't get what you are saying...I think you have had fancy digital gear so long, you don't understand the low-budget mindset anymore. Check this scenario... I want to shoot a 90 minute feature. If I shoot at 4:1 ratio like you did, I can: Buy a $100 Super8 camera off ebay. (I got a good one for $40, but let's just figure high) Go through Spectra and get 6 hours worth of Color negative film in a bulk deal with processing, prep/clean, and RANK telecine to digital format: $7,137 TOTAL FOR JUST THE IMAGE ACQUISITION AND EDITABLE PLATFORM: $7,237 Let's say Panasonic HVX200 camera: $5,285.00 (figure taken from buydig for estimate) At least two 8 GB cards for swapping out (assuming you transfer footage and delete): $2,300.00 (B&H) TOTAL FOR IMAGE ACQUISTION AND EDITABLE PLATFORM: $7,585 Granted, the HVX200, in DVCPRO50 mode will have higher res. than Super 8. But using a good S8 stock like Vision2 200T is going to give a much better latitude than the HVX200. If the end result is SD, is there really any significant gain in using the HVX? If it's not for SD, you still have a native film negative instead of a digital source. Either way, I think the Super 8 is the better choice in the super low budget realm. And MiniDV is not even on the charts in this discussion.

I never said you were a fraud. Honestly, my concerns are really that you aren't going to have your camera done as soon as you say and also that the perceived value of the 17.5k camera is going to disappoint as all the neccessary add-ons factor in. I am a low budget filmmaker so a package costing upwards towards 30k might as well be like shooting 35mm film for me. It still seems to make more sense, cost wise, to shoot 16mm. This camera most likely will not change that.