Anthony Schilling

Very cool, i like the look. Wish I could see it projected. None of it looks fake because of course none of it is, but funny how some shots have these hues and inherent effects from the process that so many digital apps try to emulate, but end up looking cheesy and videoish. Yet this is not your typical super 8. Thanks for sharing-

I would at least wait and see what Kodak's new campaign has in store later this year. All we know is that the whole idea is aimed to simplify everything above, including a new camera. Only question is what the costs will be, surly cheaper with fewer middle men and mark ups. What ever the costs may be, they will at least be more definitive, and then you'll know if you can afford it or not.

Are you guys in the UK able to order film straight from Kodak? And once the new camera is launched, Kodak will be selling film, processing, and scanning bundles later this year. No one knows what the prices will be yet. I'm hoping for a better deal on film and processing, closer to what they offered with K40 10yrs ago.

Looks like that was just a dummy cam in the video, planted by Kodak to promote it.

I received my Ripple panel the other day. Have it up and running with Resolve 12. At first it appeared a little smaller and cheaper than I anticipated. The master dials are hard plastic (I was hoping for fake rubber) but after putting it to use, i'ts everything I hoped it would be. The dials are very fluid and the track balls are a dream for fine color adjusting, at least for a first time panel user. You can map with DaVinci as TK Element, which gives basic controls for color wheels, masters and resets. Can't use it on the curves in this mode, but don't care to either. For the price, i'd highly recommend it to anyone scanning their own films, or having to do color grading but not wanting to go all out on gear.

Whatever category they put it in, logistically the format is getting closer to professional workflows. A decade ago I was splicing and projecting silent reversal film. By the end of this year I'll be able to work with audio sync with the same emulsions and work flows as 16/35mm. Theoretically you could carry out a production on Super 8 just as if you were shooting 16/35mm, but on a much smaller scale. I would not go for a 2hr film on S8, maybe a 20-30 min at most. If you can pull off a mini production on S8, it will be much easier to move up to 16/35mm.

I am not an expert in this area but recently covered it in Resolve training. There is a LUT folder which of course has a rec 709 LUT. The grading tools in Resolve are second to none, really good qualifiers and power window tools to isolate colors and saturation areas.

I've been using the Retro Universal since it came out. Side to side instability is usually cause by warpage in the take up reel, i always make sure to give them a stretch before hand. Frame jumping can be caused by light flooding the sprocket holes and/or the sensor knob not adjusted properly. I've scanned clear edge film without any jumping just by turning the sensor way down. Vertical stability is camera dependent... Super 8 and even my Bolex H16 will have some slight frame line movement at times, but S16 shot on an SR3 is rock solid on my machine...No frame line movement what so ever. The Universal takes a little getting used to as there are so many things to adjust to your needs. My guess is that

Digital Cinema has established a strong foothold in Hollywood, but has recently gotten a bit of backlash from a lot of serious and established directors, Some kind of deal was made between the directors, big studios, and Kodak to keep film alive as a viable choice when making movies. A good chunk of your more serious and big budget movies are still shot on film. Digital technology has allowed amateurs to shoot film and use digital workflows a lot easier than amateur film used to be. All of this is reason for the Super 8 promotion as well. People from all levels perceive film as more desirable or more superior than digital. While many others (George Lucas) like the ease of digital. So it's really up to what you like.

Interesting info Perry- I didn't realize ProRes came in smaller packages. The file I got was 130GB for 400ft S8 uncompressed I presume, it was 4 years ago. But yes, large files are an issue for me, even though I have never gone above a TIFF. Im grading and editing 250ft S8 i scanned for someone now, 100GB proxy as a TIFF. Most of the files I deliver are from small volumes of film but the files are usually 60-100GB. But I was curious as how pro facilities handle transferring large volumes... which like you said, involves more expensive gear.

Interstitial plasma? on a few bright shots.. but what it was inherent to is hard to pinpoint. it was a shadow scan of some S8 so maybe more due to the colorist than the file? But wasn't really my point. My point is I found ProRes a bit more cumbersome to deal with. I guess I just don't get why an Apple based codec is becoming the current standard? There are already enough headaches on various compatibility issues between Windows, Mac, codecs, hardware, media players, edit software ect... and I feel like image sequence files cut through a lot of workflow headaches for once. At least that's my perspective as a basement novice, between incoming and outgoing files.

I feel like working with DPX, TIFF or any codec free sequence file to be a step forward in my work flow over any codec. Maybe because i'm a Windows only guy, tired of Apple based codecs dominating the scene, tired of the codec boondoggle all together. My one experience with ProRes was too noisy, and I find codec free files to be a much smoother work flow. DPX and TIFF drop into resolve with no fuss.

Totally normal. Some cameras like the Canon XLS's will stop at the end but most will keep running. You get warning lights and can hear the motor free up in the right conditions, but i must admit there have been plenty of times where i was still shooting with a Nizo and run out of film without being sure if I was still capturing. Hard to observe the warning light when you're focused on the scene.

The new Ripple color control panel from Tangent is available for pre order today for only $350!! ordered mine! http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1184425-REG/tangent_the_ripple_color_correction.html

Awesome!

All I heard the larger, full metal body camera will come out first for about $750 or $800. Then there will be a smaller, sleek hand held plastic body design for around $400

I would keep it simpler like a quiktime file. It won't take up much space, won't burn up your machine trying to render anything, and it will still look good. You want something that's just plug and play at first. All these new codecs and ever changing PC technology can be a nightmare for someone just jumping into it.

Another round of SRIII's from NFL films were up again this week, for around $3000. Comes with mags, batts, cases, no lens. But if I was in the market, something like that would be worth another $1200 for a lens.

Whatever camera you find at whatever price, double that if you want a lens. 16mm camera bodies are historically cheap but lenses have gone through the roof.

If you didn't already know, Kodak is coming out with new Super 8 cameras and film packages this fall. The new cameras will only run at basic speeds, 9,18,24,25fps (but could change with firmware updates?) but will have some cool new features like on board audio recording, wider screen frame, inter-changable lenses. The film packages will be film, processing, and scan under one roof at one price. http://www.kodak.com/ek/us/en/Consumer/Products/Super8/default.htm The 2 & 3rd films of mine you posted were shot with the Nizo. The 1st from 1959 that I scanned. I've owned that Nizo since 2005, but just got another barely used 481 last summer for about $200USD. The differences on the 481, 561, and 801 are the zoom lens sizes. The 801's lens is a little bulkier, the 481's is the smallest. Unless you want more zoom (which I usually don't) the smaller of the lenses is just as sharp as the others. I also use a Canon 814XLS which has been good for more straight forward shooting, especially in low light. Also a good choice but more spendy.

The best camera for you would be a Nizo 481 or 561. I've owned and used most of the good S8 cameras over the years, and the Nizo Schneider lens holds up very well, very sharp. It is very compact with a fold back handle, you can carry it around on your hip. Built in intervolometer 1fpm to 6fps, 180, 90, 45 degree shutter options, with the option to have an open shutter exposure ranging from 1fpm-6fps. 18, 24, and 54fps slow motion. The models that end in "1" have an autoB feature that advances frames for open shutter time lapses. Once you get used to all the mechanics of shooting film as 3600 photographs with the mechanics of this camera, there is an infinite amount of creative potential. I'll try and attach a link to a link to a experimental music video i made last year, mostly with a Nizo 481 Macro. https://vimeo.com/133524531

I would do an image sequence since it's codec free. DPX files if you want incompressed, or Jpeg is compressed but user friendly and look good.

I would just get a cheap used camera and wait until September for this http://www.kodak.com/ek/US/en/Consumer/Products/Super8/Super8-camera/default.htm

Such a prosumer scanner does now exist now. http://www.moviestuff.tv/universal_web_ad.html It will run you about $4500 with both 8 and 16mm gates. The quality is better than what I was getting from a $600,000 machine at the time this thread was started.

The cool thing about this unit is that is has an interchangeable gate for different gauges. Currently they offer 8mm, 9.5mm, 16mm gates. They do also have a 35mm gate for capturing stills, and I believe a 35mm MP gate is in the works. They did recently build a custom 28mm gate for an archival institution. The camera head is also interchangeable, so you can upgrade to 2.5K or 4K down the road.