Ernie Zahn

Well a lot of those cheaper Eastman stocks from the 60's and 70's fade no matter how well you take care of them. They were made cheaply because they made them to sell for the time being they didn't care much about the long term. It seems to be a repeating quality among studios. They burned nitrate prints on the set of Frankenstein for the fire at the windmill scene. Some of these films are totally lost now. There are also many rare films produced on Eastman stocks that never hit the home video market and they are totally pink, red, and brownish. I agree though - hobbyists who know how to take care of the prints, especially the LPP ones, have a better chance of making them last. If we're talking about films that don't exist commercially on Amazon or other retailers then, personally, I'm all for telecinning them and sharing them. If it isn't competing with a BluRay/DVD release then it deserves to be out there somehow. Unless it's a terrible movie :P

Well I have a PS3 for BluRays and a 1080p BENQ projector with DLP. It does the job nicely and that's my go to for most movie nights. Though I have a select few prints on 16mm and Super 8 that I like to project too. It's not about one being better than the other - I'm not suggesting it would have mass market appeal at all but there is certainly a difference in the experience. It's not about quality, it's more of a nostalgic thing. I don't think photochemical film is not a viable option for delivery on a mass scale anymore. As an environmentalist I can't say no to digital projection. I wouldn't want to impose my own personal nostalgia on the public. The cost is too high. It's still nice, however, that its out there for a few weirdos like me. If I had to choose between Raiders of the Lost Ark on film VS BluRay I think I'd choose film every time. It's a complicated relationship :wub: In short, a select few film prints for special occasions and digital for pretty much everything else. I guess it's not that complicated. True. Since we are talking about actual scannable images w/o any kind of analog equivalent to DRM, it would be hard for a studio to sell them. If someone got their hands on a theatrical print of Star Wars prior to the changes, I don't know if Lucas would be too keen on an ambitious fan getting that print telecined into HD and distributed into the ether.

From Roger Evans at MovieStuff "You can have a color in many variations such as 8 bit (4:2:2) or 16 bit (8:4:4) as well as color that's 24 bit (8:8:8). Many regular video cameras capture in 8 bit 4:2:2 and even 4:1:1 which can look just fine but doesn't have the range of full 8:8:8 on the color channels." Also, I called up and asked about file format. It is an image sequence but it's uncompressed .tiff files compiled in a proprietary .FILM file (which is a form of .zip). Those can be converted to ProRes4444, DNxHD and other codecs. Chris, I don't know what you'd be doing with Super 8 that 8:8:8 wouldn't be good enough. I worked in post with the RED Epic for Univision and Warner Brothers and we worked with Final Cut in 4:4:4 and 4:2:2 and this was plenty of color space to key green screen footage in AE and do various sequences in Cinema 4D. Regarding the sensor bit, I hear these are selling well. I've even considered getting one myself. Perhaps the internals will improve with subsequent releases. I heard there's going to be a 16mm equivalent at some point. That will be scanning a lot more surface area. Maybe an improved sensor for this will trickle down to the 8mm line. Personally I'd like one that supports MAX8/Super Duper 8 frame.

Thanks for the info David. It's interesting though kind of unfortunate. I'm sure there is an elite segment of collectors out there that would love great access to these prints. Then again, I'm in favor of recycling!

Google was not my friend on this one. I can't seem to get a clear answer on this. I know that most theaters in the UK and US are digital now but there are still some 35mm release prints out there on a limited scale. But before 2009 there were many many 35mm theaters. So I'm wondering, what happens to release prints when they're cycled through at the main theater chains? I assume many of them move to smaller theaters that play films after the films' box office plateau. What about after that? I'd imagine that are thousands and thousands out there but I only see a few once and a while on eBay. There's never a shortage of trailers for sale on eBay though. I know they are not strictly speaking legal to own. Roddy Mcdowall's place got raided by the police in the 70's for having a host of unauthorized for personal use, prints. Though I've heard legality around that doesn't get enforced anymore since the rise of the home video market. I've heard that Quentin Tarantino has a personal library of them too. So anyway, I see a couple here and there pop up on ebay and flea markets and such but that's all? Do they get sent back to the distributors and archived or destroyed, while others slip through the cracks?

Give me a budget and I'll happy use Super 16 over my DSLR!

I was looking forward to seeing this but I've read some mixed reviews. I don't usually read reviews but I was compelled to when I heard Jim Carrey refused to do any publicity for it. I mostly enjoyed the first one but I had an issue with how humiliating and trivialized violence was portrayed. I'd be lying if I said I'm against violence in films. That being said, I take issue with the role it plays in films more than the volume of violence featured. I might catch it on Netflix so as to not "knock it before I try it," but I'm not eager to spend $$ to see it in theaters.

LOL you lost me at Windows Phone. But seriously, I've had mixed results with pressure plates before. If it truly looked stable and the motor was super quiet then I'd be down for $1000...$1500 at the most. But my concern would be warranty, servicing etc.

Thanks! Very good explanation indeed!

Interesting. Thanks I didn't realize how much he preferred 1.85. Though they were Zemeckis films, were the Back to the Future films shot 1.85 too?

I try and google this subject and all I can find is that it was shot w/o a scope lens or any other widescreen implementation. What I can't find is why they shot it in full screen? I know many Spielberg films were shot anamorphic so who's call was this? Was it Dean Cundey? Spielberg? Outside influence?

I have a Beaulieu 4008 ZM II. Schneider Kreuznach Optivaron 1,8/6-66 mm. Recently serviced. Comes with a battery and charger. I can also throw in a couple of rolls of 100D and or 500T. PM me with offers.

I know that this site: http://www.single8film.com/ is bogus and the guy has basically disappeared but aren't there sources out there for Single-8? I thought some place was reproducing Single-8 stocks? And aren't there places that still process it? Or is it absolutely completely dead?

Hey all, just wanted to let you know that after 6 years of production my feature film is entering post and I along with the rest of the production team are starting the first push of promotion. We call it a post-apocalyptic religious satire. It's an epic comedy about the end the of world and humanity's final stand against the forces of heaven. The battleground is the rubble of fallen civilization. We shot in Super8mm to capture the classic cinema look akin to films like Clash of the Titans, Spartacus and Land of the Lost. We shot using all Kodak stocks. E-64T, V2/V3 200T, V2/V3 500T, 100D, Plus x and Tri x. Actually there is one sequence shot in single 8 with an underwater camera. It's all being telecined by Photoplays in HD and edited in Apple ProRes 422 on Final Cut Pro. We worked with a Beaulieu 6008s, Canon 514 XL and the XLs and a Nizo 3056. I have a couple videos to share: NOTE: The teaser is in B&W to keep with the newsreel motif. The actual film is in color with a couple B&W sequences. I'm going to put up a behind the scene video that talk all about our experience with Super8mm and this project. It was also feature some HD samples from the film itself. Would love some feedback! Also happy to answer any questions about production. More links! Main Site The Comedy Group That Produced the Movie

Hey all, I just made a blog post about the cinema tools app for iOS and if you wanted to take a look at it, I'd love some comments or feedback on the post: http://erniezahn.com/2010/09/13/kodak-cinema-tools-app-for-ios/#respond

I bought this camera 2 years ago for a project. That project is now concluded and my super8mm filmmaking is pretty much limited to hobbyist stuff with my little Canon 514XL. Here's the info on the Beaulieu: Prime Lens: Schneider 1,4 / 6 - 70 mm Auto / Manual Zoom with 3-10 s Ground Glass Focusing Macro focusing Zoom Lens: Canon TV Zoom Lens V6x17 17-102mm 1:2.0 Manual / Auto Exposure Frame rates: 4,9,18,24,36,56 + single frame Shutter degree: Var. Fades Lap dissolve of 90 frames Interval timer with 1,10,30 second intervals Remote control socket Flash contact Weight: 1280 g Single-system sound Auto / Manual Recording Level Control 6 X AA batteries Also comes with a case and manual. I'm asking $850. Message me if interested!

Yes, I've seend diy solutions for lens weight support. I guess this will just have look ridiculous!:P

Right now I'm doing research on a DIY DoF adapter that would attach to my current lens which is mounted on my Beaulieu 6008S. Is there a solution where I can simply attached a DoF adapter straight on to the body of the CMount Beaulieu? Aside from that where have people found the sources for their own DoF solutions.

I guess what I'm asking is, can I attach a 35mm lens adapter with this ring?

I recently got a cybershot H20 from bestbuy. I'm using for simple youtube vids and short documentaries. I'm eventually going to upgrade to a DSLR (perhaps the T2i depending on its success). For now it's just me and the H20 and even though it's not a high end camera for not so high end projects that doesn't mean that I don't want to get the best image from it. So, I noticed there is an adapter ring for it, the VAD-HA. It's a 71 mm diameter adapter. I was wondering, could I attach any 71 mm lens to it? Does it have some kind of proprietary connection or is it a simple thread? I couldn't much info beyond a price. A price I'd only be ok with if I could use a lens that I already own.

Thanks for all of the recommendations. I'll have to take a look at some youtube samples.

I thought for sure that I posted this project already but I could not find it in my searches. Oh well, the title of this film is Charlie Christ: The Gospel According to Fools. If you could not tell, it's a religious satire. Here's the public plot: Why are we here? Who created us? A multinational conglomerate called Veratech has found the answer to these questions. This conglomerate discovered the gateway to heaven and has met God. Now as a result, the nations of the world are getting nervous, nobody trusts each other, WWIII breaks out and God is pissed! Well, we asked for it, Judgment Day has been declared! The horsemen come down, cities burn, armies fall and just when the light of humanity is going to be extinguished forever; a lone hero emerges. This hero’s name is Charlie Kemp and he has the knowledge & ability to pull humanity from the darkness. He’s got the guts but will he sell them on the black market to raise money for the glory? Find out in Charlie Christ: The Gospel According to Fools! Production: We've been shooting since June of 2007 and we should be wrapping up by June of 2010. It has been a long time, primarily because a majority of us are undergraduates working on this project during our free time. It is in fact a feature length film and was written by myself as well as two others. The entire film has been shot in Super 8mm and telecined into HD. We recently received substantial financing and are ready to get these reels out of the cans and on to digital for the post-process as we continue shooting. This Week's Media Update Here's a link to a "behind the scenes" clip to the film: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3ERD2e54HXA If you have questions please let me know! I'm going to post an update next week. See you then! P.S. If you are in the NYC area and want to help please come by. Our financing is limited to equipment expenses and the like. I'm not even getting paid and I'm: Co-Writer, Co-Producer, Co-Director, DP and I play the antagonist. None of those jobs see a check. This project is mostly for our enjoyment but if a career forms from it then that'd be nice too!

Thanks. Yes I've seen the flip. I haven't used it but seems a little too rudimentary. This is the Cybershot that I'm looking at: http://www.amazon.com/dp/B001OI2LV8/ref=as...ASIN=B001OI2LV8

I'm going to be making a series of short web videos over the next few months as well as some short documentaries. I'm looking to see if there are any great HD cameras that shoot progressive and are fairly cheap. I'm ok with bad sound because I'll be using a Zoom H4n for external audio. I was looking at the Sony Cybershot. It sells for $250 at Best Buy. It's nice, I worked with it on a project once but it will would be nice to have a little more lens control but I guess that's where the extra $500+ comes in right? Can anyone recommend a line of HD cameras that are in the consumer price range like the Cybershot? Would Cybershot be your first choice? I'm okay with whatever storage media, HDV, SD, CF whatever. For these projects which are more practical, I'm okay with auto-focus, exposure etc. just as long as it handles those functions well. Suggestions? P.S. this will be a temp camera for me as I will prob get a 7D in 7 months or so. However, I need something for the time being.

I actually haven't given it a shot yet for any application. I'll try it with a test, thanks!