Edward Koehler

That is definitely a result of the film or processing, not your camera or your projector. The only time I've seen anything like that is when I located a roll of lost film approx. a year after it was exposed, and it had suffered temperature changes. It was heavily solarized in the warm tones and highlights. Any chance the film was subjected to heat after it was exposed? Placed on or near a heater? You should consult with Pac-Lab. If it's something to do with their processing, then they need to know about it. But rest assured (and assure your wife) that is not the result of your camera or your projector.

Thanks for that, Jurgen. Looks very interesting, I just can't justify the expense on myself this time of year. Surely they'll run additional printings since it's getting so many pre-orders? A run of only 100 seems very limited.

Perhaps it was the lab's fault that he made the same basic error so many times growing up that he won't 'tolerate it anymore'.

Any student 'DP' or 'Producer', or independent filmmaker for that matter, who would send their footage off to be CROSS-PROCESSED without a general understanding of the results to expect from the chemical process hired would be solely responsible for the results yielded. Regardless of whatever 'look' or color balance they were intending to maintain, the resulting redshift would not be the liability of the lab. It is a cross-process, afterall. Any dramatically unexpected result would likely be due to their inadequate testing or research of the production workflow. But it sounds like you would blame the lab in such an instance... Is that right Karl? Correct me if I'm wrong but it seems to me you're indicating such results would be the fault of the lab. Please clarify. It's so thoroughly axiomatic that one should test any experimental process before shooting principle footage (to have some knowledge of what results to expect) that you're point seems extraordinarily pedantic. No one said you can process Fuji R25N in E-6 with complete color accuracy. It was offered as a cross-process alternative. Here's a recent UK music promo from a well-known pop act directed by an acquaintance that exhibits similar color approach:

So you do densitometer readings of a grey card on your S8 reversal then, eh Karl?

There is nothing personal in correcting your erroneous statements, Karl. It really is not about you.

Sorry, guys. My intention was to merely correct Karl's statement that single8 is 'dead'. It's not my intention to always be 'right', but I do endeavor to not be factually incorrect. Karl Borowski takes offense to my corrections to his factual inaccuracies, which is telling.

Carl Looper has not been suspended from Filmshooting. He's an active contributor and gets along quite nicely, unlike someone else who has now abbreviated their (similar) first name out of some apparent realization he has not exactly been making friends around here. I wonder if Karl has found out how to note shutter angle yet? He'll need to know that IF he ever surpasses loader.

That is incorrect, Karl. Fuji R25N will be produced until March 2012, RT200n until May 2012. They had announced the discontinuation for 2007 but continued production because of petitions from users. A few Cinevia stocks appear to still be available, supplied GK Film GMBH. There is also a B/W stock called RetroX availble from Tak at Retro Enterprises in Japan. http://onsuper8.blogspot.com/2009/06/rip-single-8-by-2012.html http://single8film.com/buyr25n.html http://film.club.ne.jp/english/eng_single8_film2003.htm http://www.super8.nl/english/e_film_new_fuji.htm

Ask anyone who has worked in camera dept. You're quite green to not know it.

The old Russian Lomo cameras are a different entity to the Lomography 'toy' cameras we refer to as 'Lomo'. Lomography AG is an Austrian company which was granted rights of distribution to the LOMO LC-A. I don't know if Lomography ever marketed the Lomo super 8 cameras, but it would seem that if they have a working relationship with Lomo on the LC-a, could (or would) they market and distribute one of the Russian Lomo Super 8 cameras? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lomography

He's also not the only one here who makes a living in the film industry. He's loaded a few jobs and seems to think that renders him some superior status to come in this forum and belittle its contributors, assuming any Super 8 enthusiast must be amateur. He comes here to inflate his own ego, rather than to contribute anything of worth. Such a personality is not well-received in the film industry, which is likely why he's loading jobs using short ends left over from a Domino's commercial. It's not just on this one point that Borowski is gravely mistaken. One of the projects I'm editing at the moment is a 'making of' video for a food product commercial shot in 35mm. This is a national commercial with a decent budget shot on fresh stock. The footage consists of the original commercial and behind-the-scenes HDV and Super 8 footage. The output resolution is ProRes 444 1920x1080. This is not the only, or last, paid project in the world to use Super 8 in this way. Filmmakers will continue to use Super 8 for its distinct characteristics. Borowski only demonstrates his ignorance in his continued contempt for Super 8, and all other formats not deemed 'professional' by him alone. I won't be addressing him directly any longer, and I think it's best we all do the same.

I'm tempted to reply to Karl... but let's not feed him any longer, now that we know what he is.

^Some great points, Robert.

Agreed. Super 8 is a niche format now, used by broad range of individuals from hobbyists to professionals. On occasion, you'll see it used in music promos, skate films, documentaries, commercials and feature films... used by many professionals when it's idiosyncratic characteristic lends well to the story. Good storytellers don't limit themselves to whatever is perceived as 'professional'. They select from a wide variety of tools and techniques, and would use a modified Fisher Price pixelvision if it augments the storyline. A good friend is an Academy Award and BAFTA winner (for cinematography), and it should come as no surprise that he is also a Super 8 enthusiast. He happens to love grain structure, as do many of us here. I would ask what Karl he thinks of a film like 'Natural Born Killers', but I no longer care. And yes, Fred... the retro-cool appeal of super 8 could be exploited by a company like Lomo. A motion picture camera does not need to be complicated, it just needs to work. Lomo is not going to produce something like a Nizo or better. It would likely be more along the lines of the old Bentley S8 cameras. Toy cameras intended anyone who might want to shoot some super 8 at a music festival, perhaps of their child halloween, of their best friend's wedding, or produce a short art film on a non-existent budget through a plastic lens. I don't see why that sort of thing needs to be denigrated as 'crap' or not professional. I had that attitude just out of film school, because I'd been taught to acquire the best signal to noise ratio possible. Then I stumbled upon Super 8 and have loved it's characteristics ever since. I actually did not shoot Super 8 until after film school... having shot mile upon mile of 16mm and 35mm, as well as a good variety of professional and broadcast video formats.