Nicholas Rapak

The problem here is not the lens, but the film. The highest resolution microfilm is only capable of 140 lp/mm, so it is impossible to get 176 lp/mm out of a frame of Super 8 film.

I would put the cans in a ziploc bag, and then freeze them. That way the condensation will form on the bag and not on the can. Another option, depending on the size of the cans, would be to put them in a vacuum-sealing bag and seal them. That way, almost no air will be outside the can itself, and hopefully the air at the warehouse was relatively dry (which is likely, unless you are dealing with a shady dealer). I have done the vacuum-sealing method several times with 100ft loads of 16mm film, and it has always worked out fine.

If you would like to test this one roll, I would like to recommend BPS Film Lab in Batavia, IL. They charge $11 for the cart to be developed, and $30 for up to 200 ft. of telecine to Mini DV. I have not tried their telecine services before, but their developing is clean and scratch-free. They don't have a website, but you can contact them by phone: 630-879-8200.

The date is still noon on December 30, 2010. This entire "December 10" issue came from one AP reporter who transcribed "December '10" as "December 10th". Nobody else bothered to cross-check the info, and the faulty date was spread throughout the media. And if you don't believe me: http://dwaynesphoto.com/

The date is still noon on December 30, 2010. This entire "December 10" issue came from one AP reporter who transcribed "December '10" as "December 10th". Nobody else bothered to cross-check the info, and the faulty date was spread throughout the media. And if you don't believe me: http://dwaynesphoto.com/

This question is extremely ambiguous. If we were watching VHS quality scans of 35mm and Super 8 on a 12 inch TV screen, it would be difficult to tell the difference. However, if you were to get 4K scans of both and project them onto a movie screen, the difference would be mind-blowing. All film has a certain amount of silver that can capture a certain amount of information. 35mm has more silver in it than Super 8, so it can capture more information. In addition, the factor by which an image is enlarged is very important. 35mm academy is a 13x larger frame than Super 8. When you are enlarging an image 500x or more, that 13x size difference will make a tremendous difference in apparent resolution

Portra 400 uses Vision3 technology, so the technologies are already there in the MP world.

Thomas, Who's your supplier? I need some of the "good stuff", if you know what I mean. ;)

They return it on a 50' spool with leader attached.

Sure. I don't know of a single lab that processes R8 after splitting, they just process as 16mm, than split. All you have to do is ask.

The turnaround for B&W was pretty good for a small operation. It got delivered to them on Wednesday, and went out the following Monday. The E-6 was a little slower, at about a week from delivery to ship.

I just got back two rolls of PXR (7276) and one roll of E100D Super-8 from BPS Film Lab in Batavia, IL. I only heard of this lab from John Schwind, the regular 8mm guy. After finding few reviews of this lab, I decided to send in a few carts. The results from the E-6 was as clean and well-processed as any of the big name labs, but I was really impressed by the PXR. This PXR was stored at room temperature on a shelf for the past decade, and I wasn't sure how good it would turn out. The results were far better than I expected, and at only $9.50 a roll for B&W, and $12.50 for E-6, I am just surprised no one else has used this lab. P.S. They also do Super-8 color neg, 16mm E-6, B&W reversal and neg, and 16mm color neg.

I would say SD. It's only a test roll, so the extra quality isn't absolutely necessary. Also, for someone like me, the extra $20 is another roll of my favorite film in my camera.

Something else I just thought of... If Kodak sells DS8 stocks, Wittner, KAHL, Pro8 and others are free to buy the cheaper-per-foot film, cut it down, and put it in their own carts. If they discontinue DS8, everyone is stuck using Kodak-filled carts. I have a feeling that most of the DS8 was sold to these few retailers, and now with 100D coming out from Kodak, these orders were canceled.

From what I heard, the sales of DS8 were abysmal, below even that of R8 E100D. John Schwind reported selling less than 1,000 feet of it last year. I guess that when Kodak decided to make E100D the main Super 8 stock, the sales were not enough to justify keeping the cat number in stock. In addition, I believe Super-8 is now slit from 35mm stock, although this is only a rumor.

I never knew this existed. Thanks for finding this!

I have several old boxes of Super 8 film with date codes as such: 802/906 5437 Is there any way to decode this into a production date? The film was not cold stored, and I need to find out how much to adjust exposure by.

Yes. "Double 8" film is actually 16mm film that is perforated with twice as many perfs as regular 16mm. The film is exposed on one side, flipped over, and exposed on the other side. The processed film is then slit in half and spliced together to form an 8mm film. For this film, you need a different camera. The good thing is that double 8 cameras are cheap and most can accommodate any film stock you put in them. If you are looking for a good, sturdy double 8 camera, I would recommend the Cine Canonet 8 or the Minolta Zoom 8. They both have auto exposure and are battery-powered. The only issue is that both use a mercury battery, so you will need to use a Wein cell or the MR50 battery adapter to use the meter properly.

I have to agree with Oliver. Those effects, with the "burned" film and the weird colors, are much more prevalent in double 8mm film. With Double 8, you had to expose the beginning, middle, and end of the film in order to thread the film between the two spools. Since light is always uneven, some sides of the spool were more burned than others, resulting in the effect. Usually, it was about 1' at the beginning, 2' in the middle, and another foot at the end. Since there is no threading of a cartridge in Super 8, you can't really get those effects.

I would keep it R8 because not only can you use those stocks that John Schwind gets from Kodak, you can also get any double perfed 16mm film converted to Double 8 by Edward Nowill in the UK.

I haven't had any experience with the motion film. but I know the still version of R100 won't work as a negative because of an opacification layer that has to be removed by reversal bleaching.

I recently came across an old Super-8 cart of PXR 7276. It was stored in an air-conditioned room for the past several years, but there was no special storage. I have no clue of the actual age of the film, and I don't know how to decode the date code. I am going to try to shoot the film on nothing important. I was planning on overexposing a stop to compensate for age, but I don't know which process to run it through. Would it be better to expose at 25 and process in D-96, or is it okay to rate at 50 and process in D-94A?

PXR and TXR use the same process, so it makes no difference to the lab. At least there's some good news.

200 feet is fine, but until someone decides to re-introduce 200' Super 8 cartridges, DS8 is pretty much the only option that we have. I mean, there are 8mm wide bulk rolls from Wittner, but I feel that jitter and stability will be a bigger problem with narrower film.

I would like to see an option for DS8, as I like to film with longer reels.