Martin Baumgarten

The hype that Super 8mm is 50% larger than Regular 8mm is just that...hype. It was based mainly on projection cropping since they are less severe on the Super 8mm projectors...well..the better ones. The 8mm projection gate cropping standard was based on the one used for 16mm, and applied to the smaller frame, it was harsher than it needed to be. Later higher end projectors for Regular 8mm didn't crop as severely. Many enthusiasts even filed out their projector gates to a more 'normal' perspective.

Thus, focal lengths for both formats aren't all that dissimilar. The "normal" focal length for Regular 8mm is 12.5mm and for Super 8mm it's 15mm. Although many Regular 8mm camera lenses for normal are 13mm. Remember, the 'normal' standard has more to do with perspective, in maintaining that relative to all gauges. What's really usable for normal, is relative of course. I think most of us prefer a wider angle than what is set as normal focal length. That being said, the basic prime lens builtin to virtually all beam-splitter Super 8mm cameras if you were to remove the front zoom standard is 15mm. And the same goes for those later model Regular 8mm cameras that had zoom lenses, but with a 12.5mm or 13mm prime lens in there. [Normal 8mm, Double 8mm, Standard 8mm etc, with apologies for those outside of the USA since it's common for us to refer to the old bootlace as Regular 8mm].

Anyhow, this gives you a reference starting point, and the other posting stating that Super 8mm was 1.3x larger is on the mark, so I would use that to compute relative focal lengths, to get the same image magnification compared to the Super 8mm counterpart and vice-versa.

Hope my two cents here helps.

When adjusting the exposure in Manual mode on any of the NIZO S-xxx series cameras, yours included, the battery power voltage makes no difference. Since the camera relies on power to set the exposure, the knob becomes a potentiometer and you're just regulating voltage to the galvonometer/needle/aperture unit.

So the setting (F-Stop) you see displayed, IS the one you are setting it at. Some else useful, is that once you know the variation the 1.5 volt batteries will make on your given camera, you can always take that amount into account when setting the exposure in Manual mode; thus having factored that in, you will always be able to use the builtin light meter.

The NIZO S-481 is a nice camera, much more compact owing to the smaller zoom lens size. Also, that smaller lens allows ease of use of many lower cost filters, after market wide angle lenses, and of course, being able to shoot easily with an Anamorphic lens as well.

Not all Super 8mm cameras require battery power to set them in Manual Exposure mode, but the NIZO S series do. The main thing here for you though, is that it works and works fine. Good luck on your film projects!

Well, if using either the JOBO 1000 or 1500, then the reel capacity is 5 - 35mm reels, or the length for 8 inches (225mm) and the wrap-around length of the diameter is 10 inches (202mm), so that 8 x 10 inch paper can be processed. IF you were to design your own round film frame, whereby you'd wrap the Super 8mm film around the outside, then the maximum amount such a design would allow is 16.5 feet. This is too short for a 50ft (15m) length of film. So, you'd have to design the film reel, so you could wind film up on an inner part of it, then to a 2nd stage, and then onto the outside, which would be the 3rd stage. If the smallest inner part would hold say, 10ft, the 2nd stage 13ft and the outside 16.6 feet, the Total would still only be shy of 40 feet. Even so, such a design would have to be a bit complex, yet easy enough to master for loading an entire length of film. With some flexibility, it should be possible to accommodate an entire 50 feet of film. Personally, I prefer manual film processing, since as nice as machines are, they have their drawbacks of course.

On another note, you sent me a message regarding the JOBO processor for Super 8mm. [i'm at Super8mm at aol dot com] This is an entirely different design; the JOBO Super 8 tank is a large 12 inch diameter spiral reel design, which sits on a loading platform with a feeding finger, and has a shaft for holding a 50ft film reel to which you would've already spooled the film onto from the cartridge core. This is all done in total darkness, and the spiral reel is then loaded into the processing tank, which has a light-tight cover. The design layout is virtually identical to the one for 16mm and other spool film formats. None of which is compatible with your JOBO ATL processing machine of course, sorry.

Hope this helps. Get inventive and make a rack design you can load into the film processing tube for your ATL.

Good luck!

Sorry, goofed up here previously in attempting to reply.

The ILFORD ID11 will work fine for processing TXR or PXR films as nice continous tone B&W Negative images. [on another note regarding Color Neg: sorry about my silly typo it's C-41 of course, NOT C-42]

The tip for cutting the film into smaller segments is NOT intended to process your entire film that way....as you'd get some uneven processing as well as emulsion damage problems. The purpose is to process TEST shots using only one cartridge of film, and then to compare the results and decide which route would be the best option for whatever you plan to do on your film project. This way, only the cost of a single cartridge of film is involved, yielding several tests if needed....and of course low cost processing of these tests, instead of having ot send several equivalent cartridges of film to the lab for processing (or the involved work of doing several films yourself).

For professional processing results, I suggest learning to load the LOMO spiral reels correctly and using that (or other similar ones: Powell Tank, Superior Bulk Film Super 8 Tank, JOBO Super 8 Tank etc). While it's actually easier and quicker to load the film in the dark once you've practiced many times with scrap film in room light.....it is also quite possible to set up a Video camera which has Night-Shot on it (using IR imaging) on a tripod. The viewfinder (NOT the flipout sidefinder!) will be facing away from the workbench or table and will not harm the film, since you eye will be over it anyway. That way, should you need the extra assurance of seeing what you're doing, you'll be able to.

Regarding a change in processing time for shorter bits of film......that is not necessary. Using the LOMO tank and the 1500 ml of chemistry or thereabouts, for either one roll or two rolls of Super 8mm, or even short bits...the times are all the same. If you want to just process some short bits of film, for TESTING, using a NIKOR or similar type roll film tank will work.....but yes, the film bits will touch and there will be possible scratching and some parts with incorrect processing due to emulsion contact. But then, the purpose of doing this is for TESTING to see how modifying a certain process will look. Then applying the test results to real project film and processing that correctly in proper equipment to yield usable results.

As for development times, it depends on exposure, desired negative density and contrast etc. KODAK states " TRI-X 7266 Negative Processing

This film can be processed as a negative by conventional methods and will yield satisfactory results. Some loss in speed and an increase in granularity will likely occur." I fully concur, so do some exposure and processing tests. Typically, a loss of at least 1/2 Stop will occur when processing as B&W Negative. You can make this up by slightly pushing the film as well. It looks quite nice either way, adjusting exposure or increasing development time slightly. But, you will need to shoot a few short segments and bracket your exposures and see what you like. Or, if using Automatic exposure, shoot and then cutup the film and process a segment one way, check the density etc...and then make the necessary time adjustment to process the rest etc.

Good luck!

Thanks Martin,

 

Thanks for all the info, lots of help.

And brilliant news about the b+w, I have access to ID11 (which I believe is extremely similar to D-76, the same processing times) for free which will keep my costs down to just the film which I can get quite cheaply :) I also have some TMax developer which works great for trix photos so I may try that at some point.

Thanks for the tip of cutting it into smaller segments, hadn't thought of that. I'd just been having nightmares of getting 50 feet of film onto the spiral correctly and evenly in the dark, 10 feet or so per process seems much more manageable. Although wouldn't less film in the tank make the times quite different than a full roll, shorter times for less film? Maybe only 3 or so segments and then increase the time slightly when doing a full roll.

If its in segments I may just dump it in a normal empty tank as I quite like the sort of marks you get. Incidentally would this be alright for a whole roll? I have access to a proper super 8 tank, but would it be possible to just dump it all in a large empty tank, say one that holds 3 35mm photo neg, or would it all be pushed together too much?

Any ideas of rough times in comparison to b+w negative photos? A guess for me would be ID11 (pretty much the same as D-76) at 7mins, 9mins and 11mins or should I widen the tests? Although I guess I can see after the first 1 how much needs doing so I can work it out as I go along, maybe start at 9mins and work from there up or down.

 

Thanks

Hi John. You can use your C-42 kit to cross-process Ektachrome 100 Daylight without any problem. It will be developed as a Color Negative, but without the typical orange masking that a true Color Neg filmstock has. Thus, it will be very easy to telecine, just using the NEG position on whatever video camera you are using for transfer. It will help if you have one with exposure adjustment also....but if not, if you can just vary the light output of your transfer projector...that will also work.

ALSO, there isn't a difficult to remove remjet anti-halation backing on the EK100D film, as there is on the Vision 200T and Vision 500T films. So, really, it's very easy. Transfer via using the NEG mode, works quite well, and there is minimal color correction needed.....as long as the original filmwork was done under the right color temp conditions, using a Filter for Daylight and without for Tungsten etc. As for projecting the film, it's not normally recommended, but you can do so. The reason they all state not to, is to avoid any projection tram lines and other projection wear, so the neg stays clean for transfer or for printing (which few consider but is available). We used to shoot film and process as NEG in both B&W or Color and use it to insert into shots where something strange or other-worldly is going on. And yes, you can just transfer it as a Negative and then flip it later in your software. Since it doesn't have the orange masking.....it reverts quite nicely to a Color Positive image.

LASTLY, also yes...you can cross-process TRI-X 7266 (or any 7278, or even PLUS-X 7276/7265 if you have any) as a B&W Negative film using B&W Negative Chemistry........use D-76 or similar for a nice smooth even toned film useful for transfer or printing, or use a higher contrast developer for a high contrast look. IF you use a typical B&W Reversal Kit/process, and just process it as a B&W Negative, it will have much higher than normal contrast.....so be forewarned. Using just a single roll of film, you can shoot several tests, and cut it up into segments and process each segment differently, and you'll have good comparison tests of various processing effects, without having to waste lots of film. Hope this helps.

Jorge, the ground glass image is what shows the actual focus sharpness. Make sure when setting ground glass clarity, you either remove the lens from the camera, or shift it into a way off macro position so that the lens image is nothing but white light.....keep the aperture fully open as well. Now, adjust the viewfinder dioptre so that the ground glass is clear and you can see its texture. IF you try doing this while an image is showing, it will throw off the adjustment since visually you'll be distracted by an image. All you want to see is the ground glass grain texture only. Once this is set, focus the lens sharply on an object, preferably newsprint taped to the wall and then compare the distance setting on the lens scale to that of a good measuring tape. As long as the lens is in good condition and not damaged or off-focus, the measurement at 5ft, 10ft, and 15ft settings should match up between the lens scale and the measuring tape.

The aerial image usually is always clear and in focus when you remove the ground glass screen away. If it is not, then there could be some other problem. The Ground Glass screen setting might need some adjustment, since it is on a movable platform to flip in and out of the viewfinder path. If you already have the camera open to set the X/Y alignment, you should be able to see the Ground Glass Frame as it moves in and out of position, and check to see that it is fully in the in position. If the moving device has come out of adjustment, this will have to corrected of course.

Anyhow, to double check this, you'll have to check the actual focus in the film gate. This is not easy to do without a filmgate prism of some kind. However, you can make do with another method. Cut a small piece of Sctoch Tape. The tape is translucent similar to ground glass, and is very thin, enough for this experiment setup. Make the X mark on the tape's STICKY Side. It will have to be the size of the Super 8 Frame of course, and then carefully place the tape on the Film Gate so it is flat and accurately lined up. Another method is to use a piece of clear or light gray Super 8 scrap film.....however, this is very difficult to keep accurately in place in the camera's gate.

Place the camera on a sturdy tripod, set it from a wall which has an 8 x 10 inch piece of white paper taped to the wall, set the camera's distance at 5 feet (the minimum focusing distance for either the 6mm-66mm Schneider, 8mm-64mm Angenieux lens etc), Now using a small strong light, such as a MagLite or small bright multi LED light (flashlight, handtorch etc), shine this through the Film Gate with the Shutter in the OPEN position. To get a proper beam of light, you will need a small mirror at a 45 Degree Angle, otherwise there will be too much light loss. Adjust the zoom lens somewhere to 40mm to 60mm, so that the illuminated field on the paper is easily visible. The X pattern should be sharply in focus on the white paper. You will y have to dim the room lights to be able to study the image. Allow your eyes to get used to the darkened room, before doing this test. This will take at least 10 to 15 minutes for them to get used to the dark enough. Otherwise, even with a small bright light, the image will still seem a bit dark and it will be frustrating to determine image sharpness. To get a brighter image, you will have to set the camera closer to the paper, but would first have to reset the lens macro focus setting in the viewfinder until it is sharp. I recommend taping the Macro Lever so it doesn't move on you. I recommend taping the camera lid so it doesn't close on you. You can also set the camera on it's side on the Tripod, so that the film chamber is more readily accessable and it makes your work easier. Use a good grade electrical tape that doesn't leave residue behind.

I do recommend having someone help you, as an extra pair of hands also with a small flashlight so you can see what you're doing without losing your night-vision will be very useful.

Also, while more difficult, it is possible to use an old scrap Super 8 cartridge as the basis for building a FilmGate Focus Checker. Gut the cartridge so you can build your unit. With a small front surface mirror at a 45 degree angle, an accurately positioned piece of etched glass, marked plastic etc to represent the Film's Emulsion Position at the gate of the cartridge....all cut so to fit into the camera gate when the Dummy Cartridge is inserted......and then a strong Film Lupe such as an 8x power minimum but ideally a 20x or so, will help you see the focused image. With such a Gate Checker, you won't need to fiddle in darkness, but can examine the film plane focus and compare it to the viewfinder. This type of a gizmo will work with any side loading Super 8 camera. IF using a rear loading Super 8 camera, it's a bit easier to build as no mirror is needed. You would only have to have a small focusing telescope type design built thru the rear of the cartridge wall and lined up with the small ground glass or plastic focusing screen. KODAK used to offer something similar many years ago for their Double 8mm Magazine cameras and their 16mm 50ft Magazine cameras.

Focusing disparity on Super 8 cameras from what is seen in the viewfinder to what is captured on film, has always been one of the problems of many Super 8 cameras and filmmakers. It either requires several actual film tests and processing of course to check and double check, all requiring extra time and cost. Also, if a fixed lens (or removable lens even) can be checked and either remarked as to how to set it by scale to know for sure the focus setting, it will be immensely helpful. The only other option is costly lens collimation, and this of course just isn't worth bothering with on lower cost cameras. Lastly, despite the cost of film & processing........one can use a single cartridge of film to check many cameras, or even just to check one, by only using a few feet, and then using the film in a known working camera for movies. Then only a small section of film has been used for the test in another camera or cameras. Do slate the test sequences so you know which camera it belongs to!

I hope this helps. Otherwise....welcome to the age range of those of us who have eye focusing problems as we get older!

Best regards,

Martin Baumgarten

My copy arrived a few weeks ago. Very rich quality, typical of the work we've all come to expect from Atoll Media. I enjoyed perusing this short but interesting work of Mr. Lutz. I was hoping for more details, perhaps larger photos, but then, I do such a variety of laboratory taskings here myself....only need to go to work to delve any deeper into it. I'll say this for certain, the book leaves the reader wanting more! And it will help stimulate a filmmaker's ideas and perhaps make some considering doing more of their own special effects work themselves. Thank you for making this available.

Best regards,

Martin Baumgarten

Very nice. In any language, it's the enthusiasm and love for the format as well as film, that comes across. The woman at the end puts it all into a relative perspective, "...it has film grain, and it's the grain that captures the soul of the subjects being filmed..". Another mentions the organic nature of film, and how it can be seen, held, felt, analyzed that gives the Super 8 medium something unique. I of course, have to totally agree. Thank you for this vignette done in Single-System Sound on Super 8mm.

Martin Baumgarten

Plattsburgh, NY U.S.A.

Hi Colin,

The OLYMPUS PEN 8 EE was made in two versions, a cream colored smooth paint scheme and the spackle black paint scheme. They were available in three lens variations:

(1). Basic camera with lens shade facia using just the basic internal 13mm F/1.8 fixed focus optic [normal focal length for 8mm format]

(2). Camera with F/1.8 focusing 9mm to 20mm manual zoom lens.

(3). Camera with F/1.8 focusing 9mm to 27mm manual zoom lens.

Both camera versions have interchangeable lens options, so using the Olympus screw mount {about 19mm or 3/4 inch} you can use just the prime built in 13mm lens, either of the zoom addon lens units, or a Telephoto or Wideangle addon lens. The mount is NOT compatible with the common Regular 8mm D-Mount, and is smaller than the common C-Mount.

Removing the front zoom or lens shade addons via unscrewing them, makes for a very compact camera.

Exposure is automatic only, however you can dial in the ASA/ISO filmspeed on the dial just below the lens, and thus be able to fine-tune your autoexposure via adjusting this dial [e.g. light or darker images as well as compensating for perhaps a weaker responding exposure system as well as the difference in battery voltage of modern replacement batteries]. There is also an aperture scale on the right side of the camera, visible through a body window port. While a bit crude, if you tape some gripable tape or rubber to the ASA dial, it's also possible to force the camera to do a Fade-out or Fade-in by rotating it in the direction that will close the lens down or open it up. Also possible is addition of filters to the lens and then just adjusting the ASA dial to compensate for the Filter's Exposure Factor.

OTHER FEATURES: Camera runs at 16fps, Reflex viewfinder (although no reflex focusing, must focus via lens scale if using either Zoom Lens module. Focusing is fixed focus 8ft to Infinity with base prime 13mm lens at F/1.8 and minimum focus changes with Depth-of-Field in brighter light. If using either Telephoto or Wideangle addon lenses, focus varies from shorter DOF and greater minimum shooting distance with Telephoto, to very generous DOF and minimum focus distance when using Wideangle. Electric remote release via rear port, Cable release socket on top camera run trigger button, Run Lock Switch on right side of body to allow a release lock, or a continous run via first depressing the top button and then flipping the run lock lever forward to "L". The "R" is for Run position, and if put in the "L" position it will prevent accidental exposure. To remove the lens, you first must unscrew the Zoom Lever from the lens since it will hit the ASA dial otherwise.

Do make sure the light meter works, easy to do via watching the lens aperture scale move when you have the meter battery installed......otherwise, if she's non-functional, you're limited to full aperture only and can still use the camera, but then only by adding Neutral Density filters in various light situations to control exposure.

Hope this helps, and that you have fun with your camera!

I would suggest contacting Dwayne's Photo Lab since they must have hundreds of empty Super 8 Sound cartridges, and to contact Retro-8 in Japan for Single-8 cartridges.

Magnifico! I have been working the past few years on making Super 8 Sound film; experimenting with both Color and B&W Reversal. My one big project was trying to use the wonderful FOMAPAN R-100, but there are some difficulties, and the high cost. I have felt that the new EKTACHROME 100D should be a good replacement, and have bulk stock here to work on for this project. However, I'd be interested to know if he is willing to sell sound striped stock, as that would make things a lot easier for me. The film lubrication & cartridging and packaging alone is plenty. I figure the film which has some reduced contrast if rated at ISO 50 and is pulled in processing, could also be offered that way, allowing for easier use in bright light; in addition to ISO 100 and even ISO 200 (with push processing). --- Over the past 30 years, I've offered reloading of KODAK Super 8 into FUJI Single-8 cartridges, and also vice-versa, of FUJI's Single-8 into KODAK cartridges....usually it was Sound film. This was more so at the end of sound film, as FUJI kept making it for a year after KODAK ceased production of their now long missed Ektasound films. While those that would be interested in actually using Super 8 sound film is small, I feel there's still a market for it. Anyone that has ever shot single-system sound using any of the nice sound cameras out there can attest to good audio quality, even at 18fps. Anyhow, just thought I'd interject some of my own thoughts and praise for this new attempt. Kind regards, Martin Baumgarten

ADDENUM to my previous post: The unit for the ELMO projectors is the ELMO EF400 Continuous Loop Device and will fit on top of all ELMO ST and GS series projectors.

Of all the Super 8 (& 8mm) editors, there are two main design types regarding the film placement. The BAIA corporation editor-viewers and all those made by BAIA under store brand names (Sears, Wards, K-Mart's Focal, Pennys etc) require the film to unravel from the Left side Supply in a counter-clockwise manner, thus the emulsion of the film is downward. They made cheap ones and some better large screen ones. If they are clean and work well, and you are careful, they'll do the job. Those large screens are nice and bright.

However, my recommendation is for the other design type, whereby the film unravels from the left Supply side reel in a clockwise direction, just as it does from the projector.....so the emulsion is in the up position. Editors made in this manner are the numerous ones from GOKO Japan, which also made them for HAHNEL, ERNO, ELMO, SEARS, and many others. They will have a similar if not exact appearance to their GOKO counterparts (since they are made by GOKO), and will also have the "NF System" moniker....referring to the polygon prism method (versus the 2 or 4 sided prisms of virtually all previous editors which have considerable flicker. The GOKO units are nice, easy to use, and use their polygon 16 facet prism (NF system). They did make a couple smaller ones that use a 12 facet prism, and while that alone is not a problem, the sprocket drive used puts too much torque on the film and prism rotation mechanism. These are easy to tell, since they have a film sprocket visible just before the film gate. Whereby the other design has the film move over the filmgate, and the sprocket is a large diameter one incorporated on the side of the polygon prism. This design with the large sprocket on the prism side causes virtually no torque on the film sprocket holes, and allows for very easy transport.

GOKO also made both manual and motorized editors. Most allow attachment of a sound reproducer to which you can listen to the sound track via earphone or headphone. However using a manual crank or basic motorized unit will cause uneven sound reproduction. The main goal here was to be able to find a synch or editing spot to know where to cut the film so that there is the best tradeoff for picture and sound editing on single-system sound films. GOKO's high end machines, their 8008 and 3008 units allow for sound recording as well, since they are capstan run units with stable recording quality at both 18fps or 24fps, with the higher model allowing recording on both tracks and also in Stereophonic sound. GOKO made a capstan run editor for ELMO which is a nice machine but without recording capability. These are all very gentle on film.

Other well made machines that are somewhat less easier to locate are: BAUER, BRAUN (Nizo), and the well made metal bodied MINETTE. The MINETTE was made in both stand alone units with film reel arms, or as a free standing viewer only requiring separate film reel arms mounted onto a baseboard. Lastly, while there were many other units made by other makers such as Chinon, the older well made metal units made by CRAIG-KALART in the USA if clean and in good condition will work fine also.

Hope this helps you out some.

ELMO made a 400ft (60m)capacity top mounting endless loop unit that had the film reel sit horizontally on top of most of their ST series Super 8mm projectors. These have shown a couple times over the past few years on eBay, but they are kind of rare. EUMIG also had a co-axle projector so the film didn't have to be rewound and thus could also be run endlessly; but, there were some problems regarding long term wear & tear due to cheapness of the main axle design. This could probably be remedied with repair if you located a non-working unit. However, my money is for locating the ELMO Endless Loop unit, which is a reliable mechanism, as most ELMO projector products are.

Those carefully worked out format and transfer and resolution details are terrific in showing the practically application of the Super 8 format. And I have to thank you for this great attention to detail, as it will help many wishing to shoot for the HD 16:9 format ratio.

This is only relative to the 16:9 HD aspect ratio, and only IF as filmmakers, you accept 'that' aspect ratio as the standard to aspire to. My own way of looking at all this is, shoot in the aspect ratio that you wish to best express your film story or artistic rendering in. You'll often note that even Cinematic releases when they go to DVD or Blu-Ray will still very often be in the original aspect ratio they were filmed in. Thus.....even with this so-called new standard of Television, viewers will still have black masking bars on the top and bottom of the image in order to yield the correct aspect ratio of the original production.

Many still like to project their films, and rightly so, even the film competitions are projected. By projection, I don't mean only in film, since even that isn't convenient or practical, thus the use of Digital Projection. And via Digital Projection, the original aspect ratio can be maintained on the screen, with minimal adjustment of the masking black side curtains to always show each aspect ratio at its best. So, I think in the end, all other considerations aside and notwithstanding, having fomented your ideas for your film project's end presentation......decide what aspect ratio your film will be in and work around that. Even the accepted film industry standard of 1.85:1 aspect ratio for non-anamorphic or other WIDESCREEN releases....is still wider than our now forced upon us all HDTV 16:9 system. So to show them correctly, as envisioned by their DPs is to show them masked with top and bottom black bars even on the HDTV, unless you watch them cropped down.

I recall watching an excellent epic presentation, on a 24 foot WideScreen, while living in England some years back, "The Battle of Britain" shot in full CinemaScope, across a couple continents to get all the aerial work & costumed recreators in.....with 4-track post synched sound and dialog on reel-to-reel.....and it was all filmed in REGULAR 8mm! It was a perfect example of how professional a film can be made, with a large host of actors, props, professional filmmaking technique, and yet, all done on the tiniest of film gauges. What a shame it would be to have to visually crop down such a production IF it was supposed to fill the 16:9 HD screen. For my two cents here, consider all the ramifications, costs, and technical considerations, and work in whatever aspect ratio you feel best conveys the not only the storyline, but the FEEL of the production you want to make.

In the end, you can film in Super 8's normal aspect ratio, but allowing more breathing room in your composition, if planning to crop the final image to fit into a wider presentation ratio in the video release.

Rumman, you already own perhaps one of the best Super 8 cameras ever made. The CANON 814 AutoZoom and the LEICINA Special, while both wonderful cameras, still won't necessarily yield you any better images. The NIZO already has the world renowned sharp Schneider-Krueznach optics on it. Also, the smaller diameter of the lens allows use of lower cost filters.

The noise level among all 3 cameras here is about the same. The quietest Super 8mm cameras ever made, are most likely the Sound NIZO cameras. To make yours quieter, just make your own sound barney for it....easily made just using a couple large oven mitts, cut an opening for the lens in front and the handle on the bottom, and use simple ties to keep it snug on the body. There's other methods, but something along these lines will work easily and reduce at least half of the noise from the camera...and with the microphone being placed near the subject and being a directional type, do some sound tests, you can pretty much eliminate camera noise.

The LEICINA Special is an interesting camera, but it can be a bit complex to use until you fully get used to it, and the NIZO is still easier to shoot with. And for a compact camera, you already have it....the NIZO S-481 is more compact than either of those other cameras which are also heavier. IF you want something for low-light use, you'll need to consider buying an "XL" designated camera, of which all three of these mentioned here are not. However, the NIZO does allow long exposure times, both in manual or automatic B mode, with exposures per frame up to ONE MINUTE! The LEICINA has timed functions, but you must also have the optional special functions box, the LT-1 or something like that...can't remember the exact designation at the moment.

This is why I always recommend that Super 8 filmmakers own a few different cameras. It's handy to have a couple cameras made just for low light use, and they don't have to be super expensive either. The Chinon made GAF SS-250 for example, has an F/1.1 lens, 220 degree shutter opening, films at 18fps, uses an external meter port, and can film in very low light. I used one once years ago with EK160A film to film off a theater movie screen. This is just an example, there are several affordable low light level cameras....another good one is the CANON 310 which can film just about in any light level. Many of these cameras are limited since they often do not have manual exposure override or EE Lock on them, film only at 18fps(which is fine for most work), and their meters only read the former standard notch codes for ASA 25/40 and ASA 100/160. But you can still work with that in low light even with films that are faster than those, since most often you'll need the aperture open fully regardless.

Regarding an INTERVAL TIMER, your NIZO already has that builtin......allowing you to shoot from 2fps down to one frame per minute, as well as expose each frame relative to the interval duration if you want to. The optional or after-market timers usually attached to the cameras via a mini-jack, so the camera has to have a magnetic closing shutter. Many of the timers made by MINOLTA, SANKYO, CANON etc will work on other camera makes as well. If you want a remote function, SANKYO made a radio control release unit, that could also be used configured with an external timer.

For Blowup, yes it is possible to blow up Super 8 to either 16mm or 35mm, but the cost is high and is based at the lab on the per foot cost of the format you are having it optically enlarged to. There are resolution and grain considerations, but it can be done....and has been done many times. Over the years there have been quite a few theatrical release films that have employed Super 8 footage for both short and long sequences as part of their 35mm production feature. e.g. Flatliners, Natural Born Killers, JFK to mention some.

So, save your money for film, use what you have, and maybe pick up a couple other cameras for continous low light filming for a fraction of what it would cost to get another high end camera or two.

Sadly, the NIZO S-801 Macro will only read Tungsten rated films up to ISO/ASA 160. So, it's close enough for the Vision 200T film, but not acceptable for the Vision 500T filmstock. The CANON will read both film types. That being said, you can always set exposure manually with the NIZO. Use the built in meter, knowing that whatever reading you get will be off by a little over 1-Stop, then factor that in and set the aperture manually using the manual override and the builtin viewfinder aperture scale.

Hi Steve,

The BOLEX reflex eyecups made to fit the BOLEX H-8/H-16 reflex cameras, work great. They are nearly a perfect fit and allow comfortable use for the naked eye. If you wear eyeglasses, they still work okay, but you'll have to press harder against the eyecup for full field vision.

Another method is to use the eyecups made for 35mm SLR cameras, those aftermarket versions. You'll have to remove the rubber eyecup from the small viewfinder frame, and might have to adjust it via cutting it a bit to get it to fit, but it works also well.

There are vendors on eBay lately that have been selling both BEAULIEU and BOLEX eyecups, at reasonable prices. I just bought another BOLEX eyecup from a vendor in Israel and they were fast in shipping it to me.

These BOLEX reflex (Rex) eyecups work great on many other Super 8 cameras, as I have fit them to several of GAF Anscomatic ST series cameras [sT-111, ST-111E, ST-602, ST-802, ST-1002 and others], and many other versions of these CHINON made cameras under other brand names.

Hope this helps you sort out your situation and keep you filming,

in Super 8!

Best regards,

Martin Baumgarten

Hi dubbing is an involved process. The old way via analogue was to loop the scenes or play them ready to record the audio directly onto the film. This is rarely done now, and you would still need to work in a similar fashion, timing all your scenes with dialog and having your voice actors dub their lines either using an audio into the computer, or an audio dub into the digital tape, or just record the lines via careful timing and trying to match the video onto a DAT, tape recorder or other audio recording device. Using the software in the computer, you can then move the audio around relative to the picture segments and either compress or expand it to make it fit, via dropping it into those segments. This can be as simple or as complex as you want it to be.

The NIZO S-481, it is a fairly quiet camera, but I would still suggest using a sound barney on it (which you can make yourself) and/or making sure that the sound recording microphones are near the subjects and at least 5ft or more from the camera for directional mics and 10ft or more if using a omnidirection mic. If filming indoors, try to keep the camera setup outside the room and film through an open doorway. This will keep most residual camera noise away. The camera is not crystal-synched but this can be done if desired. I have found it's not really necessary, since this NIZO, as do many Super 8 cameras, run quite smoothly enough. Shots of 30 seconds or less aren't any trouble at all, and I have done sequences on cassette tape over 2 minutes and it still all matched up quite nicely. I do recommend recording audio as the film is being made, even if you decide to dub some it later, as you'll have the original recording as a reference, both for duration and inflection of your actors' voices.

When filming and recording sound at the same time, make sure to SLATE your shot at the beginning (and/or at the end if possible) so you have a reference for the start point. Otherwise, it can be very frustrating to locate the exact start point. Shots were the actors' mouths are not distinctly visable can be more forgiving in having audio off slightly, but of course any facial shots closer up will require as tight a lip-sync as possible. That being said, I have seen many amateur and independant films where virtually all audio was dubbed later and it was apparant that it wasn't lip-synched, but still looked good as the magic of film pulled you in. As an example, look at all the spaghetti westerns that were filmed in Spain with a variety of actors from various countries speaking their lines in their native tonque, and then the voices were dubbed in for whatever country the film was released in. While watching these, you soon forget about the exact dubbing and get into the story of the film. So, to some extent, it's all relative to how you make your film, the story, the filming style, and other various techniques.

This is just from my own involvement, others will have practical application tips to add, and there is information on the net that can be helpful. My own films, I always shoot at 18fps for Super 8mm, even though many if not most professional productions are done at 24fps (25fps in Europe). Best regards, Martin Baumgarten

The process I use depends on the type and age of the KODACHROME film I am developing. For very old KODACHROME-II films and very old KMA-40 films, they are processed to a B&W Negative using conventional KODAK D-19 technical developer, with time and temperature based on what information the customer has provided to me about age and storage history. Otherwise, for most films exposed prior to 1985, I will process the films not longer than 3 minutes and at 68 F (20 C), with first having a 2 minute prewash stage. I used to use an anti-fog agent, but have not really noticed any benefit to doing so for very old films that suffer from severe age fog. Afterall, that silver has been ionized and will react to development, and no chemical added can distinguish between silver that has reacted to light energy or to radiant energy.

If a batch of films come in, I will test one first, and base the processing on my results. If films are severely age fogged, I will often lower the Developer temperature down to about 65 F so that I can still keep development time in the 2 min to 4 range. It's a delicate balance between getting images and getting nothing. You have to be careful to not make the times so short that you'll just get cloudiness in the images with little detail. Some films are so severe that to the eye, it looks like the film is completely black. But upon examination under a strong light, you will see the images. I transfer all films done this way to video for the customer, who gets back their processed film and usually the DVD. The films that yield a somewhat closer to normal density negative image, can be transferred via most any telecine method. The films that are so extremely dense will require a more conventional telecine transfer with a bright projector lamp in order to be able to see the image and render it to video.

B&W Reversal Processing of KODACHROME films: This really can only be done successfully with films that are in good condition, not too old, or have been cold stored prior to use, regardless of age. Otherwise, there isn't enough silver for the reversal stage due to the severe age fogging in old films, and the images will either be very faint with little detail, or nothing at all.....just clear film. To reversal process good KODACHROME film, just use the normal B&W Reversal process. Prewash the film 1 to 2 minutes prior to development, and you will have to push the development in the First Developer by at least 2 minutes over normal time. The reason is that KODACHROME will lose its effective filmspeed if processed to the exact time you would process Plus-X or Tri-X for example. If you do not compensate the time, then the final images will be too dark otherwise. IF you are using the newer KODAK D-94a formulation to process the film and the new permagenate Bleach solution, then you will have to conduct a test to determine your time in the First Developer based on density after processing, and also will have to extend the Bleaching time by twice as much in order to bleach out all the negative silver.

REM-JET Coating Removal: In the motion picture process, this is soaked to soften in a remjet removal bath stage, then buffed with buffing rollers at the tank exit stage while being rinsed with water at the same time. In manual processing, you will have to remove the remjet after all processing is completed. It is troublesome, and slow to remove. After the film has been properly washed free of the Fixer, soak the film in a solution of Borax & Water (2 to 4 tablespoons per Liter), at a temperature of 75 F to 80 F, for at least 5 minutes, longer if necessary. After soaking, remove the film from the processing tank or spiral reel, depending on what method you are using. Transfer the film to a takeup reel, and then place into a tray of the Borax solution. If you can make up a special plastic tray by gluing a small stud in the center upon which the reel can rotate, all the better. Then setup a rewind arm; I use a portable 3ft setup with 2 small Craig 8mm/16mm rewinds on a 3ft 2" x 4" board which I can clamp to the lab sink or countertop via a large C-Clamp. Use a good photo-grade sponge and have a 2nd tray of Borax solution, as you will pull the film from the holding tray, thru the sponge which you will keep soaked and submersed in the 2nd Tray, and the film will then pass to the Takeup Reel on the Winder Arm. The remjet backing should come off, just be careful to wind slowly and watch the removal upon takeup. Be advised, this is a very messy process, and you will have to rinse the sponge out many many times, usually after every 5 to 10 feet of film. It depends on how much came off during the processing itself, usually, not too much. Generally, you will have to wipe the film completely at least twice to get all the remjet off. Then once removed, you will have to wash the film for at least another 2 minutes to remove all traces of the Borax solution. Then use a Wetting-Drying Agent such as KODAK Photo-Flo Solution, chamois if desired and hang up onto a Film Drying Rack to dry.

NOTE: IF the remjet is very hard to remove, even after soaking for a long time, even if you have increased the solution strength by double, then you will have to use more physical force by squeezing the sponge harder and pulling the film thru just a couple feet at a time and checking for removal, and if not all off, backing the film and going over those 2 feet of film again, until the backing is off. On some very old films, you will find that there often are still small traces of the remjet backing, and even film cleaner won't remove it easily. For Newer and/or Cold Stored films, the remjet will come off.

SEPIA Tone: If you prefer a nice rich Sepia Brown Tone to the reversal image, then substitute KODAK T-19 Developer for the ReDeveloper. This is a simple solution of Sodium Sulfite and Water....but NOTE.....use plenty of fresh air, since not only does this stink of rotten eggs, but can be dangerous! No reversal exposure is necessary when using this Developer. The formula is as follows:

KODAK SULFIDE ReDEVELOPER T-19

Kodak Sodium Sulfide (Anhydrous) 20.00 grams

[NOT Sulfite!]

Water to make......................1.0 Liter

I have been able to use Sodium Sulfide Flakes, but they must be ground up prior to mixing using a mortar and pistol and it can be quite time consuming. If you use this, make sure you use a breathing mask and do the grinding in full fresh air.

Exact times, temperature, method, all depends on what chemicals are available to you in processing your own films, and also what processing method you are using: Rewind Tank, Reel & Trough, Rack & Tray, Spiral Reel & Tank etc. No secrets, just normal B&W Reversal Chemistry, either the original long time formulas, or the current D-94a process.

LASTLY, if you desire a NEGATIVE image instead of Reversal, you can make use any any conventional full emulsion speed continous tone Developer (e.g. D-76, Microphen, HC-110 etc) and adjust your process as necessary based on density results. I recommend shooting your own Control Strip so that you can fine-tune the Negative Development to whatever Gamma or Contrast Gradient you desire. Since most would be transferring the Negative images to Video with electronic reversal......a remote possibility is to print the film and strike a positive from it; but that is costlier.

Hope this is useful to you.

Martin Baumgarten - November 2010

The FUJI Single-8 format, via their cartridges, is still very much supported worldwide...though not anywhere as large as Super 8. That being said, even with the demise of FUJI's fine R25 and RT200 filmstocks and the official end of their processing coming up eventually, the support it has will allow filmmakers to continue using Single-8. Super 8 film is identical to Single-8 gauge-wise, and is on celluose-triacetate, versus FUJI's polyester base. So, it can be successfully reloaded into the FUJI Single-8 cartridges, but with less volume; nominally about 40ft (12m) versus the original 50ft (15m) of FUJI's original stock. So, it's a little bit less, but still allows one to use the many exceptional and fun to shoot with Single-8 cameras that were made.

RETRO-8 Enterprises in Japan and GK Film in Germany both avidly support the format. In England there was a rather strong support club, The Single-8 Society...and I would imagine they are still around in some form, but I haven't found them on the internet. [NOTE: I have a ZC-1000 camera and plenty of frozen R25 filmstock for sale, on consignment here if anyone is interested. It will go back on eBay again when I have time.] Actually, since Super 8mm film is being loaded into the Single-8 carts these days, it's better in some ways, since now anything shot with a Single-8 camera will intercut more easily with anything shot in a Super 8 camera on similar filmstocks; and no focus shift problems between intercutting the thinner original Single-8 stock with Super 8 footage.

Regarding home movie film processing.....it's just like anything else, if you have the time, patience, and equipment......you can do it, and do it quite well. Movie film is longer and that leads to lots of extra care required. However, that being said, I knew several teenagers that processed their own movie film, myself included. So, if a 13 or 14 year old can develop their own movie film, and have it look good, I think an adult could do it also.

As with anything in photography, you can be as technical as you want or need to be, within the realm of the medium, the goal is to achieve the results you are looking for. If something works well for you, even without the use of densitometers and other more elaborate and sophisticated methods of processing control, that's fine.....nothing wrong with that. People have been processing their own films, and doing printing and a plethora of laboratory work without the benefit of high end equipment. You can make up your own control strips shooting color charts and gray scales, using care in exposure accuracy, and use these to help fine tune your own developing solutions and technique. There's plenty of information out there to assist anyone interested in doing so. Is it worth doing yourself? Only you can answer that.

Not everyone wants to or needs to be involved in every facet of the process, since in the industry, professionals concern themselves mainly with image capture process. But it wasn't always that way. In the early days of cinema, the very cameras themselves could also become contact printers and projectors, and many of the filmmakers had their own labs to process their films. Even the great DeLuxe lab was doing manual film processing and drying the films on 10 foot or better diameter Film Drying Racks, prior to the commercial advent of the motion picture processing machine.

Anyhow, yes, Single-8 filmmaking is still very much alive, albeit smaller than the Super 8 users. But that goes also for Regular 8mm, Double Super 8mm, and yes, even 9.5mm.

Best regards,

Martin Baumgarten

Plattsburgh, New York USA

---> KODACHROME Processed as Black & White <----- [October 2010]

Yes, KODACHROME can be processed as Black & White, I do it all the time here. In fact, in default, so can virtually ALL photographic films. KODACHROME is a triple layer matrixed B&W film in reality [matrixed with gelatin filter layers for the 3 primary colors], and color dyes are added by 3 separate Color Developers relative to the formation of the Positive silver during the reversal process. All black metallic silver is removed during the Bleach and Fixer stages in the end, leaving only the positive color dyes. There's more to it than that, but that's it in a nutshell for this part of my answer.

Since KODACHROME is really only a B&W film, it is most often processed as a B&W Negative, usually done for all the old K-12 films and K-14 films that were exposed years ago but never processed. They have to be done as a Negative, since Reversal processing would leave a faint muddy image if anything at all, due to the severity of the age fog in the film. This is what is done for such old films here at PPS, at Film Rescue, and also at Rocky Mountain Film Lab (if they're still operating these days). To save images from those old films, that is the only way to process them, using a high contrast technical developer adjusted for the age of the film, and any resulting images then transferred to a video format (nominally DVD) and returned to the customer along with the film original.

However, IF the film is good stock, meaning having been cold stored since new and virtually as good as new, OR film of recent manufacture...... it can be processed as EITHER a Negative or Positive (via B&W Reversal processing). What does it look like? Pretty good if the film has been cold-stored. As a Negative, depending on what developer is used, it will have nice even tones and can be used to telecine the images just as with any negative stock. As a Positive image, done via B&W Reversal processing, the film looks pretty good, but is grainier than what we're used to expect out of KODACHROME. The reason is because processed as Color Reversal, the dyes overlap each other and are themselves virtually devoid of grain. The grain we see is the ghost image of the grain from the original B&W Positive image that is necessary to create the Color Dye image. So, yes, it's pretty good, just grainier, and grainier than PLUS-X 7276 or 7265......but less grainy than TRI-X 7278 or 7266.

This is one reason I'm not worried about using up my KMA Sound filmstock, since it can still be processed as B&W and I'd rather have B&W Sound film, than no sound film at all; or try to race and use up what I have just to use it up and have to pay all the processing costs to do that, without really having enough time to use it properly for some project. But it is somewhat expensive to have it processed this way at any of the labs, unless you wish to tackle it yourself...which is quite doable if you have the equipment: processing tank system, film rewind setup, darkroom trays, photograde sponge (to physically wipe the remjet off with the Borax Bath solution), chemistry etc.

Also, done as B&W Reversal, it can also be Sepia toned just like the other B&W Reversal films, and that gives it a nice look. I'll try to run some tests here when I get out of this busy holiday photography season, and post some frame grab results. Lastly, since the film is silver-rich, it really needs the previous B&W Reversal process........otherwise, if using the D-94a and new Bleach, you'd have to make some adjustments to the Development time and also extend the Bleaching time out. There's some other factors involved here as well in processing, development time aside....and the worst factor is the removal of the Remjet Anti-Halation Backing, which when processing manually, must be done after processing, and slowly by hand using a Borax bath, and then a rewash afterward. A reminder here though, if you have old films that were shot long ago, or just old film that you might want to use that was NOT cold stored.....forget about processing it as reversal; it will just be muddy nothing or very very poor.

AND.....when processing OLD films, the darn remjet backing is very stubborn and you really have to work at getting it all off; meaning a long soak in the Borax Bath [10 to 20 minutes average] to help loosen it, and usually giving the film two wiping passes to get it all off. And even then, you might still have some streaks of it here and there. In the K-12 and K-14 processing machines, they use not only solution but soft buffer rollers rotating at high speed to help clear all this off and then a spray rinse to remove residual traces as the film passes through that stage of processing (done prior to actual developing).

Hope this helps.

Best regards,

Martin Baumgarten

Hi David,

Film is film...so if you can process a roll of 120 or 35mm still film, you already understand the basics and it also applies to movie film. The difficulty and technical consideration which makes it so different is the film length! This requires extra care and attention in movie film processing, all the way from initial film loading, through the processing stages, to drying the film and then downloading it from whatever film drying rack or setup you're using. That long wet movie film is can be like fly paper, attracting all kinds of dust if you're not very careful. That all being said, many young teens processed their own movie film years ago, back when wonderful companies such as ESO-S PICTURES and SUPERIOR BULK FILM COMPANY were around to name two of them.

The SUPERIOR BULK FILM Co. Super 8mm Tank & Reel Unit (also known as the POWELL TANK) is perhaps the easiest spiral reel setup to load. The tank must be used a bit differently regarding adding and changing chemicals since the spout it too small for quick enough solution changes to yield even results, and adding solutions through it doesn't allow the air to evacuate fast enough, thus forcing the lid up and off if not careful. Anyhow....the next spiral reel type that works great is the former JOBO FOTOTECHNIC Super 8mm Reel & Tank. They were very expensive, but work fine (I have the 16mm version since I could never get my hands on the Super 8 one....long story, but in the nutshell, idiotic sales people at some german camera shops in Frankfurt, refused to believe such a thing was available, and the USA division was useless. I ended up getting the 16mm version since store manager was so....well...I'll leave it at that). Anyhow, these JOBO ones are rare as hens' teeth.

This brings us to the venerable LOMO Tank, of which there are a few varieties, but for Super 8mm, you need only concern yourself with the UPB-1 or UPB-1A, with the latter being the newest version of the same tank. These will allow processing of 1 or 2 rolls of 50ft (15m) Super 8mm film. IF you load and process only 1 Super 8 50ft film, it is quite easy to use. The difficult part is learning to load 2 rolls, requiring a lot of finnicky care while in total darkness. But, it can be done and has been done by many, and many hundreds of times by myself. As with any spiral reel processing method, you will want to transfer the Super 8mm film to a 50ft projection reel to make it easier to handle in the dark, and also will want to tranfser the film from that reel to another reel, so that when you load the film, emulsion facing outwards, the sprocketed edge of the film is laying in the spiral groove. Otherwise if not, you risk getting uneven image density due to the surge variation of the solution during film agitation. And speaking of agitation, you do NOT want to twirl that reel agitator around! You need to rotate it, but also lift and lower the reel setup as well, and rock the reel back and forth gently.

If the cost of these tanks and/or availability is a problem, another quick DIY method is to just build a small plexiglass rack. Using a 16 x 20 inch piece of plexiglass, you will wrap a 50ft scrap film around it, separating the film by a few millimeters evenly spaced. Then make some marks where the film wrapped around with a felt tip marker. Remove the film and now make some curved cutouts 8mm's wide where the marks are. Smooth these cutouts with fine sandpaper and polish well. Drill a hole in the upper left corner, and both upper and lower right corners. Make this hole 1/4 inch, large enough to fit a rubberband through it. Get two pieces of plexiglass, cut to an inch wide and 16 inches long, to glue to either side of the 16 x 20 sheet. The sheet should be centered on these, as these will act as a stand to keep the bottom of the sheet from touching the bottom of your processing tray. You load this by looping a rubberband thru the hole in the upper left of the rack, loop the end of the Super 8mm film thru that loop and staple the film, then wind the film around the rack emulsion up, nice and snug, but don't cinch the film, until you get to the end, and then repeat with a rubberband on the end, and adjust the film so it remains taut. Now you process this film on the rack in large 16 x 20 inch photo trays, having filled them with solution high enough to cover the rack completely. Agitation is via moving the rack carefully in the solution side to side, top to bottom and up and down. You can easily lift the rack, drain the solution off by holding it at an angle, and move it to the next tray. 11 x 14 inch design should work as well, but you will have to make the spacing narrower.

There's other methods as well, and there's also the REWIND TANK, a long time proven method, but is tedious as it can take the better part of 3 hours to process a roll of movie film. There are some pros to the Rewind Tank method, ease of use, easy to load, small footprint of space required, and can be done most anywhere.

Lastly, the other tricky part, what to do with that wet film. I recommend building yourself a film drying rack, easily enough constructed out of Quarter Half Round dowls or full dowls, 2 feet long and attached to 18 inch long crossed slats of wood. The crossed slats, have a long bolt in the center which doubles as a rotating pin to sit the Drying Rack on a stand you'll also have to make. Some have just drapped film around plastic clothesline in their darkroom or bathroom. While this works, it's more professional and practical to use a film drying rack. You attach the film to the rack using large PaperClips bent like an "S" shape, with one end closed and holding a rubberband. The rubberband on either end of the film will stretch to compensate for slight film shrinkage as the film dries. Having a loading stand to rotate this Drying Rack will allow ease in loading and also unloading after the film is dry. After unloading, I recommend splicing film leader onto both ends of the film, then clean & lubricate the film, and finally wind it tightly and neatly onto a 50 foot projection reel and wrap with a 3 inch rubberband. It is wise to let the film sit like this for a few days before projecting it since the film will have small curved areas in it from the film drying rack, which in time disappear......and the tight wind really helps smooth it out. Although, if necessary, you can project the film usually within 2 hours from when you begin processing, if you are organized.

All other laboratory methods apply: cleanliness, solution control, proper rinsing/washing to avoid contamination, temperature control, proper chemistry mixing, processing control, and so forth. Do all that, and you can process your own movie film with professional results, just as you can in processing still film. Is it worth the time and materials? Only you can answer that. I always thought so. However, due to cost of chemistry, Hazmat shipping fees here in the USA on photographic chemicals, and all the time involved to get it right.....you will need to process a certain number of films to make it cost effective for yourself. I mean, you don't want to mix chemistry up that can process 6 to 12 films, and only do 2 or 3; in which over time the solutions will age and become useless...costly.

So, it's relative. For working on special effects on films, and doing complex title sequences, it really helped being able to process our work, view it that evening, make corrections to the setup as needed and continue on with the project the next day, or sometimes even later that same day. But this was film I intended on projecting as a finished product. So many of you now do all this in post in a video editing software program since your projects end up on a video format. Either way, I'm still processing the 35mm slides I plan to shoot on a nice little old 35mm KODAK that I got at a junk shop for $8 the other day. Press on, do your homework, make some plans and come to a decision if the cost and labor is worth it to you. Hey, if hundreds of kids could process their own movie film years ago, and I could do it as a teen, I think you can do it also. Just my two cents here. If it doesn't work out, you still learned something and can sell off the equipment on eBay and recoup some or all or your money. Good luck!

P.S. Super 8 was and still is and can be so much a DIY film gauge for so many reasons, and that's another reason we all love it.

We all agree, buying an ISCO is now insane. What about the HYPERGONAR?

 

Any Cons and Pros from experts in the house?

 

/Do

The HYPERGONAR lenses, are quite small and were made to work with smaller primes than the zoom lenses we're all used to on most Super 8mm cameras. The two small lenses, HYPERGONAR 8 and 16, were intended for those respective formats, since they would allow full coverage on the "normal" focal length lenses. That being said, an A-lens will work with most any lens that it can physically match. As for the larger HYPERGONAR lenses, they are either way too long (as in the case of the 35mm cinema projection units)or are just plain huge and heavy, making them not easy to work with. Also, they don't show up all that often on eBay or in other cine sales arenas these days. Back in the day, The WIDESCREEN CENTRE in London used to export many of them to India since they are perhaps the country where most of the CinemaScope type films have been made.

There are lots of A-lenses in the hands of enthusiasts that for whatever reason don't use them, are too old now to bother with filming, or just love seeing them collect dust. With the loss of so many cine clubs worldwide, most of it due to upcoming generations not being club joiners for a variety of reasons......the venues for members or former club members to sell off these lenses has been drying up. I recommend that anyone interested in obtaining any equipment, as well as A-lenses, to contact any remaining film clubs to see if anyone is willing to sell. It's that, or pay outrageous prices at industry suppliers' shops, or wait until something shows up on eBay or other online auction sites with photographic wares sections. I'm sorry, but my tiny HYPERGONAR-8 lens I'm keeping....works great on most fixed lens small Super 8s, or small prime lenses. Those tiny FUJI P-2 Single-8 cameras or the tiny CHINON Pocket 8 with this lens, really makes for a pocketable CinemaScope filming rig!