Jump to content

Mark Sperry

Basic Member
  • Content Count

    95
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

4 Neutral

About Mark Sperry

  • Rank

Profile Information

  • Occupation
    Cinematographer
  • Location
    **(obscenity removed)** all
  1. 35mm motion film is thicker it's true, not sure about the still films such as Portra 160/400. The thickness is variable though. Delta 3200 for instance is a very thick film. Most 120 cameras have some degree of tolerance for a thicker stock. The Cinestill guys are running 65mm film through 120 cameras even with the perfs and don't seem to be running into problems.
  2. The lens they have mounted is the 6mm 1.2 Cosmicar (Pentax). If it's a sunny day, and you're shooting with a 6mm lens, a better question would be how do you find anything out of focus? The DoF will be massive.
  3. This makes me SOOOO happy. I don't know what's better, it's return to S8 or 35mm. I hope it also gets cut for 120! My Rolleiflex would love to shoot the hell out of this stock.
  4. If it got through one reel that would tell me that it's capable of getting through exactly one reel. That's not something on which I'm willing to gamble thousands of dollars and a client's wedding film. Plus even if I wanted to shoot 2 or 3 reels that's hundreds of dollars in dev/scan at current lab rates. Cinelab isn't even doing SD scans anymore, and PacLab NYC closed so all processing must be mailed out for me. I'll just spend the money on a camera that I know has been fully overhauled and can be serviced at any time. It's a barely a dent in the lifetime RoI of shooting and a great deal of peace of mind.
  5. I bought the expensive Pro8mm rebuilt Super 8 cameras and it was worth it to me. I trusted their reliability far more than an eBay find, which matters because if I'm shooting a wedding for a client I'd rather know my camera is going to work than know I only spent 10 dollars on it. Now Kodak is giving us one with a video tap. That would make my life a lot easier if it's integrated with an internal light meter. I'll write to Kodak and see if they can get Christopher Nolan to make freaking Dunkirk featurettes for Kodak on Super 8 so that everyone here is satisfied by the production value.
  6. Yeesh you guys are being pretty hard on a prototype. It's a Super 8 camera still folks and it still looked like Super 8 to me. Some of the shots didn't have a great exposure but that shot of the truck looked great. To me it still looked like "Super 8" more or less. Meaning, a technically imperfect but aesthetically charming analog motion picture format. I don't understand why someone would come to the Super 8 forum and lodge existential complaints against the format. There is no way I would be able to shoot film for my motion projects were it not for super 8. I don't expect it to look like freaking 65mm just because 50D is available to me. I like that it's grainy and jittery. If I didn't like those things I would either not shot it, get a Logmar, or shoot 16mm.
  7. You can still make me an offer based on the ebay price I have. I'd love to avoid eBay fees and pitfalls.
  8. On eBay now: http://www.ebay.com/itm/Pro8mm-Classic-Pro-Beaulieu-4008-Super-8-Camera-/262644659936?hash=item3d26d776e0:g:uYkAAOSwPCVX6a~Y
  9. Back to the OP, I've really enjoyed the last few years of seeing formats used almost completely for aesthetic reasons over cost. There were all the films that Tyler mentioned shot on Super 16 (Moonrise Kingdom was drop-dead gorgeous on screen), and even on TV the Walking Dead is still Super 16 (though I think the Cable TV compression makes it a little ugly and mushy), even as it's spinoff went digital. Then on the other side of that we have Dunkirk coming in completely shot on 70mm and we had Tarantino resurrecting a basically obsolete format and distributing projectors for it. There is some really cool stuff out there! I might be in a minority here but I think I can see the difference in formats even when just viewing a good HD copy at home on my TV. You can tell what parts of Batman were in 70mm, and Moonrise Kingdom doesn't devolve into mush, it looks great. Digital is kind of the great leveler as far as formats go, which is kind of boring in comparison (I'm no film purist but I like it see it shot as much as possible).
  10. DSC_6502 by Mark A. Sperry, on Flickr DSC_6501 by Mark A. Sperry, on Flickr DSC_6504 by Mark A. Sperry, on Flickr DSC_6503 by Mark A. Sperry, on Flickr Updated with some photos of the camera!
  11. Hi! I'd like to sell my Pro8mm "Classic Pro" with max 8 modification. It will come with the 8-64 zoom, a Cosimcar Pentax 6mm 1.2 prime, and the single lithium ion cell/charger. This camera has seen probably 10 reels since purchased from Pro8mm. It's as new as it was from the company. It's in beautiful hammertone finish. I have some Hoya color correction and ND filters I'll throw in too. This is a camera I will miss, but I have to save up for a relocation so it must go. I'd like $1750.00. That's a $940.00 discount from what Pro8mm currently charges. Here is the Pro8mm listing: http://www.pro8mm.com/Merchant5/merchant.mvc?Screen=PROD&Store_Code=01&Product_Code=CAMERA_CLASSIC&Category_Code=S8 This camera is in my opinion the best Super 8 camera you can get. The Logmar might be modern and perfect, but this is classic Super 8.
  12. Well if anyone wants the 4008ZM rebuild that Pro8mm does at a steep discount I'm going to be posting mine in the classifieds in a few days. It's like new, and max 8. PM me if you want to beat me to the post.
  13. NYC is incredibly dusty haha. I've sworn off darkroom printing for a few reasons but they all have to do with the limitations of living in NYC. Thankfully I am moving to Maine within a year or so and I will be either using a community darkroom or building one at home. I got into photography in the darkroom and I will die in the darkroom (so to speak). :-) I wish I was still able to make RA-4 color prints from home, but if I'm being completely honest my Epson R3000 pretty much matches or exceeds what I was able to do in the color darkroom. Plus you can print on fiber paper.
  14. The only thing I've wanted to try is home development of B&W stocks. I would love to try conventional B&W developers on Tri-X in Super 8, but the problem is that there are no easy tank solutions. And once I do get the film out as a negative I still have to send it to a lab for xfer, and we're only talking about a theoretical small change in contrast or granularity.
  15. You've never been impressed by home processing of still images? Then you haven't seen much of anything. Technically Ansel Adam's entire portfolio could be considered 'home' processed. In fact any B&W film photographer worth his or her silver forgoes the lab for the ultimate control that home processing and printing gives you in the world of still photography. Yes you need to have a darkroom that isn't complete rubbish, but you're doing it from home. The best photographic prints that I've ever made were all done by hand and some of the best ones I've seen were done by my peers when we were working in the darkroom, all by hand. You drop a roll of FP4+ off at the lab and they're going to run it through a standard XTol or TMax developer in a dip/dunk machine with no specialized agitation control. You develop it at home and you can use Rodinal or a Pyro developer that actually takes full advantage of what the emulsion is capable of. If you're shooting still B&W film you should stop using labs as soon as you can. Color, less so, but there isn't any difference between C-41 in a home Jobo vs a lab except for the fact that you're doing it yourself, assuming you don't screw it up. There certainly isn't a quality gap between the two if you know what you're doing. For motion picture sure, there are probably no decent DIY solutions, I would agree with that.
×
×
  • Create New...