Phillip Mosness

I think the gimmicks existing in the 50s were those like William Castle's really cheesy ones, such as "Percepto!", where there would be a small electrical jolt under the seats that would give you a little buzz. He also swung skeletons over the audience in some horror films. There was another called "Illusion-O" where you'd put on glasses to "see" ghosts in the 13 Ghosts movie. Later in the 70's there was Sensurround used for Earthquake which was heavy use of subwoofers for when the quake was in full effect. Fun stuff.

Yes, the Logmar might the the zenith of the format, but very expensive and probably hard to find now. The NPR is Pin registered. The Eclair ACL is not pin registered, however the pull down claw is designed to be very steady because of the hang time at the bottom of the claw's movement, I believe. I own an ACL and it's always been quite steady. If you look around, you'll probably find either in your price range. I had my ACL on ebay a few years ago but it didn't meet the reserve price, so I still have it.

Hello, Andrius. Both of these cameras are excellent examples of cameras for this format, however we're talking about cameras that are 40 + years old so at this point I'd just make sure you're getting one in good running shape. I own a Leicina special and a Beaulieu 6008, (never owned a 4008), and like them both about the same. The Beaulieu 4008 will give you lots of C-mount lens options. The Leicina will give you more expensive M-mount options. The Leicina has the Schneider 6-66, and the Beaulieu comes with the same zoom about 80% of the time. (some say the Leicina version has an extra element in their version of the lens, but I doubt anyone could tell the difference), so lens -wise, they're pretty even. The Beaulieu has a fast guillotine shutter that sometimes gives the impression of sharper , but strobe like footage, but with a reflex mirror, all the light will reach the film. Leicina has a beam splitter and a more "normal" looking shutter angle. As far as jitter goes, it's going to be an inherent part of the format and its design. The only camera I've seen that has made an impact on stability is the Logmar, but that camera may not be what you're looking for. A crystal sync motor isn't what affects image stability and I don't see a difference in either one of these cameras as far as breathing goes. I will say that some post production stabilization can help a lot with locked down shots. (I'm doing a bit of that right now.) It looks like the first clip (fashion) was transfered by Ocho Y Pico in Spain. They've got some of the best super 8 transfers I've ever seen, so which transfer house you use will make a difference too. I mean those shots at around :45 are about as good as the format can produce, but at the end of the day, super 8 is super 8. Its going to have idiosyncratic elements that make it what it is. So my next question is if you'd consider shooting 16mm. At this point, the difference in cost is negligible and the frame stability is increased immensely.

Just got back from an T.V. Academy event hosted by Amazon for Maisel. During the Q & A portion, the cast made a point to mention the work of Mr. Mullen. It's nice to know that the cast is fully aware of the importance of the incredible cinematography work. The show is such a great package of creative and technical artistry. Looking forward to season 3!

I'd love to know what ratio Kodak produces double perf vs single perf. I can only guess how few cameras are still being run that have double sprockets. Maybe some early Bolex cams are still floating around.

The SUPER shallow DOF is throwing me off more than the lighting . Inadvertently make shots look like green screen.

I don't think there's any physical way to mount a PL lens onto a 3 turret Arri 2c. However, the bright side is there was lots of great glass made in Arri standard mount, and often cheaper to buy and rent. What you may lose, though, is modern gears for follow focus , etc.

Simon, I get it, but super 8 has its place. I projected some footage I shot when I lived in China last night and it just looks amazing to me. And the thing is, I wouldn't have shot all that in 16mm, nor do I ever look at the stuff I shot in mini DV from the same time period. I'm so happy I took that Beaulieu with me. We are asking a lot from this consumer format, but it delivers more and more for me. The 2K transfers of my wedding I recently got done at Gamma Ray Digital are quite striking, and again, I wasn't quite willing to drag my larger format cameras overseas. I basically am just whining about the price of reversal. It should probably be less than half the price of 16mm.

Far be it from me to tell a company how to price their goods, but I realized I was out of Tri-X in the super 8 format and so I thought I'd hop online to order a few cartridges. Holy Crap, they're 29.99 each, the same as the Vision negative stocks. I really want to support Kodak, but that price just floored me. Tri-X in Super 8 really ought to be cheap enough to entice people into the experience, but at that price it's not that much cheaper than shooting 35mm shortends once you calculate the transfers. I feel a little like an old man complaining about an Egg McMuffin going up 10 cents, but it wasn't all that long ago that Tri-X was something like $15 .

Which model do you own? Does it have the reflex prism? The reflex models tend to use the RX versions of lenses, like the Switars, because those have a design that works with the reflex prism to overcome slight aberrations the prism causes.

The tripod hole at the bottom of the handle wouldn't be the most ideal place, but the camera is solid enough, and well balanced, that i don't think that makes much difference in the long run of you have a good fluid head. The general breathing of super 8 will out-weigh the potential issue with the tripod connection. Final Cut Pro X has stabilization, that I've been playing with, and it has done a surprisingly good job on breathing. Even on hand-held shots. At the end of the day, I never found a camera that did everything I needed. They'd be great at one thing, and lack in something else. The beaulieu 6008 had my favorite lens (Angenieux 6-90) but too finicky , and faster shutter often made footage look more strobe-like. Nizo 6080 was the quietest and 220 degree shutter for low light , but it's top heavy and too fancy for its own good, with electronic gizmos that eventually broke. (even my back up one eventually broke and wasn't worth fixing) Leicina Special is most compact with Schneider 10mm prime, but Leica M mount lenses aren't cheap, and the pull down claw has a tendency to not grab the perfs without a couple of tries(probably just mine) and i always forget to turn it off resulting in running out batteries. Nikon is the camera I can grab on the way out the door and know it'll work great, even though it may not be #1 in any above category, it'll be great in EVERY category. I haven't shot with high end Canons as much but those feel similar to me to the Nikon, but they're so much more expensive for whatever reason.

I'd like to throw in one more option. The Nikon R10. It's been the most problem free of my cameras. It feels the most solid of any I've owned. I have a Leicina Special, Beaulieu 6008. They both have interchangeable lenses, but they've also been more finicky. The Beaulieu especially feels more delicate and plasticy. I've also owned the most quiet camera made, the Nizo 6080, but the more electronics a camera has, the more chance for something to break. The R10 is the go-to camera when I need a work horse, and by far the easiest to shoot with. There are several well priced ones on ebay ,

These sort of questions bring a tear to my eye, but I'd suggest getting a new roll of 100D or Tri-x rather than spend he time and money dealing with Kodachrome developed as B&W negative. I've sadly tossed out old unused rolls of K40 in recent years. The 100D 7294 is worth supporting.

Is such a thing possible? I'm guessing no, but also hoping that it could be done. The ones I see seem to work with mirrorless cameras so the device must need to get closer to the focal plane than a PL could allow.

animation that didn't require a voice actor, I suppose.