Keith Marley

A decent attempt to define "casual observation", however I felt that the answer lacked a degree of contextual relevance, so only a six and a half out of ten from me B) For me the "imperfections" I associate with super 8, i.e. grain, a general softness of focus, saturated colours, are elements that are missing in this footage. That is why I think it looks more "video" rather than Super 8 film. For me, it is merely down to a matter of taste over anything else. If I get commissioned to shoot Super 8, which admittedly is a rare occurrance these days, the client paying for that privelege wants a "Super 8" look.....while I think this footage looks "quality", I don't think my clients would be happy with the lack of "super 8ness". Most of my clients want video to imitate film, rather than paying a hefty price for film to imitate video.

What is a "casual observer"?

I am obviously in the minority here, but I don't like it, sorry. It looks like 720 video footage

Thanks for the reply chaps. I will post some grabs later

Hi, After being fairly disappointed with my 2K scan from several reels of various film stock shot on a Canon XL-S 1014, I am thinking about buying a telecine kit. I know that it is fairly lo-fi stuff, but at just shy of £140 it isn't exactly breaking the bank. Has anyone had any experience with the following bits of kit: Sankyo Dualux 1000 projector Vivtar UVC1 Telecine:

I really don't like that footage. The cinematography is great, yes, but the denoising ruins it for my taste, why should in S8 and then digitally remove some of its inherent qualities, beats me why you would do that

Thanks for the replies. I had a chat with a guy in a camera shop and his advice was simply to judge the handheld meter rather than a 30 year old internal camera meter. Will do the grey card test, so thanks for the advice Gregg

Hi, I have to admit I am new to using Super 8, so forgive my lack of knowledge. I have just bought a Canon 1014 xl-s and put in a Vision 3 50D cartidge, not done any test shoot yet but the camera appears to be in good working order. Due to issues with cameras reading ISOs nowadays I am using a light meter and hoping to do everything manually, however there seems to be some differences in the way that the camera is reading light as compared to the way the meter is reading it. I was in my garden and had the meter set to 24fps ISO 50 and in cloudy but bright conditions I am getting a reading of f5.6(9), however with the camera auto reading I am getting somewhere toward f16. Just can't understand it. The meter is a decent Sekonic L-358. Should I just trust the camera on auto and point and shoot?

That sounds like a sensible idea! Thanks very much Anthony

Thank you A, so would I leave it on auto-exposure and hope that the camera reads it OK?

Hi, new to the forum and have recently got back into using Super 8. I am awaiting delivery of a Canon 1014 xl-s and want to do some timelapse from day to night. How would I expose this correctly - would I set the meter to auto? The film stock that I have is only a choice of 2 - 50D and 500T - would the 500T be horribly overexposed in the daytime or conversly would the 50D be underexposed for the night stuff? I will be shooting across the roof tops of Nice, so the light should be very bright. Any tips would be welcome. Thanks in advance