Aaron Razi

I've skimmed this thread, so sorry if this post comes as a little off topic, but from an amateur perspective, shooting on Super 8 seems to be much more accessible. I shot on 16mm this summer and while it came out absolutely gorgeous, the price of a nice camera and the lack of a Kodak Color Reversal stock is pretty limiting. I probably did not look deep enough, but for a nice Bolex it was about $1500. Stocks and Development aren't cheap either. 40+ for a roll, and another 30 for development + telecine. When comparing that against Super 8, I only paid 85 for my camera and around 30 for a stock. Development and Telecine are around 60, when compiled with shipping out to Burbank. Not that that is cheap or anything. In fact, my adoration for the medium is breaking my wallet, as I keep buying different stocks and tools. All jokes aside, it seems to be that Super 8 is much more embraced currently, at least by Kodak. Financially, celluloid is not practical, but film never was intended to be. There's a great quote from a documentary titled Dying of the Light, that in reference to celluloid vs. digital, says that: "Americans will always prefer convenience over quality."

Thank you so much for sharing! I've been looking everywhere for some test footage. Looks quite crisp!

Just ordered a reel for myself! Cannot wait to start shooting on it. I'm not too concerned as to their survival. They just opened a new development lab in NY and have done a good job rebranding Super 8 as hip and aesthetic. Their analog resistance campaign, while too slow for my liking, seems to be pretty successful so far. Would be nice to hear some news about the camera, though.