"New" super-8 camera to market

[Friedemann Wachsmuth]

Anthony is nailing it. (:

 

If imperfect S8 is what you are looking for, this is not the camera for you.

I guess at least some of you have experienced how much better S8 looks if it originated from a Leicina or Bolex DS8 conversion. It is less easy but so much better. The Logmar has the same effect, but even more radical.

[Erkan Umut]

But what you said is interesting... are you really in touch with former Soviet technicians ? I would so much love to learn from their experience. If they could make something like a Zenit Quartz but with oscillating mirror and functional C-mount that would be something to throw my money in !

 

Yeap, they had visited me in 90s in Istanbul when they were active at the factories. Some from the Krasnogorsky Mikhanicesky Zavod (ZENIT) and Odessky Zavod "Kinap" (was the largest projector manufacturer in the USSR) were here. They have graduated from the LIKI (old name: Leningrad Institute of Cinema Engineers).

 

Also, I have visited the LOMO factory in 2001 in St. Petersburg. I have visited my friends at the NIKFI (a large institution and experimental works - Scientific Cine-Photo Research Institute) in 2010 in Moscow.

 

Once I was in contact with all manufacturers in the field worldwide. Crazy, huh, but real!

Edited November 23, 2013 by Erkan Umut

[Tom Chabbat]

I feel a lot of people, when they don't really understand a technology, think that the more complicated the design the more effective it will be. Well, this is not always the case, far from it.

To put it simply, one have to remember that super 8 film moves something like 4,5 times slower than 35mm for a same frame rate, so it is this easier to keep the film still when shutter is open with a well designed pressure plate. Does someone really wondered why only the Mekel have separate feeder, pressure plate and registration pin ? Because it deals with much higher speeds, where the fast moving film requires more complex registration to be sure it will not move during exposure. This camera is over-engineered for just 24 fps.

I hear the point that super 8 also has to be projected this time bigger too, so smaller deviations will become more apparent. But registration flaws only have to do with precision tolerances of the pull-down claw. And it is much more easier to have just one precise claw than one with a pin mechanism. The more parts you had, the tighter tolerances must be.

 

Now just look at this random footage I just found on vimeo :

Do anyone sees how sharp it is ? Does anyone really noticed registration problems ? I dare you too find DS8 footage which looks better...

 

I remember seeing the same endless debates 10 years ago on filmshooting, Erkan must too.

The conclusions are always the same. Kodak engineers knew their stuff. And they did an awesome job.

[Friedemann Wachsmuth]

Good for you, Tom, that the awesome and ingenious Cartridge-Super 8 brings all the quality you need!

[Jose luis villar]

Hi Tom,

 

 

I have now shot a fashion video with 50d and still looks better than all this, it seems s16 ,unfortunately the client does not let show yet.. That's why I really interested in this camera with a Schneider lens.

 

The filmtransfer is very important, basic to show a good result in the digital medium and also the postproduction of the digitized footage is equally or more important.

Look at this, the footage is not good, although it has a lot of detail because it is shot with a Schneider lens with Beaulieu, but the transfer and post-production is better.

https://vimeo.com/62358313

[Tom Chabbat]

Thanks Jose ! So good to hear your voice, the footage you made is so wonderful ! You really make me ashamed of not having shot a single roll of film since a year...

 

Good for you, Tom, that the awesome and ingenious Cartridge-Super 8 brings all the quality you need!

What I'm trying to say is that you will not have a better quality with some other exotic registration or pressure plate because those parameters have almost no influence on it ! They are just here to keep the film in place ! Image quality only depends of film resolution and lens sharpness. The frame is so small that film flatness is very easily achieved by just a slight pression on its edge. And keeping it firmly against the gate is the only thing required to assure perfect focus.

 

Saying that the Super 8 cartridge and camera design was flawed from the beginning and that they could have done much better sounds almost like some plot theory. You induce that in almost 20 years when it was used by millions of people, no one from the manufacturers to the customers really care about quality and just wanted some cheap toys to play with. What was then the point of paying a premium price for a Beaulieu if at the end the result was this worse ? Do you really think engineers were this careless ? People this blind ?

When Kodak introduced their new system, they had the goal to produce better results than 8mm. If not, what was the point of enlarging the frame to have more resolution if it was not fully exploitable ?

If DS8 offered a significant better quality then, I assure you a lot more people would have turned to it. Human empathy have a small tendency to take de defense of the underdog, but truth is that most of DS8 cameras was a way for small manufacturers to not design entirely new cameras. A top quality and innovative company like Beaulieu preferred to develop a new line of cameras for the new format instead of converting their old R8.

 

People have to stop spreading some myths. If they had done so earlier, I'm sure Lasse could have made a much simpler and cheaper design and everyone would be equally happy with the results.

[Jose luis villar]

I show two frames of what you can do today s8 day, I can not show the movie yet. I mean, this camera can be important for some people who want to produce low-priced film.

 

[David Cunningham]

Thanks Jose ! So good to hear your voice, the footage you made is so wonderful ! You really make me ashamed of not having shot a single roll of film since a year...

 

What I'm trying to say is that you will not have a better quality with some other exotic registration or pressure plate because those parameters have almost no influence on it ! They are just here to keep the film in place ! Image quality only depends of film resolution and lens sharpness. The frame is so small that film flatness is very easily achieved by just a slight pression on its edge. And keeping it firmly against the gate is the only thing required to assure perfect focus.

 

Saying that the Super 8 cartridge and camera design was flawed from the beginning and that they could have done much better sounds almost like some plot theory. You induce that in almost 20 years when it was used by millions of people, no one from the manufacturers to the customers really care about quality and just wanted some cheap toys to play with. What was then the point of paying a premium price for a Beaulieu if at the end the result was this worse ? Do you really think engineers were this careless ? People this blind ?

When Kodak introduced their new system, they had the goal to produce better results than 8mm. If not, what was the point of enlarging the frame to have more resolution if it was not fully exploitable ?

If DS8 offered a significant better quality then, I assure you a lot more people would have turned to it. Human empathy have a small tendency to take de defense of the underdog, but truth is that most of DS8 cameras was a way for small manufacturers to not design entirely new cameras. A top quality and innovative company like Beaulieu preferred to develop a new line of cameras for the new format instead of converting their old R8.

 

People have to stop spreading some myths. If they had done so earlier, I'm sure Lasse could have made a much simpler and cheaper design and everyone would be equally happy with the results.

 

Although it is true that a formal pressure plate and registration pin will not make that big a difference in the overall quality of Super 8 when it is working correctly, it is not true that these things will not be better at working correctly. Yes, the plastic "pressure plate" and standard "pull down claw" are sufficient for the format most of the time, but issues do arise. This is especially true with older cameras that have not been serviced or were of a low quality design. If the film and plastic pressure plate do not engage perfectly into the gate of the Super 8 camera, the film will move and you will get an unsteady image or uneven focus. I have suffered the fate a few times. There is no way of knowing for sure that the cartridge you inserted is perfectly seated in the gate until you get the results back.

 

Now, a perfectly serviced and high quality camera reduces the chances that something will go wrong, but you still do not know for sure until you get your results. I have a perfectly serviced and high quality 1014XL-s that runs 10+ rolls perfectly with fantastic registration. But, around 1 in 20 of my cartridges will clearly not engaged the gate perfectly. So, at wider angles you may notice a very slight uneven focus and/or increased jitter. This may be the fault of the film cartridge or just bad luck. But, it does happen from time-to-time. When it doesn't, I get similar results to Jose. When it does, the results are still good but not perfect and I am disappointed. But, that is the nature of the format.

 

I never have these problems with 16mm because of the nature of the gate, pressure plate and pull down. Implementing these features into Super 8 will just guarantee a more constant and professional result.

 

Unfortunately, I would not be able to use this for my wedding business because so much of that is about quickly swapping the Super 8 cartridges on the fly before the next moment comes around. It's even easier than swapping 16mm magazines on my Eclair ACL. This camera, requiring precise manual threading, would not be an option in a fast-paced wedding film environment.

 

Back on point, however...

 

When Kodak introduced the format in the early 1960s, their goal was not better results than regular 8mm when used correctly. Their goal was better quality images that were a direct result of ease-of-use. It was always intended as an amateur format where tolerances and perfect images were not of major concern. There is no doubt that correctly using regular 8mm will give a better quality image. The pressure plate will hold the film flatter and the pull down will be more constant and smoother. There are far less "jitter" issues in regular 8mm, similarly with Double Super 8.

 

So yes, Kodak did introduce a system that they knew was inferior to their 16mm and Double 8mm formats. But, it was a superior amateur/home movie format because it was so easy to use. That was their entire goal.

 

Over the years, many like Beaulieu and Canon tried to introduce professional grade Super 8 cameras and were very successfully in maximizing the results with the format. However, all of these professional grade cameras are well known for their need for servicing. Beaulieu cameras are fantastic as long as they are properly maintained at a professional level. But, they have a very high failure rate when not perfectly tuned. To achieve the amazing results the Jose gets with his Beaulieu and Canon 814/1014 cameras, those cameras have to be in perfect operating order. When they go out-of-spec even slightly, quality falls quickly.

 

So, I've rambled on long enough. I guess the conclusion I come to here is that when I want guaranteed perfect and high quality results with good registration/stable image and perfect focus, I use Super 16mm. When I want the Super 8 look (like for wedding films), I use Super 8. This new camera, while exciting and very interesting (I do want one), would not be particularly useful to me in either business or pleasure. It would just be fun.

Edited November 23, 2013 by David Cunningham

[Jose luis villar]

Hi David,

 

 

If I want sharp quality and reliability, always shoot in HD video for today. If you need some organic look for some projects, s8 shoot ,

I'm going to sell my 16 cameras.

[David Cunningham]

 

Hi David,

 

 

If I want sharp quality and reliability, always shoot in HD video for today. If you need some organic look for some projects, s8 shoot ,

I'm going to sell my 16 cameras.

 

 

Oh, that's sad Jose. I understand where you are coming from though.

 

I still prefere 16mm in the grand scheme. But, when going for "the vintage look", Super 8 wins all the way. Super16 is almost too low grain now unless you shoot 500T and/or purposely exaggerate the grain via what ever method.

 

If I were shooting a Documentary or Feature, I'd still go Super 16. But, with weddings and most home movie work, I'm sticking with Super 8. I'd love to get into the fashion shoot stuff like you do too. Unfortunately, I think you need good connections for that. :( I am very jealous of your Super 8 fashion shoots. You are right that Super 8 is the perfect medium for what you are doing in the fashion industry. You do amazing work!

 

Dave

[Tom Chabbat]

I actually never saw regular 8mm footage which looks better than S8. All the ones I've seen looked worse to me in every way. And if you open a r8 camera, you'll be surprised to find plastic pressure plates... I even own a 16mm camera with a wooden plate (!). No registration or flatness problems.

What is true though is that sometimes the cartridges does not engage well. But maybe that's because today manufacturing tolerances at Kodak are not what they used to be, or because the cartridge has already been repacked a lot of times as they seem to be reused after processing. But this is not a design flaw, only a manufacturing one. This is something which can be solved with some independent company deciding to produce their own cartridge with tighter tolerances. This way we're curing the disease at its roots which is better for everyone.

 

Jose is so right. If you want a good and cheap picture quality and reliability, HD is really good today. Super 8 is not the place to have a clinical look.

Edited November 23, 2013 by Tom Chabbat

[David Cunningham]

I actually never saw regular 8mm footage which looks better than S8. All the ones I've seen looked worse to me in every way. And if you open a r8 camera, you'll be surprised to find plastic pressure plates... I even own a 16mm camera with a wooden plate (!). No registration or flatness problems.

What is true though is that sometimes the cartridges does not engage well. But maybe that's because today manufacturing tolerances at Kodak are not what they used to be, or because the cartridge has already been repacked a lot of times as they seem to be reused after processing. But this is not a design flaw, only a manufacturing one. This is something which can be solved with some independent company deciding to produce their own cartridge with tighter tolerances. This way we're curing the disease at its roots which is better for everyone.

 

Jose is so right. If you want a good and cheap picture quality and reliability, HD is really good today. Super 8 is not the place to have a clinical look.

 

Yeah, I've wondered that about the Kodak cartridges these days. It may very well be them.

 

Whittner sells cartridges that are re-usable. I have heard good things about them. I did a few test rolls with some reversal films that Pro8mm was testing. I am 99% sure these were in the Whittner cartridges. (I know Phil was testing them). Both of these reversal rolls ran beautifully smoothly through my Pro8mm rebuilt Pro814 (Canon 814 AZ). The image stability and focus was fantastic!

 

Also, I know Jose uses the Whittner metal pressure plate.

 

Jose, do you use it on all your work?

 

I am thinking about picking up a couple of these pressure plates. My understanding is that they work quite well with the Canon 814 AZ and 814/1014 XL-s because of the "clip" style gate design. (They have these little clips that engage the film to hold it steady. This combined with the pressure plate makes for a supposedly rock solid image).

 

Dave

[David Cunningham]

I actually never saw regular 8mm footage which looks better than S8. All the ones I've seen looked worse to me in every way. And if you open a r8 camera, you'll be surprised to find plastic pressure plates..

 

I'll have to see if I can have some of my Standard 8mm E100D transferred.

 

I used a Bolex D-8L must like this one:

 

http://www.bolexcollector.com/cameras/d8l.html

 

The registration is remarkable, the image clear... basically just a grainy 16mm.

 

I imagine most of the Regular 8mm you have seen in the past was old or done with low end or grainy film. E100D was fantastic in the camera the few times I got to use it.

[Jose luis villar]

 

Yeah, I've wondered that about the Kodak cartridges these days. It may very well be them.

 

Whittner sells cartridges that are re-usable. I have heard good things about them. I did a few test rolls with some reversal films that Pro8mm was testing. I am 99% sure these were in the Whittner cartridges. (I know Phil was testing them). Both of these reversal rolls ran beautifully smoothly through my Pro8mm rebuilt Pro814 (Canon 814 AZ). The image stability and focus was fantastic!

 

Also, I know Jose uses the Whittner metal pressure plate.

 

Jose, do you use it on all your work?

 

I am thinking about picking up a couple of these pressure plates. My understanding is that they work quite well with the Canon 814 AZ and 814/1014 XL-s because of the "clip" style gate design. (They have these little clips that engage the film to hold it steady. This combined with the pressure plate makes for a supposedly rock solid image).

 

Dave

 

Hi David,

 

Yes, I use the pressure plate, but only with Beaulieu. It really is my favorite camera to shoot s8, sharp difference Schneider lens with Canon is great.

[Tom Chabbat]

 

 

My understanding is that they work quite well with the Canon 814 AZ and 814/1014 XL-s because of the "clip" style gate design. (They have these little clips that engage the film to hold it steady. This combined with the pressure plate makes for a supposedly rock solid image).

If we're talking about the same thing, I think those "clips" are actually present in almost all super 8 camera... those little spring push the film against the opposite vertical guide of the gate to maximise horizontal steadiness.

I'll be happy to try those wittner cartridges, they always had very serious products.

 

Referring to r8, I was not talking about the grain which is not dependent of our subject here but more of steadiness. But maybe there were shot with low grade cameras, I don't know. What I know is that I shoot a lot with single 8 cartridges which are functionally the same as r8, and really my footage looks the same be it in super or single 8 (with the same lens and same stock).

[Tom Chabbat]

To be maybe more clear and brief, the point I'm trying to make is as simple as that :

 

All things being equal, it doesn't matter wether the pressure plate is inside or outside the cartridge as long as it works properly. If we see some problems, the design is not the cause, only the way it is executed. So instead of trying to fix this issue with a whole new camera, it is much more simpler to fix it with better made cartridges so everyone can enjoy it.

Edited November 23, 2013 by Tom Chabbat

[Anthony Schilling]

The carteidge system is ok but it has it's ticks, not just the pressure plate but they can be a tad sticky sometimes as well. I've started using the GK pressure plate again after having a small amount of jitter and it's mostly gone now (check out my recent post "Vision3 sampler"). The GK plate is an improvement but not up to DS8 or pin registered standards. Anyone with experience in DS8 can tell you that the image is a lot sharper and steadier.

 

"So instead of trying to fix this issue with a whole new camera, it is much more simpler to fix it with better made cartridges so everyone can enjoy it."

Stability is just one improvement that this camera will fix, and not the sole reason for it's developement. The camera improves on a host of issues that many people have discussed numerous time in discussions over a hypothetical new camera. I assure you that if they passed on making a better registration system, people would be screaming bloody murder.

[Friedemann Wachsmuth]

Tom,

 

All things being equal, it doesn't matter wether the pressure plate is inside or outside the cartridge as long as it works properly.

True!

Unfortunately, the S8 cartridge way too often does snot work properly. There is a big list of possible causes, often combinations of them cause the trouble. There is no SPOF to blame. The core problem is the technically bad design of the S8 cartridge system. It is definitely easy to use, but full of horrible flaws. I could name you more than a dozen.

 

If we see some problems, the design is not the cause, only the way it is executed. So instead of trying to fix this issue with a whole new camera, it is much more simpler to fix it with better made cartridges so everyone can enjoy it.

Good luck. If its so much simpler, please do it!

Many very smart people have planned this and some even executed on their plans. No-one succeeded in the end. The problem IS the conceptual design, period. Agfa's cart was a bit better, but the molds got destroyed after being worn out.

 

If the cartridges are good enough for you -- great! If others do not want to jeopardize their work and want highest reliability with S8, the new camera is the way to go, since it is not 40 years old AND approaches most of the flaws.

 

Just some facts for the record:

- Kodak's cartridge does NOT have a pressure plate. The film is supposed to run free in it. The plastic just supports it. Read the patents!

- "Registration flaws only have to do with precision tolerances of the pull-down claw" is just plain wrong on so many levels. Sorry.

- Cartridges do not get "repacked" multiple times and are not reused. Cartridges always 100% break when they get opened.

- Wittner cartridges are and always have been just empty Kodak cartridges.

 

No offense, I really like Super 8 and have shot (and developed and loaded) many kilometers of it and still do so -- but a lot you are saying is just plain wrong. Being wrong is not a problem, but for your own credibility, please don't claim that others "don't really understand the technology" and thus follow the wrong approach. It isn't as simple as that.

Edited November 24, 2013 by Friedemann Wachsmuth

[Tom Chabbat]

I feel like talking about god's existence here ! :)

If I'm wrong, I'll be happy to have some actual proofs... As I said before, please show some DS8 or regular 8 footage that look significantly better than Jose's, or some serious article revealing test results. I feel the more a thing is difficult to prove, the deeper the belief...

 

 

 

Kodak's cartridge does NOT have a pressure plate. The film is supposed to run free in it. The plastic just supports it. Read the patents!

 

How can you seriously say that super 8 cartridge does not have a pressure plate ? How could it works if it doesn't ? Do you actually know how film transport works in a camera ? Super 8 cartridge does have a little spring loaded plate that applies pressure on film. A pressure plate. I've read the patent. It mentions a "pressure pad". Ok, not plate, let's play with words if you want, but in the end, same effect.

 

Again, contrary to the common belief, the smaller the format, the bigger the tolerances. If not, a 16mm camera would cost much higher than a 35mm one. Because when you have a smaller format, it is easier to move it, keep it still and flat. It's as simple as that. You can have an over-engineered camera with 35mm tolerances made for super 8, but you won't notice any improvement on picture quality. As long as you are within the practical tolerances, improving precision won't have any effects. It's like putting a 4k capable lens on a 2k sensor, it will produce the same results as if you put a lens with enough resolving power for 2k. Remember we're just talking about gear here, they just have a simple mechanical function, nothing to magically improve picture sharpness.

 

For the registration pin, I don't like to repeat myself, but its use is only relevant on high speed design. See professional 35mm camera. Aaton don't have pin. Because in normal speeds, pressure plate is sufficient to hold the film still. And as super 8 moves more than 4 times slower than 35mm, it's even more useless here.

 

Look at Jose's work. It's the sharpest you can have in this format. If this is not enough for you, the only solution is to have more resolution or a better lens. Or, shortly, going to 16 or even 35mm.

[Erkan Umut]

Look at Jose's work. It's the sharpest you can have in this format. If this is not enough for you, the only solution is to have more resolution or a better lens. Or, shortly, going to 16 or even 35mm.

 

This is very easy, Tom.

 

Lets wait for the camera is released, then compare the images shot with the same camera Jose used with the Logmar camera, the lens should be the same for a fair compare. The steadiness test should be also done!

 

It could be better than words, because if the results are better with the Logmar camera, then you are in trouble buddy! :)

 

By the way, please don't underestimate the Super 8 cartridge pad gram force applying several points on film...

[Tom Chabbat]

I'm all with you Erkan ! I'm waiting for actual serious tests and comparisons. I actually don't mind being wrong. I still think what Lasse is trying to do is simply incredible, making a new 8mm camera today is such an exciting thing ! Please Lasse, prove me wrong ! :)

I just tried to explain that in theory as well as in practice, a pressure pad can be placed indifferently inside the magazine or inside the camera, and that a registration pin can be avoided in a lot of cases. I don't know why but most people here seem to deeply believe that these are two unconditional parameters of picture quality...

 

 

 

By the way, please don't underestimate the Super 8 cartridge pad gram force applying several points on film...

Thanks Erkan, it feels good to at last see someone supporting my point.

Edited November 24, 2013 by Tom Chabbat

[Jose luis villar]

I am sure that steadiness will be much better in the new camera, the sharp images, I think it will be like my Beaulieu with pressure plate.

[David Cunningham]

There is no doubt that if you but a DS8 camera in Jose's hands he would end up with a steadier image than what he currently gets in his Beaulieu. The same will probably be true with lasse's new camera. We've actually discussed how super 8 jitter affects the image in Jose's films. Because he uses a line sensor system for scanning the registration issues cause occasional warping and distorting of the background. I'll post more exact examples when I get home and am not posting with my iPhone.

[David Cunningham]

But Jose. Again. I love and highly respect your work. I have never seen super 8 look any better. Nor do I think it can. The jitter/registration issues are just part of the format.

[Jose luis villar]

Thanks David, very important for the new camera is reliability, when I shot with my dear Beaulieu'm afraid that may fail at any time, are 40 years ...