"New" super-8 camera to market

[Tom Chabbat]

Again, I stand corrected, but I don't know why DS8 would have a better registration as the cameras works in the exact same way, with same tolerances, as Super 8. The pressure plate, no matter if it's in a cartridge or in the camera, acts the same way. It just push the film evenly on the gate. And they have the exact same pull down claw mechanisms. So I really don't see how it could be better. I don't see any logic in this statement.

 

Remember, we're dealing with old cameras. Of course they have issues, but the pressure pad, being just a piece of plastic on springs, is not this prone to problems. There's so much other parameters there's a good chance your jitter problem originates from somewhere else (and it seems to me that Jose's footage with the 1014 is way more stable than with the Beaulieu... So maybe it's just a servicing to do...)

[Heikki Repo]

Here's an example of 8mm film that I found and which I think looks really nice, much better than any super-8 E100D I have seen. Only thing this clip is missing is HD scan:

 

 

Anyway, you really cannot compare Jose's best looking work to any DS-8 or 2x8mm footage -- because there is no Vision3 film stocks available in DS-8 or 2x8mm.

[Anthony Schilling]

This a a smaple clip i shot recently, mostly with the Canon 814XLS and some with the Nizo 481 macro. I used the GK pressure plate in the 50D and 200T shots, but not the 500T. The 50D and 200T shots are all hand held and i don't see any real cartridge jitter, just some hand held unsteadiness. The candle shots with the 500T (no added pressure plate) were tripod mounted and you can see some noticable unsteadiness. The candle shots were also taken with my 814xls which was purchased sealed in the box just a few years ago and is basically flawless.

https://vimeo.com/78660128

[Tom Chabbat]

Heikki, difficult to judge the sharpness here... Macro shots "look" sharp, but it's only an impression, we can't judge it objectively. But look closely, there's big registration problems on this video, the footage does not have a good vertical registration.

 

Anthony, nice work ! You're right, the GK seem to improve a lot the footage... Too bad you didn't use it on tripod too to have a better comparison ! You serve my point, a well made in-cartridge pressure plate is as good as a well made in-camera pressure plate !

[Erkan Umut]

Anthony, you don't need to watch the movie to try to understand whether there is image unsteadiness or not. One frame with less blur captured will tell you so so. But you know that's not the correct way, because the steadiness has an amount to be measured. Films should be studied with a microscope with the naked eye when needed. The better way is to shoot the steadiness test patterns with the double exposure.

 

Also, never trust on the video transfer other than prismatic flying spot one, 'cause the projector plays a role here too. The projector should have the sprockets, and checked with the test films such as a SMPTE film.

 

I am sure you know all this, you are a working professional.

 

Heikki, never compare the reversal stock with the negative. Reversal is a difficult stock to work with, with limited exposure latitude, and contrary to the negative characteristic curve its tend to be contrasty. I see that your film's colors are saturated.

[Heikki Repo]

Heikki, never compare the reversal stock with the negative. Reversal is a difficult stock to work with, with limited exposure latitude, and contrary to the negative characteristic curve its tend to be contrasty. I see that your film's colors are saturated.

 

Erkan,

 

that isn't my film, just something I have come across during surfing Filmshooting.com and Youtube. And as I mentioned, I posted it only to compare to reversal films shot on super-8, not to films shot on negative stocks. My main point was to point out that there is no use to say that one hasn't seen as good or better DS-8 or 2x8mm film as Jose's super-8 because there is nothing that it can be compared to -- no Vision3 stocks available in DS-8 or 2x8mm, only reversal. Thus one should compare reversal to reversal and negative to negative, just as you Erkan say. :)

 

Anyway, I think it is best to lay this discussion about the pressure plate and sharpness to rest until we get to see some examples shot with Lasse's camera...

[Anthony Schilling]

Right Erkan, but the jitter we experiance most often is clearly visible or sometimes distracting. My scans were done sprocketless with the Retro 8 scanner which uses the light from the perfs to register frames. It's accuracy is very precise.

[Erkan Umut]

By the way, I examined the Super 8 cartridge just now again :), and I noticed that the loop forming before the film enters to the gate is not so much, so too much pressure might be problematic, due to the intermittent stress applied to the film on the gate, that's why the design might be made simpler by Kodak engineers...

[Tom Chabbat]

Erkan made a good point here ! As long as we don't make any serious tests, our "feelings" and "impressions" are not a factor for real quality judgement.

 

I know Erkan you've collaborated with schmallfilm magazine (I loved your article about chinese cameras), do you know if there's ever been in their archives an article about regular/super/single/double super 8 comparison ? I can't believe this hasn't been done before...

 

We could align together a Beaulieu MR8, a Beaulieu 4008, a Fujica ZC1000 and a Pathé DS8, put each time the same lens as they are all C-Mount compatible and see what comes out.

Edited November 24, 2013 by Tom Chabbat

[Erkan Umut]

Tom, I should ask Juergen... Give me some time. He knows many engineers and designers, esp. in the amateur market.

 

The venerable John (Mr. John Pytlak of Eastman Kodak, Rochester, NY, deceased unfortunately) would be the best person for the questions about the design... I missed him so much!

 

Unfortunately, some of engineers I know in the former Soviet Union work in serious military projects and don't prefer to exchange mails with me anymore... :( Some doesn't speak English and German, also my Russian is not so good to discuss the detailed subjects...

[Tom Chabbat]

Thank you so much Erkan ! I'm sure M. Lossau will have some precious insight. Let's wait then !

 

To bad the Soviet engineers you know won't help... Their knowledge bust me so valuable...

[Erkan Umut]

Tom, I have many Russian books, which are the best in the world in the field, so I will search for the subject, at least the design parameters for the KASSETA-8 re-loadable cartridges. Need time...

[Tom Chabbat]

But you really are a gold mine ! I'll let you dig then ! :)

[Friedemann Wachsmuth]

Oh boy, the sole idea to compare camera qualities based on compressed and edited digital transfers is really quite telling already.

 

Some Super 8 facts:

 

- The film guiding piece with the gate – let me call it film track – (usually metal) in each Super 8 camera, together with the pressure pad in the cartridge, forms a channel for the film to run in. This channel is supposed to have 0,14mm space for the film. The Kodachrome films that introduced Super 8 where 0,13mm thick, so the film "ran free" in the channel, unlike to how pressure plates work.

 

- Kodak themselves had a non-flat film track e.g. in the Kodak M4 Instamatic Camera. There were little ramps before and after the gate to put the film into a slightly concave shape in the gate. This was supposed to compensate for optical imperfections in the relatively simple lenses (and it worked!). Do you see that a concave shape does not fit together what a pressure plate does?

 

- Actually, some high-end S8 cameras as the Nikon R10 and I think also the Leicina Spezial use the same trick, so this wasn't a one-off. Ergo: S8 Cartridges do not contain a pressure plate. The pressure pad forms one side of a channel and does neither work like a pressure plate.

 

--> The channel allows film to move back and forth and causes "pumping" focus as well as non-flat focal planes. (I hope my terms are understandable, I am not a native speaker)

 

- To keep the film in place during exposure, the cartridge is supposed to provide a certain, defined friction. Since the film core is turned constantly, the film is also pulled constantly by the core. The pulling torque is higher at the beginning of a cartridge (small core diameter) than at the end (high core diameter). While the core is supposed to be wound with a torque of iirc 90-110 cN, this torque alone must not advance the film. Only when supported by the claw the film must move.

 

- To achieve the required transport friction, Kodak relied on and defined a bunch of different parameters, such as the film's thickness, the film base's bending behavior/flexibility, the presence of a remjet layer on the back side, a slip disc in the unexposed-compartment, several 90° and 360° curves the film has to take (one with roller, one without) plus a defined tension on the film due to the ratchet on the wind-up core. There are like two dozens of parameters that have to be right to achieve the right friction.

- Just to revive memory: In "normal" cameras, the pressure plate is supposed to hold the film steady during exposure, provide this friction. Sprocket gears do the continuos movement, the two film loops give space during exposure and the claw advances "under" the pressure plate while the shutter is closed. This system basically depends on one parameter only: the pressure plate force. All other speeds and forces are defined.

 

So far so good -- the S8 system worked surprisingly well and often still does! However, it is far away from ingenious. Film today is thicker than Kodachrome was (7285 for example has 0,15mm after development). Other film is stiffer, especially Fujis, also some slide materials as EPY/E64T. Then, modern films often no longer have the remjet layer. Kodak's cartridge molds and manufacturing steps are not as precise as they used to be. For example, the slip discs (which only people who do the development ever see) often have rough edges these days and tend to not move. Camera's wind-up torque is most often below 80cN sicne the slip clutches got oily or aged. There are many other factors here that can impact. Not one of these things is to blame -- its usually a sum of factors that cause the S8 system to run out of specs and start showing failure (as way too much jitter, bad sharpness etc).

 

Due to the high complexity of this system, it tends to fail (your words actually!) and any camera with a straight film-path, two loops, a pressure plate and ideally sprocket gears is and will be superior to the S8 system.

 

TL;DR: Super 8 Cartridges can work well (as in Jose Luis Example), but they often don't. Servicing a camera often helps, but often not, since other factors (film, cartridge) chime in. "Invention of a better cartridge" is a nice idea but won't bring any guarantees, since there still would be no loops, no sprocket gears, no straight film path.

 

Sorry for the long read. I hope this clarifies some things for those who didn't know and also explains why standard systems (sprocket gears, pressure plate film loops) are desirable normality and not at all "over-complexity".

 

(Oh, and to everybody who followed me till here it should be clear now why the GK Framemaster plate is not without risk. It can help, but it can also make things worse. Hint 1: Measure the Current on your Camera Motor with and without the little shiny plate. Hint 2: Consider what it does to light hitting emulsions that don't have a remjet layer.)

[Tom Chabbat]

Sorry Friedemann, but you don't seem to understand really well how the cartridge works... If the film is supposed to "run freely" as you imply, why putting a spring loaded pressure pad behind it ? Why even putting "pressure" in its name if it does not apply any ? A fixed plate would have done the same job.

 

I know the ramps you're talking of, I've seen them on a R10. They DO NOT make the film concave. If you observe it closely, you'll see that their thickness in the end does not exceed those of lateral film guides, which stays STRAIGHT around the gate. And to prove it, photo of the R10 gate, and, bonus, of a M4 (which looks straight don't you think ?). What purpose really have these ramps ? Between the film guides and over and under the gate aperture, there's a recess so the part of the film which is not placed on the aperture have less friction when moving. The ramps just help to delicately put this part of the film over the aperture which is in another plane so it can then be held tightly between the gate and pressure pad.

 

You describe very well that Kodak designed their cartridge so that the film has the right friction when moving. But you misinterpret the goal to have this "right friction". It is not to replace the pressure pad function, it is to assure the film, when moving inside the cartridge, forms the right loops so the pull down claw intermittent action does not perturbe the winding of film around the take up reel. You made me read the patent, you should read it too, all of this is very well explained. The patent describe very well the goal of this design. Here's the link for all of you who are interested in technical details ! :)

 

But you've got one thing right actually, that the GK plate adds some friction to the film since it's pushing the pressure pad back, adding more tension on its springs.

[Anthony Schilling]

 

The channel allows film to move back and forth and causes "pumping" focus as well as non-flat focal planes

This is another problem problem that's just as common as jitter, i always referred to it as "frame breathing"... where the film moves in and out of focus. It happens more often and more pronounced at the end of a roll from the memory curl on the film. This is why DS8 is so much sharper than S8.

[David Cunningham]

It's amazing how this thread has gone on. We are a passionate bunch about our 8mm. :)

 

Something was said earlier that I must correct. The DS8 and Regular (Double) 8mm pressure plate and pull down system is not even close to the same as super 8. It's actually almost identical to regular 16mm. The pressure plate presses evenly on the entire 16mm surface of the film, with the edge of the gate preventing significant "breathing". So, between the even pressure and breathing aspects, there is a lot that is superior to the image in Double Super 8.

 

Although the overall design of the Super 8 system may have been very good and the system works extremely well when working and used properly, all the reasons mentioned in this thread are reasons why it simply does not work very well a significant portion of the time. The cartridge was designed for film with characteristics that simply do not exist anymore. Also, the cartridges themselves seem to have inconsistencies that cause problems.

[Anthony Schilling]

Looking at all the super 8 footage that my Grandpa shot... he could barely focus the lens so i wouldn't want to see him try to thread film into a pin registered gate. The cartridge has served its purpose.

 

The DS8 and Regular (Double) 8mm pressure plate and pull down system is not even close to the same as super 8. It's actually almost identical to regular 16mm

Exactly, the Scoopic 16mm and Scoopic DS8 are basically the same camera aside from the gate size and sprocket size.

[Friedemann Wachsmuth]

+1, David and Anthony.

[Friedemann Wachsmuth]

Tom: Measure the width of the R10's film gate. It is narrower than the spec suggests. Guessing why?

[Erkan Umut]

Tom: Measure the width of the R10's film gate. It is narrower than the spec suggests. Guessing why?

 

Friedemann, I will announce the official parameters for the Nikon R10 soon, just examining the drawings of it...

[Andries Molenaar]

Sorry Friedemann, but you don't seem to understand really well how the cartridge works... If the film is supposed to "run freely" as you imply, why putting a spring loaded pressure pad behind it ? Why even putting "pressure" in its name if it does not apply any ? A fixed plate would have done the same job.

The description of Friedemann is the acurate one. The same understanding of how it works was described here a year ago (or so). By somebody else :) Not me or Friedemann.

 

The R10 ramps (and in R8, 8x super Zoom) at the centre are there to cast the film to the far end in the channel where the focus was put by the NIKON designers and factory. Also the the R10 stop-pin makes sure the film is not yanked past the gate too easily when the shutter is open. This way the R10 out classes all others. Nikon engineers had a good grasp of the features of the S8 cartridges and way of working.

 

BTW Leicina Special have no ramps and have a straight plane gate which is suppose to be crafted from a spage age material.

Edited November 25, 2013 by Andries Molenaar

[Friedemann Wachsmuth]

BTW Leicina Special have no ramps and have a straight plane gate

Yes, mea culpa -- I was wrong here. I am pretty sure that Leicinas also have a slightly narrower film path than the spec suggests, though. That's probably how I mixed it up.

[Erkan Umut]

Also the the R10 stop-pin makes sure the film is not yanked past the gate too easily when the shutter is open. This way the R10 out classes all others. Nikon engineers had a good grasp of the features of the S8 cartridges and way of working.

 

Noo, the stop pin is just for the reverse shot for accurate framing! During forward it has no effect!!! You have to examine it with a clear film like a leader...

Also, the frame size is a little different than most cameras have.

Edited November 25, 2013 by Erkan Umut

[Erkan Umut]

Guys, do not stick to the standards you read, they are not the blue prints!!! The standards show you just a way in a long path to design...