Jump to content

Super-8 total costs in 2018


Samuel Berger

Recommended Posts

  • Premium Member

Yes, it's a hobbyist thing, but as we all know all professionals started out as hobbyists. If you do have plans (or hopes) of some day doing something that might get shown in theaters and you want to shoot film, you really need to begin with hobbyist reversal shooting. You need to start somewhere. It's too expensive to start out with negatives and prints.

 

But color reversal super 8 hasn't existed "new" for quite a while. So I'm trying to understand in 2018 pre the release of a NEW reversal stock, how is Super 8 really relevant?

 

Also, using the camera to automatically select lens type, shutter speed, f stop and ISO, isn't really 'teaching' you much about the technical aspects of filmmaking. You would learn A LOT MORE shooting with a Bolex with real lenses and a light meter OR a camera like a Blackmagic Pocket Cinema camera which is 100% manual and some inexpensive cine primes.

 

So if the idea is learning how to make movies on film, Super 8 doesn't quite make sense. I guess for experimental stuff where the results don't mean anything and you're just looking for "cool shots" the retro feel of super 8 has some merit, but really only when combined with the reversal stocks. Shooting Super 8 with modern negative and a clean/modern camera, kinda destroys all of that retro feel.

 

Before you go calling me a anti-super 8 person, I have 6 super 8 cameras and shoot the format quite a bit.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

There sure is a lot of Super 8 protesting in the Super 8 subforum. ;-)

 

 

 

But color reversal super 8 hasn't existed "new" for quite a while. So I'm trying to understand in 2018 pre the release of a NEW reversal stock, how is Super 8 really relevant?

 

Also, using the camera to automatically select lens type, shutter speed, f stop and ISO, isn't really 'teaching' you much about the technical aspects of filmmaking. You would learn A LOT MORE shooting with a Bolex with real lenses and a light meter OR a camera like a Blackmagic Pocket Cinema camera which is 100% manual and some inexpensive cine primes.

 

I think Kodak is trying to make it relevant again. That might be the reason behind the new reversal stock, and it's going to work. I don't know whether the camera is going to work out for them or not, but no doubt the film will. There are millions of Super 8 cameras out there.

 

A number of cameras allow you to learn that stuff you mentioned. I learned on Super 8 in the 70s before moving to the Bolex in the 80s. I wasn't unhappy.

 

And I do love the BMPCC, you know that, but it's not film.

 

I would like to say that Cinelab has amazing prices, much more reasonable than Spectra, and anyone looking to both process and scan Super 8 should take their business there.

 

And folks, just a reminder to those who are new to the hobby, and got here through Google: Never do business with Pro8mm.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Premium Member

There sure is a lot of Super 8 protesting in the Super 8 subforum. ;-)

Yar... There is a lot of Red protesting in the Red forums too! hahaha

 

But honestly, if you're such a poor filmmaker that you can't buy a $400 bolex a $60 light meter and find some cheap 16mm stock, then you shouldn't be shooting film.

 

For a 9 year old, super 8 was great! My first Sears super 8 camera cost me $10 dollars and I saved up for it at 9 years old by mowing lawns. I went to the local CVS, paid $4.99 for a roll of film and my parents covered the shipping and processing. That was our deal and I shot a lot of movies for a 9 year old. Remember at the time (1987) camcorders were hundreds of dollars used and even blank tapes were kind of expensive. I stuck with super 8 until I was 12 and the only reason I stopped shooting it is because my at the time, Elmo Super 8 sound camera, had a light leak somewhere in the viewfinder, which was destroying my movies. This was pre-internet and the cost to fix it was exorbitant for a 12 year old. It just so happened, that was the time I started volunteering with the local community access TV station and switched to video.

 

Point being... shooting super 8 when you're 9... that's cool man, go for it. Saying that 16mm is too expensive for "adult" the hobbyist doesn't ring true. The biggest cost difference is the camera, but once you buy a Bolex, you're kinda set until you do sync sound films.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Point being... shooting super 8 when you're 9... that's cool man, go for it. Saying that 16mm is too expensive for "adult" the hobbyist doesn't ring true. The biggest cost difference is the camera, but once you buy a Bolex, you're kinda set until you do sync sound films.

 

I'm not sure anyone is choosing Super 8 over 16mm because of the price. Some of us do love the format, the equipment, the little rolls...and some of us have dedicated most of our filmmaking life to Super 8, not because of cost.

 

I did enjoy your story about saving for that Sears camera, I think a lot of us can relate to that.

 

Speaking of Bolex, I just bought a Bolex Rex 4 H8 for so cheap it's insane (and the only reason I bought it). Now I get to shoot Fomapan regular 8mm for the first time ever. I'm going to feel like I'm young again.. ;-)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Premium Member

I'm not sure anyone is choosing Super 8 over 16mm because of the price. Some of us do love the format, the equipment, the little rolls...and some of us have dedicated most of our filmmaking life to Super 8, not because of cost.

Reversal? Yep... got ya. But shooting negative (the only thing available today in color), transferring it to digital and watching it on a TV monitor? That's not super 8. To me, if you ain't watching it on your projector, you ain't getting the experience.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Reversal? Yep... got ya. But shooting negative (the only thing available today in color), transferring it to digital and watching it on a TV monitor? That's not super 8. To me, if you ain't watching it on your projector, you ain't getting the experience.

 

I agree, that's why I have a projector. I did shoot some negative for that project I told you about. My logic for it was that even though the movie was going to be in S16, the Super 8 camera was less conspicuous. Although, now that I have the Filmo, I will likely use 16mm for sniping shots on locations like that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Premium Member

 

I agree, that's why I have a projector. I did shoot some negative for that project I told you about. My logic for it was that even though the movie was going to be in S16, the Super 8 camera was less conspicuous. Although, now that I have the Filmo, I will likely use 16mm for sniping shots on locations like that.

 

I still have my Elmo super 8 projector, but the poor thing has some odd registration issue that I haven't been able to figure out. So it works, but not great.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

"... using the camera to automatically select lens type, shutter speed, f stop and ISO, isn't really 'teaching' you much about the technical aspects of filmmaking. You would learn A LOT MORE shooting with a Bolex with real lenses and a light meter ..."

 

Good point. Very true. But a bit overwhelming for many. I'd think it best to start with Super 8, get to understand setting up a scene, eyeline/continuity and all that, how to tell a story, telephoto/wide shots, framing, panning speed, etc, tripod use and hand held: the complete and utter basics, without having to worry about all the other 'manual' things. Then move onto 16mm and learn the nuts and bolts of exposure, prime lens selection, ISO and f stop etc etc.

 

And maybe dream of even one day moving up from there ....

 

But Super 8: ahh, it was so great! Brings back great memories. Just point and shoot, really. You can actually direct a picture and shoot the thing as well.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Again, being the new guy here.. I LOVE seeing and reading all the different points being talked about.

 

One thing I will mention, I completely agree about learning the "right" way, manually. Everyone that asks me about getting into photography I always tell them to get an old manual camera and start with that. All my film cameras are manual except for one. I can see how the same logic is applied here. In my case I wanted something I could play with in an Automatic setting, but go manual if I chose (even if limited). I also wanted something portable, sort of. So a Super 8 clicked the boxes. Going in I did tons of research online and saw the differences in resolution and kind of like that old timey/choppy super 8 look. And if it were about resolution, I could have spent less (factoring the costs of film) in digital and gotten great results.

 

I also considered the "K3" to start with. Again, size was an issue. I really wanted something small. When I travel I tend to take more than a few cameras/formats with me, in ONE bag. So the least I can take and be happy is fine with me. These are MY reasons and Im not justifying it for anyone or any reason. I'm Just adding to the conversation on why someone might get into Super 8 at this point and time.

 

 

Oh and what do you guys think about Pro8mm? (jk)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Premium Member

Your Elmo can’t register vertically precisely unless lateral (horizontal) film guidance works properly. Check the gate, whether everything is clean, the side pressure rail moves.

 

I re-built the entire projector. It's WAY better now, but for some reason it still has this odd problem. Basically it was as if the projector had no side rails at all, even though they're in place and springs work great. It's been frustrating!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Premium Member

I personally think the K3 is a better option all the way around. Yea it doesn't have the best pulldown system, but you can get a super 16 K3 from Russia for $200 bux re-built! That's insane! Spinning mirror reflex with an OK lens? Pretty amazing. I'm not a huge fan of the camera, but it's so darn cool in so many ways. It's also smaller and lighter then a bolex, especially a motor drive bolex like mine where you gotta deal with batteries.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I personally think the K3 is a better option all the way around. Yea it doesn't have the best pulldown system, but you can get a super 16 K3 from Russia for $200 bux re-built! That's insane! Spinning mirror reflex with an OK lens? Pretty amazing. I'm not a huge fan of the camera, but it's so darn cool in so many ways. It's also smaller and lighter then a bolex, especially a motor drive bolex like mine where you gotta deal with batteries.

 

I disagree based not only on build quality but on availability of stock. Ektachrome is coming back for Super 8, they have not okayed it for 16mm. I actually have a K3. It has some quirks I'd rather it didn't have. Its only advantage over my Filmo 70 DR is the reflex viewfinder.

For the moment the only color 16mm reversal options are expired stocks, or Wittnerchrome (which few people like). I only shoot B&W reversal in 16mm.

 

Kodachrome was life.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Premium Member

I disagree based not only on build quality but on availability of stock. Ektachrome is coming back for Super 8, they have not okayed it for 16mm. I actually have a K3. It has some quirks I'd rather it didn't have. Its only advantage over my Filmo 70 DR is the reflex viewfinder.

For the moment the only color 16mm reversal options are expired stocks, or Wittnerchrome (which few people like). I only shoot B&W reversal in 16mm.

True... but but but, printing ain't that expensive.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just for reference:

 

Vision3 Stock $25

Develop $18

2K HDR Xena scan $25

 

$68 total for a cartridge.

 

How about for 4K scan?

 

Nice of you to drop by, I'm actually packaging some carts to send your way right now. I didn't see Dropbox as an option in the form, only hard drive, but I know you do send to Dropbox, so can I just add it in the comments box? Thanks.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Considering we are at the two or three year mark for release/availability of the new camera, I have an idea.

Being a longtime, huge fan of Kodak, I feel more than qualified to offer a small amount of advice to Kodak Development.

 

Here goes... please listen close...

Shut up and get to work.

 

Dear lord Development... I have a question... what the hell are you doing?

If any of you had an administration or superior that truly cared for you... you would have been fired many years ago.

Enthusiastic talk of new film stock offerings, new cameras, and a new processing center must stop. I'm embarrassed for you.

 

Kodak, take the advice of a friend, Let's "put our crypto-currencies where our mouth is" and actually produce something.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Also, using the camera to automatically select lens type, shutter speed, f stop and ISO, isn't really 'teaching' you much about the technical aspects of filmmaking.

 

With my Canon 1014E, I select the aperture manually, and I also have the option of adjusting the shutter speed also. I very rarely use auto exposure on super 8. There have also been occasions where Ive used my 35mm SLR's internal meter to take light readings for the super 8 camera.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think it's still all too expensive. That is why 8mm and Super 8mm formats have always been a do it yourself film format. I recommend each enthusiast to do as much as they can for themselves to keep costs down. I mean, the cost of scanning should be in the $5 per 50ft range, processing in the $12 to $18 range, and film costs, well, that we can't control since it's the manufacturer. However, a person processing film themselves and scanning it in, could realistically get the cost per 50ft cartridge under $35 each, that is film, processing and scanning....if doing the latter two themselves. At the very least, cut the scanning cost by doing that yourself if uncomfortable with attempting processing. Those of us who still primarily project, well, it's lower cost, however, we also need to consider digitizing all our films as a pristine backup. Duplicating films is also possible, but costlier unless doing that yourself also via a synchronized refilming (optical print duplication) which can be done. Just some musings of mine on this topic, since I have always tried to keep it affordable (on the cheap) for myself since I was 13 years old.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think it's still all too expensive. That is why 8mm and Super 8mm formats have always been a do it yourself film format. I recommend each enthusiast to do as much as they can for themselves to keep costs down. I mean, the cost of scanning should be in the $5 per 50ft range, processing in the $12 to $18 range, and film costs, well, that we can't control since it's the manufacturer. However, a person processing film themselves and scanning it in, could realistically get the cost per 50ft cartridge under $35 each, that is film, processing and scanning....if doing the latter two themselves. At the very least, cut the scanning cost by doing that yourself if uncomfortable with attempting processing. Those of us who still primarily project, well, it's lower cost, however, we also need to consider digitizing all our films as a pristine backup. Duplicating films is also possible, but costlier unless doing that yourself also via a synchronized refilming (optical print duplication) which can be done. Just some musings of mine on this topic, since I have always tried to keep it affordable (on the cheap) for myself since I was 13 years old.

 

What I would like to see is a hack and modification for the Wolverine to allow scanning at 4k and 24fps. There is currently a software limitation to it that keeps the generated MP4 at 30fps and the scan is not even true HD that I can tell.

Modifying those $300 machines would ensure that future scans for backup purposes cost nothing.

 

Even as things are, the price of cartridges is too high. I look forward to the day when a hobbyist investor will do what it takes to create a slitter/perforator and start selling carts at $8.99 again. Empty carts from Kodak can be purchased at $3 dollars each, it's in their catalogue.

 

Paul Cotto was working on such a machine, but I think he lost interest.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Super 8 has become expensive as hell, but I guess that's what happens with such niche markets. Nowadays I'm paying per roll 35€+17.50€ developing at Andec+15€ telecine + shipping. That's 67.50 plus shipping which comes to about 10-20€ more per order. That's quite a price alright. However I'll say that it's still noticeably cheaper than 16mm, which would be 50€ + 25€ developing + 30€ telecine, comes to 105€ plus shipping, and shipping will be more expensive because of more weight. That's almost twice as expensive. Within the expensive world of film, Super 8 still has the price advantage.

 

I for one don't much care for the enthusiast aspect of Super 8. I mean, I get that some people look for that, and that's cool, but I don't, I just want to shoot on film, whatever format it may be. If I shat money I'd shoot on 65mm ffs. For now Super 8 is the most economic, so it makes sense. If prices were to keep going up I'd might consider exclusively using 16mm, since I recently got me a Scoopic, which is much comfier than the old K3. There is the issue about the weight and size of Super 8 gear vs 16mm, but it's mostly the price for me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...