Super-8 Looks great on Movie Theatre Video Projection Systems...

[Alex]

I checked out the Flicker Fest in LA last night. One thing is for sure, Super-8 film, rank transferred to Beta-Cam SP, STILL looks like film when video projected full size in a theatre setting that seats over 600.

I don't believe it is necessary to bump a Super-8 film to 35mm for theatre projection, it might be advantagious if you can afford to bump your film to 35mm, but don't let that be the reason you don't screen your super-8 or 16mm film in a theatre setting.

Any super-8 image that I saw last night, that was properly exposed, be it BW Tri-X or Plus-X, or Ektachrome, looked terrific when it was video projected. (Kodachrome was not an option for last night's screening because of the delay in getting the film developed)

The Super-8 films transferred to Video looked like film when it hit the big screen. Add a good sound track, and the audience had a good time.

Film origination, digital destination.

I enourage anyone out there who has wanted to screen their Super-8 or 16mm film on a big screen to not be worried about the "quality" of the projected video image.

If the movie theatre has a Hi-quality video projection system, and your super-8 or 16mm film transfer is done via rank-cintel technology and properly exposed, you will be happy with the results when shown on the big screen.

If anyone offers Hi-Def transfer of Super-8, Super-8 would definitely be a viable format for the video theatrical release of movies. [img]graemlins/thumbs_up.gif[/img]

[TA 152]

<font color="#a62a2a" size="1">[ August 28, 2003 05:14 AM: Message edited by: S8 Booster ]</font>

[Alex]

Poor little orphan Super-8.

Those who shoot Mini-DV see their images on the big screen and fall in love, those who shoot Super-8 wish it were 16mm or 35mm and are disappointed.

But Super-8 compared to Mini-DV, hands down I'd rather shoot ANY of the film stocks currently available, and project via a high quality video projector.

The poorly exposed shots last night didn't look too good, but then again, they were poorly exposed! The properly exposed shots looked fine, the properly exposed shots with reflector boards looked terrific.

[Alex]

Even festivals that screen Super-8 should consider tranferring their festival films to video and having another screening on the really big screen.

[Alex]

I had a chance to speak briefly with the director of the United States Super 8 Film and Digital Video Festival.

I was pleased to hear that the United States Super 8 Film and Digital Video Festival uses a video projector with 10,000 lumens (I don't know if when he said that he was stating it as the exact amount or just as an example of a large number), that they have screened many super-8 films that were played back on VHS, and that the Super-8mm to VHS looks shockingly good when projected via their state of the art projection system. [img]graemlins/film.gif[/img] [img]graemlins/idea.gif[/img] [img]graemlins/thumbs_up.gif[/img]

[Mike Buckles]

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size=2 face="verdana, sans-serif">quote:</font><table border="0" width="90%" bgcolor="#333333" cellspacing="1" cellpadding="0"><tr><td width="100%"><table border="0" width="100%" cellspacing="0" cellpadding="2" bgcolor="#FF9900"><tr><td width="100%" bgcolor="#DDDDDD"><font size=2 face="verdana, sans-serif"> The poorly exposed shots last night didn't look too good, but then again, they were poorly exposed! The properly exposed shots looked fine, the properly exposed shots with reflector boards looked terrific </font></td></tr></table></td></tr></table></BLOCKQUOTE> Are you referring to the super 8 films? And as far as your reference to reflector boards, did you mean outdoors?

[Alex]

At the Flicker Fest that was held at the Egyptian Theatre in November of 2002, all the films were Super-8.

There was one film BW film that looked really bad. Most BW Super-8 have a neat look to them. But one BW film didn't look so good. I think it had to do with trying to "lift" the black level on shots that already had the black levels "crushed".

In essence, making the BW contrasty film look "milky".

The reflector boards comment was directed toward the outside shots. The properly exposed shots looked like film, projected on a big screen.

If one sits in the first couple of rows in the front of the theatre, the film "may" look ultra-grainy, but from the rest of the theatre seats, the images looked like film.

Is anybody going to Rutgers College for the Super-8 Film Festival the weekend of Feb.21-23, I'd love to hear how those Super-8 films look projected on a big screen, especially since they may be projected from VHS. I have a feeling they are going to look pretty decent.

[Mike Buckles]

Thanks, I was considering some reflectors for outdoor use in the future, and you've just given me a good reason to get them! But first I'm buying gel holders for my indoor lights to put diffusers to soften the light...one thing at a time!

[Alex]

I did video camera on a "behind the scenes" for a trilogy that will be on Showtime in a couple of months.

At the end of the final shootday, they had these 4 feet by 8 feet pieces of foamcore (they're actually thicker than foam core) that have have silver reflective material on one side of them.

They work just like more expensive reflector boards, except they are rather flimsy and if it's windy outside you'd spend all your time trying to keep them from moving.

[Alex]

Ha ha.

I've been "offered" the opportunity to edit the behind the scenes footage that I shot. But the money may be so low that I may have to turn it down.

I shot 6 hours of footage, and cutting that down to an interesting 5 or 10 minute piece is going to take a lot of work, a lot of work.

If I don't do it, the odds are whoever does edit it will not only do a half-arsed job, but they'll probably complain about what I shot...

Technically, I covered myself by using some tricks. Because I didn't have a sound person, I purposely used two distinctly different sound level recordings on the two audio tracks even though I had only one microphone.

The result is that one track should always have an optimal sound level. The problem is one track will also not be optimal.

Can I really expect an NLE editor to understand what I did and watch for that? Can I really expect another editor to know how to "clip" the video signal at 100% and the set-up precisely at 7.5., match color intensities shot by shot, smooth out the audio, all of this on a low budget behind the scenes video???

I doubt it, so I may ask that if I don't edit it that my name not be on the piece at all.

But thanks for the royalty comment...hehehehe....

hey, they shot film, and I made sure to get shots of the film cans, camera reports, the camera...etc.