Use of Super-8 in our feature

[daveduck]

Alex suggested I post a comment about our use of the Beaulieu 4008 in the making of our feature when I inquired as to whether it was okay to post a for-sale notice here.

So here goes, I hope in brief.

The bulk of the film--an action-comedy aimed at SE Asian audiences--was originally planned for 35mm. Budget problems forced us instead to shoot mostly on DV, with some key scenes done in 35mm.

At a couple of crucial points in the story, different characters are drugged with a narcotic. I thought, as the director-main camera operator-idiot who dreamed up the whole exhausting project--that it would be a great effect to shoot the drugged characters' POV in Super-8 for the obvious esthetic provided.

So we bought the 4008 MOS package then sold by Pro8mm (currently marketed by them minus a lens, I see, in what apparently is supposed to be x-treme skateboader colors). I had previous experience a long time ago in a previous century with Super-8 in junior high through the first year of film school.

Sidenote: My favorite camera from those days was a Canon XL-something sound unit that was magnificent. Great sound, lens, features. I was not smart to sell it.

I'd also owned a Beaulieu 5008-S that I had mixed feelings about. The lens was super sharp, but the registration was very poor, especially for one of the most expensive Super 8 cameras around. It was a permanent flaw that could not be tweaked away.

So when it came time to shop for a Super-8 camera in 2000, I was a little apprehensive about only finding Beaulieu as a serious choice from Pro8mm. I didn't want to take a chance on an eBay sale, and we had limited time to get the equipment together.

I did find a couple of low-consumer-grade cameras in thrift stores and shot a couple of test rolls that were processed by Pro8mm, and looked pretty bad. So we bought the 4008 package and hoped for the best.

The initial tests looked better than the thrift store cameras by far. Yet I was a little disappointed to see some slightly visible registration movement. It wasn't as bad as the thrift store cameras, but it was still there. (Do I hear potential buyers fleeing in droves?)

It could be that after leaving Super-8 in the early '80s I had forgotten that it wasn't ever particularly rock-solid in the projection. As far I know, registration pins were never used in any Super-8 camera, leaving it to the pull claw to do the work.

The image, however, was certainly acceptable, especially since these druggy POVs were to be handheld. So off we went on the shoot, pulling out the camera every so often. At times it seemed to double as a piece of exotic art. (The design is pretty appealing.) Even a couple of the actors (born well after Super-8's peak) wanted to fondle the thing. (They did so gently.)

We shot about half of the Super-8 material down in Lone Pine, CA, a desert town famed as a location for many a western. It was not especially hot, but very bright, so we stuck with the lowest asa, finest grain neg stock sold by Pro8mm. Other shots were done on exterior locations in San Francisco, where we used a mid-speed stock to deal with overcast and fog.

One roll jammed, which Pro8mm replaced, saying that they'd had a couple of bad cartridges in a certain batch. The rest ran through fine and the result was pretty much what we had hoped for.

One aspect of this camera I found to be a shortcoming--its shutter. I don't remember now what we determined it to be, but it was far off from the 180 degrees that generally gives you smooth motion. This is a limitation of the camera and there's zip you can do about it at 24fps--fast pans and fast action within the frame will appear slightly strobed, which is not a look that I like. I also found the viewfinder to be dim--the bad old days of flicker were back. But it's a given with this camera. The flip side, of course, is that more light reaches the gate when the shutter is open.

The camera has since sat in its case as we wondered every once in awhile whether we would need it in post production. It has turned out not, so it's for sale.

For another shoot like this I will say that we would not take the same route again. We would probably shoot DV and do filmlook in post. The process would have been faster, and we wouldn't have had to switch cameras and carry extra equipment around. The lab delay with Pro8mm was also a hassle, although again that's the nature of FedExing your film off to L.A. and waiting a week before you see whether a dog hair was in the gate half the time. (Luckily, never. In fact, virtually everything we shot, including some boundary-pushing exposures, looked good.)

So, not so brief, but there you go.

Cheers,

Dave

[Alex]

A lot of great info! Thank you Dave!

Yeah, I could see you wanting to use a slower shutter speed since it is a "narcotic trip" sequence...

...and that camera you remember so fondly was the Canon 814XLS and 1014XLS...two of my favorites!

One way to alleviate the strobe affect is to shoot more shots that are straight on toward the camera rather than shooting lateral movement, however, that may have compromised the artistic intent you were going for.

The Canon's mentioned above have an extra wide shutter angle of 220 degrees, which resulted in a slower shutter speed and probably exactly what you wanted to achieve, or you could shoot with the "normal" shutter speed of 150 degrees. Both shutter speeds have their time and place.

I am a fan of slower shutter speeds for film work, but many like the 4008 specifically because the faster shutter speed makes the individual frames look sharper because they have less blur.

[daveduck]

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size=2 face="Verdana, Helvetica, 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, Helvetica, sans-serif">Originally posted by Alex:

I am a fan of slower shutter speeds for film work, but many like the 4008 specifically because the faster shutter speed makes the individual frames look sharper because they have less blur.[/QB]</font></td></tr></table></td></tr></table></BLOCKQUOTE>

Sure, true for all cameras, even video's electronic shutters. Apparently there are some snowboarders up here shooting their action and specifically doing it in Super-8 with cameras like this one that can capture relatively sharp images at high frame rates. The 4008 maxs out around 70 fps. We didn't get the crystal sync option since none of what we did with the camera was intended to be locked to sound. The frame rate seemed stable at the 24fps setting.

Dave

[daveduck]

Incidentally, a trailer for the movie can be found at http://www.chasingamerica.com

It was a rushed affair to get something up in time for an article that ran in an Indonesian newspaper. None of the Super-8 footage is in the trailer, however.

Dave

[cameraguy]

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size=2 face="Verdana, Helvetica, 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, Helvetica, sans-serif">One aspect of this camera I found to be a shortcoming--its shutter. I don't remember now what we determined it to be, but it was far off from the 180 degrees that generally gives you smooth motion. </font></td></tr></table></td></tr></table></BLOCKQUOTE>

The shutter speed is like 1/85th a second at 24 fps. It acts like a 100 degree shutter angle!!! On top of that you can lock the shutter 1/2 closed for 1/170th shutter speed.