Feature film

[benson86]

Hi guys, I'm new to this group. I am interested in shooting a low budget film, and I really don't want to shoot video. I am intrigued by the idea of shooting super8.
Is there any real cost savings by shooting super8 rather than super16?
The film would be 90min, and I hope to get some cable tv exposure. What do you guys think? I am open to any suggestions.
TIA
Benson.

[tripplezero]

There is loads of info here well worth your time to read all the post.
look at this post for a start

Shooting a Super 8 Feature need some advice

[AlexGfromUK]

you will save a heap by shooting super8 rather than super16, because the filmstock is less than half as much, lab costs are a lot lower, and for the money it would cost you to rent a super 16 or any 16mm camera for a day you could buy a very nice super 8 camera to keep for life. so there you go.

[ekoe]

wow, benson.
that's a great question.
can we actually sit back and formulate a 'line-item budget' type deal to determine the effective cost savings of shooting super8mm in comparison to shooting super16?
or not even so detailed.
can we estimate a cost savings from super16 to super8mm, camera equipment, stock, and lighting rental, finishing to video, for a 90 min. script? and show your work. : )
we need somebody who works in both super8 and super16 to objectively answer this.
please help.

[Actor]

Super16 is a wider aspect ratio than super8, 5:3 vs 4:3, and costs a bundle. You can get a super16 camera for about $5000 (Bolex) but a good one will set you back $15,000 - $20,000 (Arri or Aaton). Also there is no such thing as a super16 projector. S16 is meant to be either telecined or blown up to 35mm.

On the other hand regular 16 with the same aspect ratio as super8, 4:3, is a lot less expensive. As a practical matter distribution of a super8 film would have to be on video so the only difference between super8 vs reg16 is the cost of the film and processing, about $2000 for an 80 min feature. Figure another $1000 to cover the additional cost of a 16mm camera.

[rollemfilm]

super16 is for 35mm blow up. you'll be wasting extra funds by shooting this. consider these problems also: most super8 cameras are nosiy. if you spend the extra money on a quiet/synced super8 you'll be in the $2,000 range. You can get a CP16 or an Arri S for that amount. CP16's are already sync cameras. Film stock price is a consideration. But you can get a 400ft roll of B&W for arond $100.00. Although you may not even be considering B&W, you can shoot 16mm fairly cheap. I shoot super8 because I like the small cameras and the look. I also like 16mm for what it offers. I guess the main question here is: have you shot and edited a short film yet? Have you shot any film at all, ever? You might want to start with a non-sync super8 camera and shoot some film and see what you think. You might even consider getting a old Bolex H8 and try that. I think when you consider la, telecine & editing fees, it won't be all that much money saved. But if you like the way it looks, shoot super8.

[benson86]

Thanks for all your help. I see I have a lot of research to do.
From what I can see, the 8mm cameras and film stock are less expensive than 16mm, but telecine is about the same for a pro job. I guess it is a question of crunching the numbers, and an artistic choice.
Benson.