Super 8 Watch: Takin' names

[MovieStuff]

Hi all!

Recent posts by myself and others that have spoken with Kodak in the past has prompted me to offer this suggestion. I have been as guilty as anyone of talking to people at Kodak about the future of Kodachrome and super 8 and then relaying that information to this list and others, never really making a note of who told me what or when.

As a result, I would like to dedicate this thread to specific information, names and dates of people that any of us talk to at Kodak or any other supplier of film or developing services. This way, instead of speculation and endless debates about the accuracy of what someone told someone else, we will have specific names, phone numbers and extensions and emails for these "inside" contacts. That way, anyone can double check that information at any time for validation.

Hopefully, this thread will be a means of tracking and sorting information related to the future of super 8 products and services. That way, IF super 8 or any related products or services are threatened, we won't be blind sided by either misinformation or sudden loss of resources.

Every so often I, or someone else on this list, needs to kick this topic to the top of the list so that it stays visible. If you see any comments about specific information from specific people (not unsubstantiated rumors) copy and past that information here, even if it appeared on another list.

Frankly, I see no other way to track this sort of thing accurately. This may be no better, but at least some effort will be made to keep the information organized and perhaps we can begin to piece together a more accurate picture of Super 8's future.

Roger

------------------
Roger Evans
MovieStuff
http://www.afterimagephoto.tv/moviestuff.html

[MovieStuff]

Okay, here is what I do not understand about Kodak. I keep hearing about how the release of a 200 ASA negative stock is some sort of indication that Kodak is an avid supporter of super 8 and its users' needs. But, all along, Kodak has had a 200 ASA Kodachrome stock that they have NEVER released in Super 8, even though such a stock would be far more benificial to the larger group than a grainy neg that can only be viewed if transferred to video.

More importantly, it is now a fact that Kodak will no longer make any more Kodachrome 200.

Please see:
http://www.kodak.com/cgi-bin/webCata...nal+Film+(PKL)

So what gives? There is no comparison between Ektachrome 200 and Kodachrome 200 in any format. But for Kodak to drop something as beneficial as Kodachrome 200 without so much as a passing thought about applying it to Super 8 seems odd and makes the release of the 200 neg seem more like a token effort than an actual act of support for the super 8 community at large.

I mean, which would YOU prefer to shoot? Vision 200 neg, Ektachrome 200 or Kodachrome 200?

Roger

------------------
Roger Evans
MovieStuff
http://www.afterimagephoto.tv/moviestuff.html

[StopMoWorks]

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Courier, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by MovieStuff:
Kodak has had a 200 ASA Kodachrome stock that they have NEVER released in Super 8, even though such a stock would be far more benificial to the larger group than a grainy neg that can only be viewed if transferred to video......More importantly, it is now a fact that Kodak will no longer make any more Kodachrome 200. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Well, I am not that familiar of what motion picture film is used more commonly in the other larger guage formats. Was Kodachrome 200 previously available for 16mm movie format or only for still photo work (slides)? Maybe not enough demand or something and the Kodak corporate people using their film sales pie charts/graphs, saw minimal usage of K200? Yeah, it "sucks" regarding whatever unknown reasoning Kodak uses to make decisions to discontinue some of their film products.

Roger, I still like your previous clever thoughts of Kodak, perhaps providing an ECO Super 8 stock that would especially be good for transferring. If somehow the Kodak marketing people could be lobbied to SEE the sales angle of how a Super8 Eco stock would be the marriage/connection medium between "Super8 film to Digital".....which in this digital age, it seems many Super 8 aficianados want to do or are already doing via the film transfer/telecine houses (ECO providing lesser contrast build-up) then doing all Super 8 post, digitally, using affordable NLE setups, but retaining the original chemical based "film look" (as originally shot)....and releasing the final Super8 product to video, vcd, dvd, web. We just have to figure out the how/where to process Super8 Eco. Browsing other Super 8 sites, reading other forums, it is just difficult for me to determine if Kodak does really have that commitment/compassinate heart in continuing to serve the niche needs of the worldwide Super 8 market.....possibly still small compared to Kodak's other divisions/products....but maybe I am wrong.....we are just not privy to Kodak's Super8 sales figures.

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Courier, Arial">quote:</font><HR> So what gives? There is no comparison I mean, which would YOU prefer to shoot? Vision 200 neg, Ektachrome 200 or Kodachrome 200?<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

In my early Super 8 days, I have only used K40 & Ektachrome 160....not for any kind of high end pro use, but for my early/crude stop motion animation & special fx practice/tests. I went to Kodak's Super 8 site and I did not see the Ektachrome 200, but they have Ekt 125.
http://www.kodak.com/US/en/motion/super8/film.shtml

Lionel


[This message has been edited by StopMoWorks (edited December 16, 2001).]