-
This is a copy of the email I sent. I have deleted the reply. I should have posted to the board for input, sorry everyone. At one time I wanted to suggest that we all send an email with our vote of confidence in super 8 but I think most companies would simply be agitated.
Anyway, here is the letter for your criticism:
Attn: Product development,
The A-Minima is a fantastic new product, congratulations for your hard work. Product innovations such as these help to keep film in the foreground in an increasingly digital world.
As you know, film (including super-8) is still superior to video in most every respect. Fortunately in recent years, great strides have been made to enhance the future viability of film, particularly in the smaller formats.
The Super-8 format offers great potential to both the student and professional filmmaker. Film students can learn the same techniques required to create major motion picture releases in a convenient and cost effective format. Professional filmmakers can exploit the aesthetic potential of super-8 as well as offer their more budget conscious clients a cheaper yet high quality alternative to higher gauge film without resorting to the limitations of video.
Yes the days of consumer filmmaking are all but dead, however, the super-8 format is being given new life by students and independents who would prefer to work with film rather than digital video. The primary attraction to super-8 is that cheap cameras are easy to acquire. The primary detraction from super-8 is the limited availability of professional cameras for more serious exploitation of the format. The only option professionals have are to make expensive retrofits to antiquated cameras that still don't reach the needs of modern filmmaking. The consumer market is dead, but the professional market is full of potential.
From University student films to stop motion shorts, from high profile music videos to ambitious independent features, the potential to exploit the super-8 medium exists but will continue to be smothered without a champion in the professional arena. The notion of a camera with the features and portability of the A-Minima made for the super-8 format excites a great number of amateur and professional filmmakers. New technology to support the format can only strengthen its presence and ultimately allow more filmmakers to gain experience and recognition.
No filmmaker wants to be limited to one format. Whether it is for the sake of artistic vision or economic limitations, small gauge film is an important option, but only so long as the tools are available to help us bring our visions to life. On behalf of all of us who rely on super-8 to express ourselves, please give thoughtful consideration to creating the tools we need to bring this medium into the twenty-first century world of filmmaking.
Thank you so much for your time!
Trevor Brown
-
That?s a great letter. I read an old post that talked something about Vista-8. Why not talking to them about it? That would be even better!!!
I just love the ideas and the people of this site.
-
Remark concerning adjustable viewfinder:
I think a fixed viewfinder is one of the most important things with cameras, that you only held in your hands and don?t lay upon your shoulders (like 16 mm). Our head is the most steady part of our body, compensating any movement. Therefore it is the ideal fixing point for any "handy" camera. A moveable viewfinder like in video camcorders would make the camera less stable to hold, an the pictures taken would become as bouncing as the well-known video quality.
The best viewfinder construction ever made has the Leicina Super8 camera body. There is a head support in the top of the viewfinder to fix the camera right on the bone of your head. The handle is less important, thin and without any special design. It?s a pitty, that Beaulieu don?t adapted such a construction.
The most terrible things ever build are that tiny small camcorders with LCD screens. People hold them like a book inside the palm of their hand, without caring to fix them anywhere. I can only imagin of how the result may bounce!
My requirement to a viewfinder is, that it should be big enough to use with glasses (like Nikon SRL cameras), not sensible for backlight (disadvantage of Beaulieu) and provide a stable connection between head and camera, for stable shooting without triplet.
Pedro
-
Pedro,
However, first I think most of us are looking for 35mm film camera style viewfinder. Meaning if we use a tripod we adjust(rotate) the angle so we are not bending our knees to see it clearly when below eye level or standing on a phone book to get that extra 4 inches of leverage when its above.
Second, a viewfinder is almost a necessity in some shooting situations. For example, if you utilize a shoulder mount for your camera a large viewfinder on several inches away from your face you can easily check framing. Seperate LCD screens for 35mm production is actually pretty popular since it is easily more accessible and the focus is not based in the diopter. And remember a LCD screen is necessary for any Steadycam type operation.
Being a film and video user, I do not agree the 'bouncyness' trait is a video problem as it is more of an unskilled or less praticed camera operator. Since film production is expensive, every gadget is invented to get the shot right the first time- i.e. Steadycam, motorized tripods, etc. We too easily associate video with dramatic/chaotic news coverage and/or our father and his pseudo auteur home videos and not with a $20 million with all the trimminngs Hollywood productions.
BTW- for news type shooting (ENG) those large cameras are actually designed so you can use your cheeks for stability.
All this talk we might as well use 16mm Eclair. I think the better question is 'What is one or two new qualities needed for a modern S8mm camera?"
[This message has been edited by crimsonson (edited July 30, 2001).]
-
Actually , I think DS8 would be a better choice for a new professional 8mm camera .
Matt
-
I think the topic of this thread should really be called,"How little money do you really want to spend on a Super 8 camera?"
I know this discussion is mostly pie-in-the-sky dreaming, but even if there were a camera that had all the features described, how many of you have the money to spend on it? I mean, no company is going to create a new Super 8 camera from scratch and sell it for $300 or so. It's going to cost a LOT more than that.
Besides, technology isn't everything. Skill is more important. Not being sarcastic, but I bet the majority of people currently shooting super 8 don't even use depth of field charts or a tape measure!
In the end, there's only two "professional features" that are found in other formats and mostly missing from Super 8: Money and skill. All the extra buttons in the world won't make up for cheap production values and out of focus shots.
Not being mean, guys. Just realistic.
Roger
-
Moviestuff : Yes , that's true , but were're talking about a professional super 8 ( or pro ds8 ) camera .How many serious cameraman has got his own camera & use it for feature : none .I'd like to train myself on my old 4008 & rent a good ,quiet ,steady professional S8 camera for feature .The DP of "I'm josh polonsky brother" , a new pro full lenght french movie shoot on super 8, said his 7008 broke the fifthe day ...for god sack ....
Matt
PS : My english is preaty bad ,but I'm working on it .
-
I think your English is delightful. Don't change a thing!
Don't get me wrong, I'm not down on the idea of a "dream camera". I just find it funny that so many super 8 users (and I'm not referring to people in this thread, necessarily) really do nothing more than point and shoot. They use auto exposure, auto gain on their sound, omni directional mics, focus by eye, no lighting, no reflectors, transfer on a home video camera with a flickering three bladed shutter then complain that there aren't any cameras with "professional features", as if that were the only weak link in the chain! Doesn't this strike any of you guys as funny? http://www.hostboard.com/ubb/smile.gif
I see it all the time and have for over 25 years. But to be fair, I know a lot of people that shoot video and 16mm the very same way. Nothing really changes, it seems. For THEM the "weak link" is that they aren't shooting in 35mm. Hah!
Roger
-
So...to wrap things up:
1. Super 8 is cost effective, but only if you use reversal film and project. (otherwise you should make more friends and shoot 16mm)
2. Super 8 has no professional or aesthetic merit.
3. Use super 8 long enough to make your neophyte mistakes, then move on to a higher gauge.
4. Forget number 3 because technology will render film useless in the next 20 years.
5. Professional filmmakers never really need to change lenses, they just like to spend money.
6. Ergonomic design is irrelevant.
7. Noisy cameras are a part of the super 8 experience. If you don't like it, shoot high end 16mm or DV.
8. Just because super 8 cameras don't require magazines doesn't mean you shouldn't have to pay for one.
9. There is nothing lacking in super 8 filmmaking, Super 8 Sound has everything you could possibly want and more.
10. If you know enough to need better equipment, then you should know better than to shoot super 8.
No technology isn't everything. But skills have to be learned and learning comes by doing. The reason the majority of people currently shooting super 8 probably don't use depth of field charts and tape measures is because they are trying to learn and simply haven't grown to that level. At some point, the limitations of the super 8 format will supercede the shrinking limitations of the progressing filmmaker and they are left feeling they could do if more flexible tools were available. Super 8 is a powerful visual format, it has simply been locked in a catch 22 for so long there is no way out.
Paying thousands of dollars for a camera that is not dead silent is a waste of money "."
-the village idiot has spoken
-
Hi, Trevor!
Man, did I hit a nerve or something? Your response seems to reflect a defense of the medium, which I never faulted. I think all the formats are fine, from Super 8 through IMAX. My point was that people are NEVER satisfied and often overlook their own technical shortcomings in their search for the ultimate piece of equipment when they really don't know how to use the equipment they already have. Again, if you read my post, you'll see that I spot that tendency in other formats like 16mm and video as well. Heck, the last 35mm shoot I was on, the newbie DP was bitching that they weren't shooting with anamorphics! The funny thing was, he had to reshoot three scenes because of depth of field problems. Why? He focused by eye.
Again, nothing really ever changes, REGARDLESS of the format. I'm not down on Super 8. I simply find people like this amusing. As my momma used to say,"Finish what's on your plate before you ask for more."
Roger
