Dumb Question for the Day

[tfunch24]

When Kodak discontinued the sound-striped cartridges, they explained that the sound striping process was too toxic for the EPA to stomach. They also mentioned that they had only sold 1,000 units in the past two years--a more persuasive explanation for why they dropped the stock. What exactly is so toxic about applying a magnetic sound strip to celluloid?

Tom

[TA 152]

Cant?t really help you but I read on the Kodak WEB that they discontinued the mag soundstriping of all their film material at the same time in 1997? That includes 35 and 16mm so most likely the process (or machinery?) faced some obstacle.

R

[lightfeat]

I think it was the glue itself that was too toxic, from what I've read. The alternatives were expensive to implement. I'm interested to hear they only sold 1000 units of the stuff, especially as everyone bemoans it's lack now.

It was gone before I started using Super8, so I'm interested: Was it much more expensive than the standard stuff? I wonder how much they sell of non-sound Kodachrome nowadays?

Lucas

[c_77]

I'd love to see the sales reports for the super 8 film over at Kodak. From what I've seen, the sound stuff was barely more expensive which may be why they cut it. Does anyone recall the prices of the sound stuff?

I started super 8 long after it was discontinued but it's a real shame. I have shot some myself and even watched my friend's childhood "neighborhood movies" from the early 80's all done with sound film and it's a ton of fun.

I know all the super 8 pros out there have their synched cameras and Sony MD's but to me this is really taking it to an extreme level. There was something more spontaneous when anybody could just go and shoot with a sound cartridge!

[tfunch24]

Some time ago someone posted either here or on S8 Forum the Kodak press release announcing the decision to eliminate mag striped S8 film. In that document, they explained that they had only sold 1,000 units in two years (1995-97) and that the process of striping the film was toxic enough to warrant the attention of the EPA. Try a search of S8 Forum and see what turns up. Correct me if I'm mistaken as I'm going by memory.

I find it hilarious that there are people who think that they're "pros" just because they shoot S8 rather than video whine about not being able to buy sound-striped carts. A real "pro" would most likely shoot double-system sound, n'est-ce pas?

Tom

[c_77]

There is a link to the article right on Mike Brantley's Page. As for the 1,000 unit sales, that seems to apply only to the big 200' rolls. This makes sense because only a handful of cameras could even use them.

http://www.super8filmmaking.com/kodak.htm

I don't know, maybe it's me but I don't hear enough whining about the the sound film anymore. IMHO a real "pro" would be making their film in 35mm!!

<font color="#a62a2a" size="1">[ January 30, 2003 05:29 PM: Message edited by: c_77 ]</font>

[tfunch24]

C_77 wrote:
<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"> As for the 1,000 unit sales, that seems to apply only to the big 200' rolls. </font></td></tr></table></td></tr></table></BLOCKQUOTE>

That's what I was referring to when I wrote:

<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">They also mentioned that they had only sold 1,000 units in the past two years--a more persuasive explanation for why they dropped the stock.</font></td></tr></table></td></tr></table></BLOCKQUOTE>

Sorry about the confusion. I have should made myself more clear on that point.

C_77 wrote:
<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"> don't know, maybe it's me but I don't hear enough whining about the the sound film anymore. </font></td></tr></table></td></tr></table></BLOCKQUOTE>

I've been lurking here for a little over a year (and posting semi-regularly since August) and every now and then there has been a debate over whether or not Kodak (or someone else) could be persuaded to manufacture sound carts again. It's been awhile since this board has hosted such a debate.

Tom

[Jodes]

hey
Hmm this is really interesting. Im a film graduate and im by no means a pro but i am pissed ya can't get sound. I was told when i brought my camera (about 3 weeks ago) that they can order in sound carts or film or whatever and i live in australia where we don't get crap!! Sounds not a huge problem to get since theres a magical device called a mini-disc recorder and ya can synch it easily in premiere but if there seems to be such a huge demand for sound film ( as this board kinda shows) then isn't kodak abit daft for not making it still? Is it just the toxic thing thats stopping them or the lack of demand?

[Matt Pacini]

The simple answer to all this sound film mania, is this: (At least this is my opinion of what the manufacturers are thinking):

If you want your audio on the same medium as your image, then use video, otherwise, shoot double system sound, like virtually the entire film industry has been doing for a very, very long time.

The fact is, professional filmmakers shoot double system, and so we are now being treated exactly like we've asked to be treated like:
professional filmmakers.

image+sound on the same medium has almost always meant home movie/video market.

So face it; there is never going to be sound film again.
Super 8 is already a small market, and the number of S8 shooters that would buy sound film is probably like 10%-20%, which is so tiny as to be not worth bothering with, from a manufacturing/sales standpoint.

Matt Pacini

[tfunch24]

Matt Pacini Pointed Out That:
<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"> The fact is, professional filmmakers shoot double system, and so we are now being treated exactly like we've asked to be treated like:
professional filmmakers.

image+sound on the same medium has almost always meant home movie/video market.

</font></td></tr></table></td></tr></table></BLOCKQUOTE>

That's what I meant when I wrote that I found it hilarious that people who consider themselves "pros" because they shoot celluloid rather than video whine because sound-striped carts are no longer available. "Pros" mostly shoot double-system sound--not sound striped film.

I'd love to be able to shoot sound but I agree with Matt--all the people here who clamor for sound carts do not constitute a major market, at least according to the big shots.

Hey, at least be happy you have the format.

Tom

<font color="#a62a2a" size="1">[ January 31, 2003 04:29 PM: Message edited by: tfunch24 ]</font>