Super 8 vistavision?

[Greg Crawford]

ACTOR "Pro8mm (formerly Super8Sound) / is definitely overpriced and not the place to go for price comparisons."

You missed my point, using Super 8 was a fast and easy way to compare apples and apples. And YES, they are pricey.

Going to shooting double 8 on 16 mm film has both up and down sides.

I used double 8 back in the early 60's I remember always losing the first shot after turning the real over. Remember seeing a scene starting with orange-red streaks.

By going to a 16 mm camera you would probably gain better registration, better pressure plate system for greater sharpness. Better selection of C mount lenses....but in some cases slower and longer lenses. More selective focus would be an advantage.

Actors comparison about cost of double 8 sounds good. Designing and making a bracket so you could mount the camera on your tripod would be costly.

You would ultimately then have a heaver....slower to work with machine...and more obvious to on-lookers ... could be a disadvantage to Run & Gun Super 8 filmmaking.

On the Positive side I would feel like I'm not filming with equipment that should have been used as props in the next Mad Max epic.

[Greg Crawford]

[QUOTE]Originally posted by bossjock-dp:
[QB]ACTOR "Pro8mm (formerly Super8Sound) / is definitely overpriced and not the place to go for price comparisons."

You missed my point, using Super 8 was a fast and easy way to compare apples and apples. And YES, they are pricey.

Going to shooting double 8 on 16 mm film has both up and down sides.

I used double 8 back in the early 60's I remember always losing the first shot after turning the real over. Remember seeing a scene starting with orange-red streaks.

By going to a 16 mm camera you would probably gain better registration, better pressure plate system for greater sharpness. Better selection of C mount lenses....but in some cases slower and longer lenses. More selective focus would be an advantage.

Actors comparison about cost of double 8 sounds good. Designing and making a bracket so you could mount the camera on your tripod would be costly.

You would ultimately then have a heaver....slower to work with machine...and more obvious to on-lookers ... could be a disadvantage to Run & Gun Super 8 filmmaking.

On the Positive side you would not feel like my using equipment that should have a prop in the next Max epic.

[Greg Crawford]

[QUOTE]Originally posted by bossjock-dp:
[QB][QUOTE]Originally posted by bossjock-dp:
[QB]ACTOR "Pro8mm (formerly Super8Sound) / is definitely overpriced and not the place to go for price comparisons."

You missed my point, using Super 8 was a fast and easy way to compare apples and apples. And YES, they are pricey.

Going to shooting double 8 on 16 mm film has both up and down sides.

I used double 8 back in the early 60's I remember always losing the first shot after turning the real over. Remember seeing a scene starting with orange-red streaks.

By going to a 16 mm camera you would probably gain better registration, better pressure plate system for greater sharpness. Better selection of C mount lenses....but in some cases slower and longer lenses. More selective focus would be an advantage.

Actors comparison about cost of double 8 sounds good. Designing and making a bracket so you could mount the camera on your tripod would be costly.

You would ultimately then have a heaver....slower to work with machine...and more obvious to on-lookers ... could be a disadvantage to Run & Gun Super 8 filmmaking.

On the Positive side you would not feel like your using equipment that should have a prop in the next Max epic.

[Greg Crawford]

[QUOTE]Originally posted by bossjock-dp:
[QB][QUOTE]Originally posted by bossjock-dp:
[QB]ACTOR "Pro8mm (formerly Super8Sound) / is definitely overpriced and not the place to go for price comparisons."

You missed my point, using Super 8 was a fast and easy way to compare apples and apples. And YES, they are pricey.

Going to shooting double 8 on 16 mm film has both up and down sides.

I used double 8 back in the early 60's I remember always losing the first shot after turning the real over. Remember seeing a scene starting with orange-red streaks.

By going to a 16 mm camera you would probably gain better registration, better pressure plate system for greater sharpness. Better selection of C mount lenses....but in some cases slower and longer lenses. More selective focus would be an advantage.

Actors comparison about cost of double 8 sounds good. Designing and making a bracket so you could mount the camera on your tripod would be costly.

You would ultimately then have a heaver....slower to work with machine...and more obvious to on-lookers ... could be a disadvantage to Run & Gun Super 8 filmmaking.

On the Positive side you would not feel like my using equipment that should have been a prop in the next Max epic.

[Actor]

<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">
I used double 8 back in the early 60's I remember always losing the first shot after turning the real over. Remember seeing a scene starting with orange-red streaks.
</font></td></tr></table></td></tr></table></BLOCKQUOTE>
That's a given with 100' daylight loads. A 100' spool of 16mm is supposed to actually be 120' long. You run off 10' (about 15 seconds) after you have buttoned up the camera and before you start shooting. You also have to keep an eye on the footage meter and quit filming while there is still 10' left, then roll that off before you unbutton the camera.
<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">
Designing and making a bracket so you could mount the camera on your tripod would be costly.
</font></td></tr></table></td></tr></table></BLOCKQUOTE>
You might not have to build a bracket. A friend of mine who has some expertise in optics says there is some kind of prism (or arrangement of mirrors) that will rotate an image 90 degrees. Maybe if you browsed the Edmund Scientific Catalog ...
<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">
You would ultimately then have a heaver....slower to work with machine...and more obvious to on-lookers ... could be a disadvantage to Run & Gun Super 8 filmmaking.
</font></td></tr></table></td></tr></table></BLOCKQUOTE>

Probably no way around that.