about sharpness of super8

[michael2]

hello
i have been a professional photographer for 20 years and dealing with video for 5 years using high end DV progressive scan "filmlooklike" cameras.( pana25p dvx100, xl1)
I am planning on using super8 in the months to come and here i am a complete "newbe".

It is said that super8 resolution is higher than DV
(more than a thousand lines)

Does it mean that a perfectly shot super8 image,
perfectly develloped , exposed, and transferred with a rank scanner, could be equal or superior in SHARPNESS than a DV progressive scan image.
(I am not speaking here about the "charm" of super8 image.)

all the jpegs seen on the net (or DV samples) look usually very blurry.
I would like to know how sharp a perfect super8 shot and rank transferred would be?
I would not film the same way if i was shooting a
blurry or sharp.

on another side, I found this image on this 8mm site, and it's supposed to be a super8 image. I can't believe it! (I think it is a mistake) Could an expert confirm if it could be a super8 capture or not?
(I would love super8 to look also like that.)

http://www.8mm.filmshooting.com/scri...rames/DSC00026

thank you for answering
michael

[hmc4me]

Hi. This is what I've been told.

Super 8 film is usualy unsharp due to the low end cameras that most people use and the lack of a ground glass focus screen.
I've been told that cheap and even some high priced super 8 cameras have a problem with the focus from the eyepiece to the film frame because most cameras do not hold the film completly still. That is why most of the film you see seem to jump.
I was also told to use a Beaulieu camera because they would turn out much sharper pictures because of the better optics and the ground glass focus screen. See without a ground glass focus screen you are only getting close to the focus you want.
Just like when looking through your SLR camera when you get close to focus your eye will correct for the out of focus image. That is why you have a ground glass focus screen in most of the SLR cameras.
I know this does not answer your question but it gives you the reason why you would have such out of focus pics.
Thanks
Anthony Collins

hi also check out the music video in this post.
http://www.hostboard.com/cgi-bin/ult...c/f/409/t/3521
I think they have great focus.

also check out this post

http://www.hostboard.com/cgi-bin/ult...c/f/409/t/3451

it's got a very good comparison between the different film stocks. I had download all of them. It's worth saving.

[King Ghidorah]

most of the bad photography you are seeing is from some person called SUPER 8 BOOSTER. he looks unable to focus or use a tripod or use a film light and is filming with a mediocre lens or something. one bad photography test after another. so many of them all over the internet.

that is not super 8 you see in that link. there are a handful of okay shots can be found on that site in the kodachrome 40 section. the man and woman intimate faces is a good example. there are some others.

most are not Rank transfers you see on the internet but projector/mirror/video cameras that are not near as good.

not many good professional proper lit setup frames are found on the internet. you will see them in many, many music videos and award winning short films and think they are 16 millimeter.

lens is important. if you want super sharp then buy a Leicina Special and use some Leica primes with it. the 10mm is unbeatable. primes just like you would in your other photography is best.

beaulieu's are okay, but make sure you have it serviced and that the body of camera has been adjusted properly to the lens! Very important. beualieu technicians will explain.

go to pro8mm site and email them for their sample reel if you want to see some good sharp Rank transfered material. not to advertise them, but it is a good way for you to see something decent by people who know how to photograph instead of amateur hobby people like that person mentioned above.

[hmc4me]

I've ask pro8mm for a dvd demo for over 6 weeks now and they keep telling me that it will be mailed that day but I've yet to get a dvd from them yet. If you ask for the dvd then keep up with them and you may need to ask a few times.
Thanks
Anthony Collins

[Ta155]

Originally posted by michael2:
hello
i have been a professional photographer for 20 years and dealing with video for 5 years using high end DV progressive scan "filmlooklike" cameras.( pana25p dvx100, xl1)

Could an expert confirm if it could be a super8 capture or not?
(I would love super8 to look also like that.)

http://www.8mm.filmshooting.com/scri...rames/DSC00026

thank you for answering
michael

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">The image you refer to is not a S8 frame. I shot it with a Sony DCR PC 120 Video camera with a 1.55MP still function. It was posted to show how bad the colours are reproduced with this digital technology. The bad thing is though (if you do not know the real colours of those building) that it came out quite good as seen on a computer. This area is famout for painters.

This one:


is from one of my summer holiday films which King Ghidorah referes to.

The S8 resolution as such is higher than the MiniDV systmes offer but the look is different and the images may not nook as "sharp" but the resolution is higher.

The transfer above is made by a Work Printer manufactured by Roger Evans and the film was transferred by Andreas Wideroe Andersen of Shoot8mm.

If this film was scanned with a High-End digital film scanner the result would probably have been even better in both resolutin and colours since this transfer was made with a 3-chip Mini DV cam as a capturing system. But this transfer is excellent too and gives good value for your money.

And , King - I have not yet posted 1 frame or film clip which is NOT from my holiday or home move films an I am a firm beliver in capturing moments over tripods and originally only intended these film shot back in the ?80 for home use only.

I may soon post some of my REAL stuff so hold on to you hat.

Where?s your FILMS by the way?

R

<font color="#a62a2a" size="1">[ December 01, 2003 04:31 AM: Message edited by: S8 Booster ]</font>

[Ta155]

Originally posted by King Ghidorah:
.......
go to pro8mm site and email them for their sample reel if you want to see some good sharp Rank transfered material. not to advertise them, but it is a good way for you to see something decent by people who know how to photograph instead of amateur hobby people like that person mentioned above.

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">You have no idea of what you are talking about so I suggest you stop misleading newcomers.

R

[cameraguy]

Originally posted by michael2:

on another side, I found this image on this 8mm site, and it's supposed to be a super8 image. I can't believe it! (I think it is a mistake) Could an expert confirm if it could be a super8 capture or not?
(I would love super8 to look also like that.)

http://www.8mm.filmshooting.com/scri...rames/DSC00026

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">No, its not Super 8. Notice below the pic it says DSC00026. Its a digital still.

I'm posting a reply here simply becasue the 'advice' given by AC and KG is not good. I assume you are wanting to use Super 8 cause it looks like film? Perceived sharpness is a result of the stills burning by at 24 fps. You'll never get a good representation of sharpness from a single frame posted on the net not matter how is was transferred. The only way you'll get your answer is to shoot a roll of K40 get it transferred with a rank and see. I say K40 cause its the only stock that has a chance to give you what you are looking for (sharpness without much grain). Negative stock from Pro8 is junk compared to K40. Bet my Bolex on it. All other stocks bring lots of grain into the mix and the grains "charm" is going to put you off, bet my Leicina on it. K40 is a slow speed stock best suited for outdoor use. If you want to do lots of low light interiors you'll want to shoot 16mm negative film instead, bet my Canon on it.

The images posted on the net look soft because of the process invovled getting them there. You have to project it to appreciate what is really there on that timy frame. You don't need a Beaulieu and ground glass (doesn't hurt) to get sharp images. I've shot with lots of different cameras and focus is not much of an issue (until you try macro stuff). Super 8 has a large depth of field compared to larger fomats. If you can stay at f/4 or smaller and less than a 50mm focal length then a monkey or even Al Gore could keep good focus for you. A bigger issue is particular camera performance. Lots of cameras out there are not performing to the specs. Many people will get a "lemon" on ebay and automatically assume all examples of that model are junk. Not true, just THAT one was junk. All camera are 20+ years old now and lots can go wrong. An example would be a hazy element deep inside the lens which reeks havoc on the final image. Try with film before you buy if possible, buying from ebay assumes higher risk despite all the "like new" descriptions.

Have you seen this S8 clip?

www.yemi.com/testClips/testPjpeg480x240.mov

[hmc4me]

Just for the fun of it. [img]smile.gif[/img]
How can my advice be bad. I did not say anything other than what I had researched for over a year now. I just gave the reason why I've been told by many pro super 8 users as to why most images look cheap. I even gave a few examples of where to find info on very good quality films that would change his mind.

I also never said use a Beaulieu. Thats the camera I went with, because of what other pros had told me.
I don't know much but I do know if you give a guy a cheap camera and then give him a good quality camera then he will turn out better pics with the high quality one if he has ever used a camra before.
You are right about the ebay cameras. I got my cameras from ebay but the guy I bought it from is a beaulieu serviceman in France. If you want a beaulieu camera I will give you his email address. I got a perfect camera for $500 and that includes shipping, and it had been serviced and the lense Collimated. It's 10 times better than the other cheap cameras I got but they are real cheap [img]smile.gif[/img] only like $5 from the local flea market.

I don't want to give any bad advice to anyone and I don't know it all myself so point me in the right direction if you can. [img]smile.gif[/img]

I will say that your video is the clearest I've seen yet.

Thanks
Anthony Collins

[King Ghidorah]

other than your opinion on junk negative film, how is my advice not directly the same as yours, yummi?

perhaps you should examine some Ranked footage taken by a professional cinematographer with exr 45 d available from pro8 for yourself. it has a finer grain structure is sharper than kodachrome 40 and much more realistic color.

now an apology is in order

[Ta155]

Originally posted by King Ghidorah:
other than your opinion on junk negative film, how is my advice not directly the same as yours, yummi?

perhaps you should examine some Ranked footage taken by a professional cinematographer with exr 45 d available from pro8 for yourself. it has a finer grain structure is sharper than kodachrome 40 and much more realistic color.

now an apology is in order

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">You haven?t a faintest idea what you are writing about.

R