Jump to content


Fuji Single 8 Bites The Big One -- Kodak Karries On!


  • Please log in to reply
49 replies to this topic

#1 santo

santo
  • Guests

Posted 25 April 2006 - 12:40 PM

So, finally Single 8 is being phased out by Fuji. In the end, Kodak continues on, the choice for filmmakers, the supporter of filmmakers, the champion of filmmakers.

I've always laughed pretty hard at the nonsense on filmshooting/conspiracytheory/slotcars.com with regard to the whining and bitching by about a dozen or two morons who constantly try to point to Fuji as some kind of "great savior" of small format, and Kodak has "forgotten" about them. Now the inevitable has happened. Will they suddenly turn 180 and begin living in reality and accept that Kodak is the only film manufacturing company who ever gave a damn about small format as a media and, though they lost their way for awhile, are now the small format's biggest friend these past 3 or so years? No, I doubt it. Those morons over there won't get it. They'll still blather on endlessly about Fuji this and Fuji that and how great they think Velvia 50 is in super 8, even though it too has been discontinued and looks no better than the Kodak 64t I've seen properly shot, developed, and transfered (three key points) -- except the 64t actually has realistic looking colours and can be used inside, unlike the NOW DISCONTINUED Velvia 50.

Welcome to reality.

http://fujifilm.jp/i...0425/index.html
  • 0

#2 Tim Halloran

Tim Halloran
  • Basic Members
  • PipPip
  • 76 posts
  • Other

Posted 25 April 2006 - 02:43 PM

Blah, blah, blah, blah


More ethnocentric racist swill from the fake filmmaker. Welcome to reality, indeed.

Tim
  • 0

#3 santo

santo
  • Guests

Posted 25 April 2006 - 03:08 PM

This must come as crushing news to you. My condolences.

BTW, Kodak offers 5 professional motion picture film stocks in Super 8. Fuji never made the jump to promoting small gauge as a professional film origination medium by introducing negative stocks, nor black and white. Only home movie grade 25d and 200t reversals.

I actually love Fuji's still stocks and use them all the time in my Olympus OM2n and my old beat-up Pentax K1000. Credit where credit is due and a balanced, logical and realistic perspective, with an emphasis on facts -- the key to life and film shooting success.
  • 0

#4 A.Oliver

A.Oliver
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 348 posts
  • Other
  • Croydon UK

Posted 25 April 2006 - 03:45 PM

Kodak offer 5 professional films!! Amazing that 3 of the so called pro films will fade quicker than the amateur stock they replaced, and in the case of the reversal stock you get double the grain. Why is 64t regarded as a pro stock?
  • 0

#5 S8 Booster

S8 Booster
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 132 posts
  • Other
  • retired

Posted 25 April 2006 - 04:08 PM

yep, the poorest formats allways wins in the end, the vhs, pcs - the list is really endless.

time to turn fuji 16 next.
  • 0

#6 santo

santo
  • Guests

Posted 25 April 2006 - 04:20 PM

Kodak offer 5 professional films!! Amazing that 3 of the so called pro films will fade quicker than the amateur stock they replaced, and in the case of the reversal stock you get double the grain. Why is 64t regarded as a pro stock?


The two black and white films will last longer than Kodacrap40 if you're looking for archival quality. No question or conjecture about it. A 100 years? More?

The two negatives are, well, negatives. The same professional negatives used to make the 30 million dollar films at your local theatre. Sure they'll fade at some point I suppose. But provided they're stored properly (obviously they are never projected), they should be good for your remaining lifespan.

As for 64t, well...

http://wwwuk.kodak.c...9.22.5.30&lc=en

I can't tell you how long 64 will last. Likely as long as your remaining lifespan if stored properly.

What are you putting on your films that you hope will last the ages, anyways?

And if it is so important, why aren't you shooting on black and white or, if you insist on colour, at least making professional digital transfers at at least the uncompressed 10 bit level which can be exactly cloned every 5 or 15 years or whatever without any quality loss just to make sure? HD is going to be with us likely for the next 100 years or more. So is SD quite likely.
  • 0

#7 santo

santo
  • Guests

Posted 25 April 2006 - 04:31 PM

yep, the poorest formats allways wins in the end, the vhs, pcs - the list is really endless.


Not really. I remember my parents had a Beta player. Don't remember any big difference over VHS back then. I suppose technically there was, but I don't remember anything. Likely those who were adults back then, didn't notice any big dif either. Plus VHS evolved over the years to be better than regular Beta was.

PC's are now better than Macs.

Yes, the list is endless.
  • 0

#8 santo

santo
  • Guests

Posted 25 April 2006 - 04:50 PM

Thinking about this, it is really all about evolution. Those who don't evolve, die. That's the way of the world and the marketplace.

Fuji Single 8 never evolved. Kodak Super 8 has evolved and come of age. The latest, most advanced professional negative stocks, revised and modernized black and white reversals, and a snazzy e-6 reversal colour stock -- and relocating the whole operation not only in their professional motion picture division, but they're moving production back to the US with new equipment to ensure excellence. Absolutely astounding and worthy of a standing ovation. Dropping Kodakcrap40 was shedding old skin in the evolution to function viably in the modern world.

Meanwhile, Fuji just continued to offer the same old home movie quality reversal stocks without lifting a finger to modernize their format. They just let it die.

It is a striking contrast in philosophy towards the 8mm format.
  • 0

#9 morris milne

morris milne
  • Guests

Posted 26 April 2006 - 05:02 PM

Those who don't evolve, die. That's the way of the world and the marketplace.


Welcome back governor.
  • 0

#10 Canney

Canney
  • Basic Members
  • PipPip
  • 76 posts
  • Other

Posted 26 April 2006 - 06:27 PM

1. Mac>PC

2. I have never really cared for fuji film in any format. Its just pretty bad when compared to kodak. But the only reason I like kodakchrome 40 is because I could by a cartridge for $12 and get it processed for $5. I have yet to get back some 64T but hope that it better like kodak says.

But yeah Kodak actually puts money and time into making and developing their film stocks. They have released a bunch of new films for S8 over the past couple years and actually care. Plus they have a greater range in types of film and exposures for motion picture.

3. Why is the link to a japaness web site? Could you give me one for english?
  • 0

#11 S8 Booster

S8 Booster
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 132 posts
  • Other
  • retired

Posted 27 April 2006 - 04:11 PM

not the kodak film material - its ok - but the kodapak cartridge no pp vs fuji cart and an in cam pp but possbly also superior fuji perfing for super 8mm format film.

as of yet is seems, like only fuji was capable of perfing 0.10mm thick polyester base film to perfection.

and for us proj buffs; fuji strill add a sounstrack/stripe on the film whilde processing.

shoot
  • 0

#12 John Pytlak RIP

John Pytlak RIP

    (deceased)

  • Sustaining Members
  • 3499 posts
  • Industry Rep
  • Rochester, NY 14650-1922

Posted 27 April 2006 - 04:14 PM

as of yet is seems, like only fuji was capable of perfing 0.10mm thick polyester base film to perfection.

shoot


Kodak perforates billions of feet of polyester film annually, including Super-8 print film.
  • 0

#13 S8 Booster

S8 Booster
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 132 posts
  • Other
  • retired

Posted 27 April 2006 - 05:33 PM

i know, its just that the 8mm (super) perfs are very small and precission is critical and we all know that agfa didnt make it with polyester in the past while fuji did so the question is if kodak is as good as fuji in this context. it may well be but it seems to be a challenge.

other than that the new kodapak carts (64T) seems to have obtained much better - to me acceptable image stability off shelf.
  • 0

#14 John Pytlak RIP

John Pytlak RIP

    (deceased)

  • Sustaining Members
  • 3499 posts
  • Industry Rep
  • Rochester, NY 14650-1922

Posted 27 April 2006 - 07:53 PM

i know, its just that the 8mm (super) perfs are very small and precission is critical and we all know that agfa didnt make it with polyester in the past while fuji did so the question is if kodak is as good as fuji in this context. it may well be but it seems to be a challenge.

other than that the new kodapak carts (64T) seems to have obtained much better - to me acceptable image stability off shelf.


When it comes to slitting and perforating, Kodak's specifications are much tighter than the tolerances allowed by the SMPTE.
  • 0

#15 Alessandro Machi

Alessandro Machi
  • Sustaining Members
  • 3318 posts
  • Other
  • California

Posted 28 April 2006 - 01:13 AM

i know, its just that the 8mm (super) perfs are very small and precission is critical and we all know that agfa didnt make it with polyester in the past while fuji did so the question is if kodak is as good as fuji in this context. it may well be but it seems to be a challenge.

other than that the new kodapak carts (64T) seems to have obtained much better - to me acceptable image stability off shelf.



Nobody should comment on super-8 image stability unless their own 25 year old super-8 camera has had it's film spindle advance clutch adjusted to spec, camera motor properly cleaned and lubricated and proper voltage/current checked from the power supply to all motor parts. As long as the super-8 community advocates the imbecilic attitude that one cannot spend more money to repair or service a super-8 camera then the cost of the super-8 camera off of eBay the area of discussion in regards to stable Super-8 images will be rife with unsubstantiated opinion mongering.
  • 0

#16 S8 Booster

S8 Booster
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 132 posts
  • Other
  • retired

Posted 28 April 2006 - 02:34 AM

well, alex, looking at perfs through a microscope is a good validator as well as professional researsh from authorities around.

i can also asure you that even a professionally serviced cam may not really hold the spec seeing the awesome complexity of cams like canons 814/1014 xlss and the huge amount of tools and reference clearance measuring tools/jigs and spacers required to measure spec tolerances an where do you get new spares to bring it back on spec these days? you dont just make those parts in your toolshed.

mr pytlak, no reason to doubt your statement and i am glad to know that kodak specs are better than standard smpte, but would be interesting if you can conform that it is a bigger challenge to perf a 0.10mm polyester base vs arox 0.150 mm acetate base as the polyester still is still much stronger.

ref agfa problems of the past.

shoot
  • 0

#17 John Pytlak RIP

John Pytlak RIP

    (deceased)

  • Sustaining Members
  • 3499 posts
  • Industry Rep
  • Rochester, NY 14650-1922

Posted 28 April 2006 - 09:11 AM

As I said, Kodak perforates over 10 BILLION linear feet of polyester (ESTAR) base film annually. Kodak has been making film on polyester base for almost 50 years. So we've learned how to do it well. B)
  • 0

#18 Canney

Canney
  • Basic Members
  • PipPip
  • 76 posts
  • Other

Posted 28 April 2006 - 12:50 PM

I think super 8 has pretty good stability. I've done DV prints out to super 8 and the frame rate and picture speed stays the same at 24fps as it does on the computer. Like the guy said before

Nobody should comment on super-8 image stability unless their own 25 year old super-8 camera has had it's film spindle advance clutch adjusted to spec, camera motor properly cleaned and lubricated and proper voltage/current checked from the power supply to all motor parts. As long as the super-8 community advocates the imbecilic attitude that one cannot spend more money to repair or service a super-8 camera then the cost of the super-8 camera off of eBay the area of discussion in regards to stable Super-8 images will be rife with unsubstantiated opinion mongering.


A lot of the cameras are old, heavily used and haven't been serviced in a long time. So they might be a little shaky performance wise.
  • 0

#19 LVD

LVD
  • Guests

Posted 28 April 2006 - 01:07 PM

Can you have your super 8 camera serviced at any respectable camera repair shop, or would you have to find someone who specifically works on movie cameras?
  • 0

#20 Anthony Schilling

Anthony Schilling
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1053 posts
  • Camera Operator
  • Portland, OR

Posted 28 April 2006 - 01:09 PM

A lot of the cameras are old, heavily used and haven't been serviced in a long time. So they might be a little shaky performance wise.

It's a miracle that many of them still run like tanks. I hear the life expectancy for expensive 3 chip cameras is about 5 years, before the CCD's and mico electronics start going sour.
  • 0


FJS International, LLC

The Slider

Abel Cine

Broadcast Solutions Inc

Visual Products

Willys Widgets

Wooden Camera

Opal

CineLab

Media Blackout - Custom Cables and AKS

Paralinx LLC

Tai Audio

Glidecam

Rig Wheels Passport

CineTape

Gamma Ray Digital Inc

Metropolis Post

Technodolly

rebotnix Technologies

Ritter Battery

Aerial Filmworks

Wooden Camera

Opal

Technodolly

FJS International, LLC

Glidecam

Ritter Battery

Rig Wheels Passport

Tai Audio

Media Blackout - Custom Cables and AKS

Abel Cine

Metropolis Post

The Slider

Willys Widgets

Broadcast Solutions Inc

CineLab

Aerial Filmworks

Paralinx LLC

CineTape

rebotnix Technologies

Visual Products

Gamma Ray Digital Inc