Jump to content


Photo

New stock s8


  • Please log in to reply
12 replies to this topic

#1 Jose luis villar

Jose luis villar
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 136 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • SPAIN

Posted 10 May 2014 - 12:22 PM

Hey guys, looks like we have a new stock s/w s8, ADOX CHS 100 II.

 

The link here, http://www.wittner-c...mm/s8_filmm.php

 

 

Edited by Jose luis villar, 10 May 2014 - 12:23 PM.

  • 2

#2 Anthony Schilling

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

Posted 10 May 2014 - 03:37 PM

Looks like processing is included but translates to $55USD per roll.


  • 0

#3 Matthew W. Phillips

Matthew W. Phillips
  • Sustaining Members
  • 1792 posts
  • Other

Posted 10 May 2014 - 06:03 PM

Looks like processing is included but translates to $55USD per roll.

Wow!


  • 0

#4 Martin Baumgarten

Martin Baumgarten
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 186 posts
  • Industry Rep
  • Plattsburgh, New York U.S.A.

Posted 10 May 2014 - 08:45 PM

I just checked their website and it only mentions that the film is coming soon, no pricing or processing details.  Since it's ADOX B&W, the pricing will most likely be similar to their ADOX Pan-X 100 Reverso.  Probably not much more than a 5 Euro difference.  It is nice to see Wittner supporting the 8mm film gauges with all that they offer.  The only issue for us in the USA or North America is the cost to import these on a small scale.


  • 0

#5 Andries Molenaar

Andries Molenaar
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 671 posts
  • Industry Rep
  • Amsterdam

Posted 11 May 2014 - 04:08 AM

ADOX, super-8 and other still film, comes from a Fotoimpex enterprise and is not from WIttner.

 

Fotoimpex commission their own paper en film emulsions.

It can be bought from several sources.  EU consumer prices are usually listed including sales tax.

 

In the USA  200D can be had from http://internationalfilmbroker.com/

E6 processing nice and cheap by Dwayne's


  • 0

#6 Anthony Schilling

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

Posted 11 May 2014 - 10:15 AM

From what i've seen and heard, i wouldn't bother with the 200D. And since i can scan my own negative S8 films now, I have no interest in reversal films especially at a premium price. I can get just as much color from the V3 50D if I want but with a lot more dynamic range. I know the cost of scanning is what keeps people looking to reversal, but there are more and more cheaper options for scans and scanners these days. The head room that you have with V3 stocks opens up a whole new creative palate in terms of doing your own color grading. Most S8 neg samples out there look closer to the raw images in order to show off the dynamic range, but there are so many different directions you can go. And it's really exciting to do, as to where reversal film in the digital realm is more of a mild disappointment.


  • 0

#7 David Cunningham

David Cunningham
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1049 posts
  • Cinematographer

Posted 11 May 2014 - 10:21 AM

For me the big difference with reversal stock is the way it scans if done right. The grain is darker and this less distracting. It's also finer and just generally looks better. Also, dust and hair show up dark rather than bright white and blend in to the footage more. Those are my biggest reasons for reversal. It's just a different look.
  • 0

#8 Jose luis villar

Jose luis villar
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 136 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • SPAIN

Posted 11 May 2014 - 10:36 AM

I think the first reason to shoot reversible, is for s8 projection.


  • 0

#9 Anthony Schilling

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

Posted 11 May 2014 - 02:39 PM

I would agree that the white dust specs on neg are more distracting than reversal. And I love projecting too, but in the age of digital sharing projecting feels a lot more reclusive these days. For grain I'd say V3 50D is on par or slightly better than K40 or 100D. I was doing some grain reduction for a while, but stopped because I find the 50D/200T grain to be just right. Watiching it on a Bluray and flat screen is actually pretty awesome. I would have called it blasphemy 5 years ago, but enjoy watching S8 on a flat screen TV just as much (or maybe a little more) than projecting.


  • 0

#10 Will Montgomery

Will Montgomery
  • Sustaining Members
  • 2030 posts
  • Producer
  • Dallas, TX

Posted 12 May 2014 - 10:42 AM

For me the big difference with reversal stock is the way it scans if done right. The grain is darker and this less distracting. It's also finer and just generally looks better. Also, dust and hair show up dark rather than bright white and blend in to the footage more. Those are my biggest reasons for reversal. It's just a different look.

Definitely a different look but negative is almost completely up to the colorist on how it looks. Kodachrome never scanned well due to the nature of the stock but it was hands down amazing projected.


  • 0

#11 David Cunningham

David Cunningham
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1049 posts
  • Cinematographer

Posted 12 May 2014 - 02:50 PM

The colorist can change the color and contrast to look like reversal but cannot change the hair and dust to be dark rather than white and can't change the grain to a darker shade without removing and readding which is just silly.
  • 0

#12 Philip Kral

Philip Kral
  • Basic Members
  • PipPip
  • 90 posts
  • Cinematographer

Posted 13 May 2014 - 10:37 PM

I don't even let the colorist do any of the color correcting anymore, as I have them send me everything flat when shooting negative.

 

That being said, I still like shooting reversal for projecting actual film. For some strange reason, I never felt reversal film ever scanned right. A projected Kodachrome or Ektachrome image always looked amazing to me in person and looks like a noisy mess when scanned.

 

 I don't think I'm alone, otherwise there wouldn't be so many super8 videos from custom-made and personal machines on vimeo and youtube. 

 

I haven't been able to shoot any 200D yet.. I should get on that.  


  • 0

#13 Will Montgomery

Will Montgomery
  • Sustaining Members
  • 2030 posts
  • Producer
  • Dallas, TX

Posted 14 May 2014 - 02:31 PM

For some strange reason, I never felt reversal film ever scanned right. A projected Kodachrome or Ektachrome image always looked amazing to me in person and looks like a noisy mess when scanned.

Kodachrome doesn't scan well; even 35mm slides don't do well due to the multilayered approach to Kodachrome. Ektachrome can do better in scanning but of course projecting it is the best.


  • 0


Glidecam

Ritter Battery

Gamma Ray Digital Inc

Rig Wheels Passport

Paralinx LLC

Technodolly

FJS International, LLC

Abel Cine

CineLab

Wooden Camera

CineTape

Media Blackout - Custom Cables and AKS

Opal

Metropolis Post

Willys Widgets

rebotnix Technologies

The Slider

Broadcast Solutions Inc

Tai Audio

Aerial Filmworks

Visual Products

Ritter Battery

Wooden Camera

Tai Audio

Metropolis Post

Glidecam

Media Blackout - Custom Cables and AKS

The Slider

Abel Cine

FJS International, LLC

Technodolly

CineLab

Gamma Ray Digital Inc

rebotnix Technologies

Aerial Filmworks

Opal

Broadcast Solutions Inc

Paralinx LLC

Visual Products

Rig Wheels Passport

Willys Widgets

CineTape