Jump to content




Photo

My first super 8 wedding


  • Please log in to reply
25 replies to this topic

#1 Geoffrey Chandler

Geoffrey Chandler
  • Basic Members
  • PipPip
  • 33 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • United States

Posted 02 September 2014 - 01:47 PM

I learned a lot and I messed up a little - missed focus several times - but I think for a first attempt, it came out ok.

 

This is 99% finished. I need to work on the color grading still but the main edit is done. For this client I decided not to do take out the super 8 jiggle or reduce any grain.

 

 

 


  • 0




#2 Nicholas Kovats

Nicholas Kovats
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 452 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Shoot film! facebook.com/UltraPan8WidescreenFilm

Posted 02 September 2014 - 01:53 PM

Great job, Geoffrey! Well done. V3 50d or 200T? 


  • 0

#3 Geoffrey Chandler

Geoffrey Chandler
  • Basic Members
  • PipPip
  • 33 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • United States

Posted 02 September 2014 - 01:58 PM

50D

500 T

Tri-x

and I think a roll or two of Pro8mm Kodak 250D

 

8 rolls total shot


  • 0

#4 Nicholas Kovats

Nicholas Kovats
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 452 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Shoot film! facebook.com/UltraPan8WidescreenFilm

Posted 02 September 2014 - 02:57 PM

What did you end up rating the 500T? Did you use this stock in conjunction with a ND filter? 


  • 0

#5 Geoffrey Chandler

Geoffrey Chandler
  • Basic Members
  • PipPip
  • 33 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • United States

Posted 02 September 2014 - 04:25 PM

500T shot without filter. I set the camera at 400 ASA.


  • 0

#6 Will Montgomery

Will Montgomery
  • Sustaining Members
  • 1922 posts
  • Producer
  • Dallas, TX

Posted 02 September 2014 - 06:37 PM

Good job shooting the interview with film (although focus was an issue) since it's always fun trying to sync up audio.

 

I would love to see you upload your master file to Vimeo to see the difference in compression because YouTube seems to be harsh on it. Obviously the more film grain, the harder it is for YouTube to handle it and you start getting strange digital artifacts.

 

Since you scanned at 2k, have you considered doing a film out to 16mm? That would be fun to see projected. If the client has some money you could probably do the film out for around $600.


  • 0

#7 Josh Gladstone

Josh Gladstone
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 309 posts
  • Editor
  • Hollywood

Posted 02 September 2014 - 09:24 PM

I'm still going to stick with my opinion that Youtube is better than Vimeo. Youtube is allowing up to 2160p now (UHD/4k/whatever you want to call it). It can be a pain to do depending on your hardware / internet setup, but you can uprez your footage into 4k to force Youtube to allow playback at higher bitrates. It definitely helps with the quality.


Edited by Josh Gladstone, 02 September 2014 - 09:26 PM.

  • 0

#8 Geoffrey Chandler

Geoffrey Chandler
  • Basic Members
  • PipPip
  • 33 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • United States

Posted 03 September 2014 - 06:52 AM

Even though much of the event took place outdoors, it was in heavy shade and mostly cloudy. With 500T, I could barely shoot the girls on the front porch of the cabin. 

 

I'm not sure why I missed focus so often. The interview I missed both the bride and groom by a lot, but I can write that off to trying to run the camera unmanned a ways back, zoomed in, while I sat close to the subjects to conduct the interview.


  • 0

#9 David Cunningham

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

Posted 03 September 2014 - 07:20 AM

Hey Geoffrey,

 

What camera did you use?  Great footage especially for a first time.  Who did your 2K scan?  Like Josh pointed out, you can actually trick YouTube into using a higher bit rate.  If you take your original footage and export it to a 4K format you can upload that to YouTube.  Then, we can select the 4K setting which our browsers will down res to our display size but still get the advantage of the higher 4K bit rate.  It works really well.  That's what I did here:

 

 

Zoom can be deceiving with most Super 8 cameras.  I used to have all kinds of focus pull issues with zoom on my various Canon cameras.  The trick is to zoom ALL the way in, pull focus and then pull back out.  Also, other than the Canon 814 AZ and 814 XL-S (even excluding the 1014 series) I find the full zoom to be very soft on almost all Super 8 cameras.  The problem gets FAR worse if you have to open up to near wide open.  If you are actually wide open, forget about it.  Get as close to the subject as possible and stay as wide as possible.  The image will just be way too soft otherwise.


  • 0

#10 David Cunningham

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

Posted 03 September 2014 - 07:24 AM

At 2:49 of my film you can see I had the same issue... long ways away, wide open (dark) didn't get it perfectly dead on... so it's soft.  :(

 

Also FYI that if you focus close up and then pull back and the focus changes, you have a lens problem that likely can be repaired by a good service center such as Pro8mm.


  • 0

#11 Nicholas Kovats

Nicholas Kovats
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 452 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Shoot film! facebook.com/UltraPan8WidescreenFilm

Posted 03 September 2014 - 10:33 AM

It's called having to collimate your particular lenses. The lens back focus, that is the distance from the rear len's element to the tiny Super 8 film plane is critical for focus. More so than the larger film formats. I am not sure how lens techs collimate a fixed zoom but it would require dis-assembly which is not recommended for the faint of heart. Hence the appeal for some of us to shoot the Super 8 format with interchangeable lens mounts, i.e C, M, etc. 


  • 0

#12 Geoffrey Chandler

Geoffrey Chandler
  • Basic Members
  • PipPip
  • 33 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • United States

Posted 03 September 2014 - 10:37 AM

I used a Beaulieu 4008 zm2


  • 0

#13 Geoffrey Chandler

Geoffrey Chandler
  • Basic Members
  • PipPip
  • 33 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • United States

Posted 03 September 2014 - 06:58 PM

Rendered to 2K. Here's the new YouTube:  

 

 

 


  • 0

#14 Josh Gladstone

Josh Gladstone
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 309 posts
  • Editor
  • Hollywood

Posted 03 September 2014 - 08:12 PM

Hey David, I watched your footage on my 4k tv. Couldn't get 4k to work on Youtube, but it looked pretty good in 2k! Just so's you know


  • 0

#15 Anthony Schilling

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

Posted 03 September 2014 - 11:57 PM

Nice job, it was really enjoyable to watch.

 

David- how did you get your footage so clean and sharp? 


  • 0

#16 David Cunningham

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

Posted 04 September 2014 - 08:22 AM

Hi Geoffrey,

 

For some reason your new post still only shows 1080p HD, not 2K.  Hmmm...

 

Hi Josh,

 

Yeah, I've notice the 4K stopped working at some point.  Not sure what's up with that.  But 2K still looks good.  :)

 

Hi Anthony,

 

In my opinion it's actually a hair TOO clean and sharp.  That footage was entirely shot with a Canon 1014 XL-S usually stopped down to around 8 or 11 and rarely ever zoomed past half way.  It was also Vision3 50D.  All those make for very sharp Super 8 footage.  But, the biggest player here is the fantastic scan by Spectra Film and Video on their Spirit converted for Super 8.  They do a fantastic job.  However, it's both a bonus AND a draw back that they have on-the-fly sharpening and grain reduction.  So, it looks "good".  But, if you really get nit-picky it almost looks took and and a bit unnatural, especially for Super 8.  Some parts almost look too clean and video-like.  Again, it's just preference I guess.

 

I've now started doing my scanning with Gamma Ray Digital on their LaserGraphics Scan Station.  I will soon be uploading a better version to both Vimeo and YouTube, but you get a pretty good idea from this Vimeo post:

 

 

I feel the scan is more true to the format.  It's true that it's not quite as sharp and the grain a bit more pronounced, but it is more pleasing and accurate for Super 8, in my eyes, especially the reversal that I have had scanned at Gamma Ray.  Their scans of E100D, Velvia 50D and Provia 100F look exactly like the projected image with a bit more shadow and highlight detail.  It's a fantastic system.

 

Again, Spectra does a great job and their colorists are fantastic.  So, I'm not knocking them at all as a great source for Super 8 scanning.  Gamma Ray Digital has the draw-back of negative scans being "flat" and not fully scene-to-scene graded like Spectra and Pro8mm.  But, it's worth the extra grading time and effort for me personally.

 

Lastly, Pro8mm does a great job too.  I love the look for their Millennium 2K scanner.  It's CRT (tube) flying-spot based.  So, it has a very different look that is quite pleasing.  It is a hair softer that the CCD area and line-sensor scanners out there.  But, it's a nice look that, again, is pleasing to watch.

 

That's my soap box rant for now.  :)


  • 0

#17 Anthony Schilling

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

Posted 04 September 2014 - 01:14 PM

Ahh that makes sense. I haven't used Spectra for scanning in a few years (wish i could afford it more often) but I agree that they do excellent work. I've sent about 5 projects there over the years and the colorists were always really good at giving me the look I was going for. I agree that the 50D here is a little too clean. but with my experience, the clean up tools they have are very handy with 500T. 


  • 0

#18 David Cunningham

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

Posted 04 September 2014 - 02:21 PM

Ahh that makes sense. I haven't used Spectra for scanning in a few years (wish i could afford it more often) but I agree that they do excellent work. I've sent about 5 projects there over the years and the colorists were always really good at giving me the look I was going for. I agree that the 50D here is a little too clean. but with my experience, the clean up tools they have are very handy with 500T. 

No doubt www.gammaraydigital.com is by far the best quality for the best price... but you'll have to put the extra work into grading yourself to get it just right.


  • 0

#19 Anthony Schilling

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

Posted 04 September 2014 - 11:50 PM

The 2K does look very nice.. Did you do you're own coloring Geoffrey? I think some of the darker scenes are a little cold, and the whites are off in 1 or 2, but all the money shots with the bride and groom looked perfect, the TriX was very nice would have liked to see more. Usually my first line of attack in color correcting is to find something white and use that to balance the highlights. 


  • 0

#20 Geoffrey Chandler

Geoffrey Chandler
  • Basic Members
  • PipPip
  • 33 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • United States

Posted 05 September 2014 - 06:39 AM

The 2K does look very nice.. Did you do you're own coloring Geoffrey? I think some of the darker scenes are a little cold, and the whites are off in 1 or 2, but all the money shots with the bride and groom looked perfect, the TriX was very nice would have liked to see more. Usually my first line of attack in color correcting is to find something white and use that to balance the highlights. 

Yes I did my own color adjusting. I know it's still a little rough but I'll keep chipping away. Thanks for the tips.


  • 0


Zylight

Broadcast Solutions Inc

Glidecam

Pro 8mm

Visual Products

Willys Widgets

Ritter Battery

rebotnix Technologies

CineLab

Aerial Filmworks

Paralinx LLC

Tai Audio

Rig Wheels Passport

Technodolly

CineTape

The Slider

Abel Cine

Paralinx LLC

Aerial Filmworks

Technodolly

rebotnix Technologies

Willys Widgets

Tai Audio

CineLab

CineTape

Pro 8mm

Zylight

Broadcast Solutions Inc

Rig Wheels Passport

The Slider

Visual Products

Ritter Battery

Abel Cine

Glidecam