I'm sure someone has thought of this, not even sure it's possible, but why not convert the gate AND the sprocket assembly on a standard 16mm camera to accept DS8 film? Seems to me you could go to an even roomier 16:9, perhaps even wider frame utilizing the extra space provided by the smaller sprocket holes. All you gear heads, say, tell, share.
Super 16 converted to use double super 8?
Posted 25 June 2016 - 07:28 AM
Double Super 8 Gate - 6.223 mm x 4.2164 mm
Regular 16mm Gate - 10.2616 mm x 7.493 mm
16 mm perforations 0.0500" high by 0.078" wide.
Super 8 pitch is 0.1667" and perfs are 0.045" high by 0.036" wide.
You would need to change (remove?) any registration pin from a pin-registered camera, as I fear that would just eat the perfs right out of the film.
You would need to change all sproketed parts out to double perf. I believe you would need to half the pull-down cam timing as DS8 uses twice as many perfs as 16mm (half the 16mm perf pitch), which is where the real engineering comes in.
There are a few people who convert Bolex H16 and H8's to double super 8 for between $500 - $1000...
Other than that its not well documented, but hopefully that info will help you.
Posted 25 June 2016 - 01:16 PM
What you describe may have been discussed in the '2-perf Super8 Anamorphic' thread in this forum.
Posted 26 June 2016 - 01:31 PM
This was implemented back in 2012 as per my UltraPan8 Facebook page, i.e.
Edited by Nicholas Kovats, 26 June 2016 - 01:33 PM.
Posted 26 June 2016 - 04:55 PM
That is one WIDE image! Glad someone with tec chops thought of this before I did. Here's a dumb question. How is it scanned? What's it look like in editing software?
Posted 27 June 2016 - 10:16 AM
Both UP8 formats are scanned by John Glehill at bitworks.org on a custom sprocketless scanner. Which is the key. A sprocket based scanner would require custom Regular 8 or Super 8 teethed sprockets that are 16mm wide. They do not exist. But there are a fair number of sprocketless 16mm scanners out there. The same logic applies to processing. My local film lab has a sprocketless 16mm processor and I label my exposed film clearly requesting no slitting.
John's setup is a special custom rig and he is able to re-center his scanner lens to the UP8 optical center. Remember. Both UP8 formats are half the height of a 16mm frame.
The sprocketless Lasergraphic scanners could also scan a full 16mm frame of UP8 footage resulting in two stacked UP8 frames per scanned frame. I am not aware if Lasergraphic scanner lens can recenter . It's all or nothing and is specific to R8, S8, R16, S16 and 35 Academy apertures. I do have an instructional PDF buried somewhere by a US based fan regarding extracting these stacked UP8 frames and then stitching them singularly into an image sequence for digital editing. In fact Lasergraphics almost developed special firmware for UP8 scans but nixed the project. Long story. But in essence it's a small market. But then again the CEO of Lasergraphics was not aware of the availability of 65mm film stock. I am not kidding.
My UP8 scans are technically overscanned at approximately 3.5K resolution into a JPEG image sequence. Huge files. Very easy to import this into my Sony Vegas Pro. There are not full edge to edge scans like Lasergraphic based scans but the UP8 R8/16mm perfs are partially visible as are preceding and following frames. You can crop to your hearts content down to CinemaScope or 16:9 if you wish. Mind you the pixel density decreases accordingly.
Edited by Nicholas Kovats, 27 June 2016 - 10:17 AM.
Posted 11 March 2018 - 12:22 PM
Posted 14 March 2018 - 05:09 PM
Thank you so much, Jean-Louis for your reply, and for the Link: it is, indeed, the very Website, that I remembered; also, thanks for relieving me of the suspicion, that it was a false-memory, a made-up fantasy.
The diagrams of the coverage on the D S8 16:9 prompts a question for you, as a camera technician: Would there be any advantage of extra width in a single-perf version of DS8, or would it be outweighed by the need to re-center the camera lens, as in Super16; or, would it require a registration pin, because the gate, and pressure plate could not have enough contact on the narrowed edge of the film to keep it steady?
Posted 14 March 2018 - 07:30 PM
Posted 14 March 2018 - 09:26 PM
Jean-Louis Seguin re-manufactured the Bolex DS8 model to shoot a non-anamorphic 3.1 aspect ratio w/o a non-centered Standard 16mm lens mount. Did you not read the prior posts from 2016? I shot this with that camera and a non-centered 10mm C-mount Tevidon. Although the width is greater than Super 16, the image exposed wonderfully, i.e. https://tinyurl.com/y8v2yzz9
The exact frame dimensions can be found on my UltraPan8 Facebook page, i.e.
"The second adaptation utilizes the full 16mm width of 2 perf Double Super 8 film (DS8) in conjunction with a Super 8 pulldown cycle. It is known as UltraPan8 3.1 DS8 and debuted in 2012. The 3.1 designation refers to it's aspect ratio with an actual frame size of 13.00mm x 4.22mm. Note that the actual frame width is greater than Super 16. Also note that the Super 8 perforation is smaller dimensionally than Regular 8 /16mm which allows more of the 16mm film width to be used. Magazine run time is also doubled as there are 80x UltraPan8 frames per 16mm foot as opposed to 40. The imaging area is 34% greater than the smaller Super 8 format (SMPTE camera aperture), "
Edited by Nicholas Kovats, 14 March 2018 - 09:28 PM.