New framerate for the Kodak super 8 camera

Well, since January when the camera was first announced, they’ve managed to make at least one improvement…sort of…I just happened to be browsing Kodak’s super 8 site and noticed it.

Instead of speeds of 9, 12, 18, 24, and 25fps (as originally announced), it will now have 18, 24, 25, and 36fps.  We’re getting slow motion, is the “glass half full” reading.  Of course we’re also losing the two lowest framerates, so there are actually less options now.  Will there be firmware updates in the future to add more framerates?  What about single frame speed, and timelapse?  While it’s a step in the right direction, I don’t understand why Kodak doesn’t work more toward making all other super 8 cameras obsolete.  Here are a list of features cameras had 35 years ago that make them still desirable:
-single frame advance and timelapse features (already mentioned)
-constantly variable framerate
-variable shutter angle
-physical, manipulable buttons and dials
-optical viewfinder

I suppose those last two are in some ways considered outdated, but it seems to me that without them, it’ll be like the difference between shooting a modern DSLR and my old Spotmatic.  And I know which way I’d prefer to work.  We also still don’t know how quiet the camera will end up being.  Will we be able to shoot sync sound without requiring a blimp of some sort?  Will that be another accessory, like the handgrip?

Another thing on the wish list for me?  New lenses.  I want an American-made Kodak Cine-Ektar 12.5mm f/0.95 macro lens in C-mount.  And I don’t want to spend more than $700 for it.  Might as well dream big, hmmm?


Just how soon is the Kodak Super 8 camera coming out?

Did I miss something?  Evidently there was an announcement a week ago, talking about a classic being born.  Again.  It’s mentioned halfway through this article:

Not that there’s enough to tell anything for sure right now, but I doubt that Kodak would refer to a 2-year-old failed cell phone as a classic, when releasing another one (except if it’s a Nokia).  Now a super 8 camera, on the other hand…

(picture not mine)

(That announcement’s all over their website also)

The article mentioned the new phone as an aside, then went into an overview of Kodak’s recent history, and mentioned this Kodak tweet in the middle of talking about the upcoming super 8 camera.  But looking at pictures of the prototype, I don’t see how it can correspond.  October 20.  I’ll try not to get my hopes up too much in the next week, but it’ll be hard…

edit: Ugh.  It was a cellphone.  Disgusting.  And not classic at all.  And shame on you Kodak, for hyping this so misleadingly.


Well, I locked picture and sound today, a full 22 hours before the deadline for submitting to my school’s short film festival (not that anyone reading this is in Colorado Springs, but just in case, here).  So glad to be done with it, at long last.  There is still more to do, as I’m going to submit to film festivals (I allocated funds from my budget for this) but I don’t plan to start that process until next week.  Tomorrow I have a photography critique, then music composition jury, then I officially submit the film, then there is judging that night for the festival, which I will attend.  After that I’m going on a much-deserved 2-day vacation.

Film banner5d

May 1st, Overwhelming Majority will be unleashed on the world.

Edit: and nearly a day later, I decided I’d just remix a few things…just a few things…

More thoughts on the new Kodak Super 8

It seems that finally Kodak is working on opening an online store.  It’s not ready yet, but you can look around at their film offerings, and it’s nice to be able to see the price that Kodak charges for some of those films compared to places like B&H.

At the risk of seeming like I’m turning into a bit of a Kodak fanboy with the impending release of the new super 8 camera, look at this.  People joining the Super 8 Collective have the option of getting on the waitlist for the new camera:

I signed up, though I’ll have to scrape to afford even the optimistically low-end estimate of $400.  If rumors around the grapevine are true however, things could be much better than they are with the new camera.  Evidently Kodak is pouring tons of money into the aesthetic design and little into usable features.  I hope we get the features already advertised–if they reneged on those I’d be very mad–but some of the things I’ve been hearing that are possible on the new camera, are being overlooked in favor of the way it looks, ignoring the opinions of real-world filmmakers and other knowledgeable consultants.  Features like a sound blimp, water-tight housing, remote wi-fi monitoring, things that the GoPro has that could be included and make this appeal to more serious filmmakers.

Remember what I said in this post?
as much as I root for Kodak and want them to succeed, they are still a faceless juggernaut to some degree...
I don’t care much what the camera looks like, which is why I haven’t said anything complained about it at all so far.  However, evidently Kodak is paying a lot of money to make it look that way on purpose.  And I will find it extremely annoying if I end up paying a lot of money for a design process instead of actual features.  And remember, we’re paying for it to look like this:
(not my picture)

So when are they going to listen to the people who have great ideas for innovative features?  And if they don’t get this camera right, how in danger are they of shooting themselves in the foot?

We have picture!

Much to my surprise, all my super 8 footage is usable.  Here are a few screenshots just looking through the (very) big Quicktime file.

In fact, I wonder just what I’ve gotten myself into with these 4K log scans I got.  The above screenshots were much flatter, but I just brought them into Photoshop and added my standard still photography adjustments.  Now while evidently I can do somewhat the same taking video clips into Premiere or After Effects, it’s a steep learning curve for me and hasn’t been going too smoothly.  My only other option at the moment is to use the settings in Final Cut Pro X which are more rudimentary, with unsatisfying results.

I ended up sending my film to Pro8mm in California instead of my local stop, Cinemalab in Denver, which gave me more options than I needed, but also a better price all around.  Still I think that instead of 4K log scans, I’d have been better off with something that included their in-house color correction but I never asked how much that would cost.  I didn’t plan on using Pro8mm, but it turns out that Cinemalab, despite what they say on their website, does not offer super 8 processing.

So what will all this mean?  I suppose the final film won’t look quite as good as it has the potential to, honestly.  But then 20 years from now I can hire a professional to do the work for the re-release and charge you all more money to buy it.