I was reading a thread on the other channel today regarding how new releases are made from digital sources which i think we all know is the only way forward. Nothing wrong with that either, if it looks good on screen then it's a great way forward.

It was mentioned how blu-ray and 4k is currently where the prints are taken from with the possibility of 8k in the future. With all the costs of having to make negatives and all the processes involved in real film, I assume the costs of prints today to be in the materials as back in the past most of the high costs were in producing the negatives to process the film.

I got to thinking here, the more "K" the better the image? Is it? Or is it down to the labs? The only reason I ask this, (there maybe people on here who still want to debate, ),
because in the last two years I have had several of my 16mm prints restored to their former glory and the Blues Brothers beyond with extended scenes. How? mainly with 50/50 DVD and blu ray. DVD is considered old hat these days but i will remind those viewing the new 8mm prints just how, in my opinion, it is who does it and how that counts when it comes to digital transfer/copying and then printing to film.

On these links to two of my 16mm reviews, there are images taken throughout the films after i added the additional/replacement parts, A fish called Wanda has 3 images in there made up from DVD, Not BR and not 4K, are you able to see the difference? The original film print is Agfa stock so the colours onscreen are much more vivid in than you see here,

A Fish Called Wanda 3 x 1600ft spools Agfa

The next one is Chisum, again, images were taken throughout the film, this one i think is either Fuji or Agfa, but again, added/replacement footage is taken from a DVD, which ones? if you want to know i'll add it later but my point is, it's all down to the labs, here there are no vertical lines and no over exposed faces. It can be done but it all depends on the expert who does it, this expert is at the top of there trade. Within the Chisum review there are four images from clips made from the DVD.

Chisum Scope Colour low fade/ IB

We screen 8 and 16 at alternate months, when we switch for the first day the difference between the two is day and night, and that includes the two new releases i have bought on 8 though they are both very good.

My own personal thoughts still stand, I do commend anyone who releases new material on 8mm to keep the flag flying but the costs are too high for me for the length of film you get, sadly, with the stripe problem that has surfaced I will continue to stick to 16mm which, at present time, if necessary, can be restored for a lot less £s if needed.

The best examples I can give to put it in perspective is a couple of our 16mm purchases, both of these titles together were a lot less than an 8mm 600ft release and while Home alone was on my radar, i had to get a reality check with things going on around me here and the possible tax burden when it arrives as well as the sound stripe issue which is a major worry that rings a loud alarm bell.

Guilty by Suspicion, 1991, Robert De Nero.

Without a Clue. 1988 LPP Theatrical Print

In total I have preserved/restored Eight 16mm prints to there full length or replaced damaged footage, and one of the best ones is my Scope copy of High plains drifter which was offered to me as rough and ready, but now it's all back to it former glory all be it, with a number of splices, but when they are done properly using a CIR splicer and Jackro splicing tape, it isn't a problem unless you have two left hands. .

But if you do have an unlimited bank account or are on benifits, get on, the skys the limit, order all the new ones

Hi Tom,

You raise some very good points. From what I understand about Andec's process is that a film print is either scanned and digitally improved upon, or, a digital source is used with any cleanup as needed (not sure there would be any though). In both cases, I believe a negative is then created to be used to print film copies from. I hope someone can confirm this is indeed what occurs at Andec. So, perhaps the only cost savings is the scanning, if that is not needed. Either way, the costs are still way too high which certainly impacts the hobby in a negative way.

I am also starting to be concerned about striping issues. I have a few newer prints with both Andec mono striping and Alberto's two track soundstripes. If problems occur with the magnetic stripe that may be it for me to switch to Marco and 16mm with an optical soundtrack that cannot flake off etc.

...There are several misleading posts, here and elsewhere, leading to more confusion and doubts regarding the current status of Super 8 film striping. It is a demanding task to offer this service on a print medium such as Super 8 and praise should be given to those have been doing the upmost to deliver quality service, at their time and expense! Currently this work is being performed In Germany and Italy. Quite simply, what is currently coming out of Germany ���� IS MONO laminate striping. Great to watch a 4K, 8K, digital to Super 8 new release in Mono! Think about it! If you are fine with digital to Super 8 and complete with Mono sound...not on the same page. Maybe we have started a new feuds among collectors. The pursuit s VS. Technology. Either way IWill take my prints with 2

Track recoding from a studio engineer over guys thinking 1 capacitor restores everything.

Greg, it would be good to understand clearly how the films are transferred from disk to film, at the end of the day as Mark Mander said before, all that counts is if it looks good on screen, and they do, that is all that counts.

Burton, thanks for posting on here as well, i do see what your saying regarding the digital sound. First and foremost, I think we do all agree that anyone who puts out new releases are to be commended, it has been said before and that is always the case.

Because of the length of time many collectors have been in the hobby, its only going to be natural for some folk to put a critical eye on them, especially when vertical lines were seen and also, for me, i still think as Stuart said previously, the contrast/colours dont quite jump out at you like traditionally processed films do. Perhaps the newer releases are better again.

Regarding the sound, i do have two of new releases, one being Jurassic Park and the sound is 100% tops. The whole print is very good, (even though there is sneak of a vertical line in two early scenes) but the sound does stand out like nothing before.
Regarding stereo, while this is fine for a few collectors i believe that the majority of collectors only have a mono projector. We do have stereo ourselves but unless your sat in the right place to hear the full effect it's nothing to spectacular. Obviously the twin track mono projector's can be utilised for stereo as well. A lot of collector's also dont have a dedicated room with a permanent set up for their hobby.

Until a few years ago when i bought the Bauer T610 and recently the Sankyo 880OMS all my films are shown through the 1200HD's via an old Pioneer amplifier which is from from the late 70s early 80s and with a pair of decent 8 ohm wharfdale speakers either side of the screen, this blows the sound at a clarity and bass, (when required) to equal todays releases providing the original sound is good. The clarity of todays digitally sourced tracks are well above average thats for sure.

The thing with 16mm films is a totally different ball game, I recently had an extended trailer to Platoon made onto 16mm, the source was from a youtube HD file and you have to see the quality to believe it, the sound is like nothing i've heard on 8 or 16mm in clarity and bass, I dont know how it was done to be this good from a YT file but I will review it in early February when i switch to 16mm for the month. The best part is, it's a whole lot cheaper than the the 8mm items being put out at present time which considering we are told is not for any profit, i have to add, i have no idea where almost 600 comes from a half hour of 16mm. I can only assume a lot of it is in the shipping and taxation. Hopefully if the pound improves and the costs can be cut by finding someone in the states to do the sound stripping for the 8mm new releases, it may make it a little more affordable for the collectors. Sadly with all the cost of living nonsense going up, it's all happening at the wrong time.

But yes, everyone invloved in making new releases i do take my hat off to them.

Tom,

Let me start by saying all the current Super 8 releases coming from Germany do not have any vertical lines, that problem seems to be solved and I have had several very new releases and don't see them anymore.

Zitat

---

The best examples I can give to put it in perspective is a couple of our 16mm purchases, both of these titles together were a lot less than an 8mm 600ft release

---

Tom are you mixing up secondhand with brand new releases as you can get a 600ft Super 8 film for a Tenner or less. In fact at a recent BFCC (well a few years ago) I purchased part 2 (600ft) of Never Say Never Again for £5 and the film was fine. I doubt I would be able to buy that for £5 if it was 30minutes on 16mm LPP, unless the seller didn't know what it was.

Interesting that you got many short segments made on 16mm for a reasonable price. I wonder how it can be done so cheap, maybe someone can explain. Possibly the Super 8 from Andec is overpriced but is it really by that much as I've always believed film is not cheap even in the 70's 80's etc.

For me I much prefer Super 8 even though the quality of 16mm is even better (naturally it has to be). For me I find 16mm too industrial maybe too professional and I don't get the buzz out of watching 16mm that I do with Super 8. I also prefer the Super 8 projectors and the look of them compared to 16mm. The space is also a big issue for me which is why I only have a small collection of 16mm, most of which has to be said is Amateur films which I will never get rid of. One thing I have done also is to only concentrate on the good sharp prints (Derann, German new releases) and to slowly get rid of the old 'soft' cutdowns unless I really like them. I love the sharpness of the modern prints which I have lots of.

One question I would like to ask you Tom, Do you have your 16mm prints in nice boxes like the Super 8, or do you just keep them in the brown card boxes they came in. This is something else I love about Super 8 and the easy availability of brand new boxes.

Graham S

Hello Graham, thanks for reply.
16mm, as you say has the downside of the space it takes, no one could disagree with that, i must make it clear that super 8 is our main stay and always will be with 16mm only being added in the last five years which we started purely for the abundance of titles available that are not or ever will appear on super 8.

For the 8mm's we obviously like them to be in their original boxes, however, for the nature of 16mm, they are in professional cans or hard card boxes with a copy of the films poster on the front, the way these look on the shelf is of no bother to us, it's always whats in the box or can thats most important.

I'm definatly not mixing second hand with new, 16mm film to produce at present time is roughly a tenner a minute, and thats for either flat or scope, that makes a half hour film, brand new with sound at around £300 plus shipping, not almost 600.
The main thing for new 16 isn't so much for producing new releases, it's for being able to preserve and restore a feature film which to date for us, has worked well. I think those who have a whole 16mm film printed from a BR or 4K disc at a cost of thousands have either got too much money or are just plane crazy, but it's whatever floats peoples boat i guess, as long as they are happy.
If you check out my Blues Brothers threads you'll see how this is the best use of producing new footage on this gauge rather than new releases.

It's good to hear that the labs have sorted out those vertical lines, i know it only marred a few titles but at least they did sort that out.
Just the sound track to sort now which even Derann had terrible troubles with, i did put up the article that Dereck Simmonds put out in one of the magazines on this subject on both forums. It'll be interesting to see how this gets fixed. I understand that half the problem is the fact new film is polyester and it's almost impossible to make it stay on. with a high percentage of glue used in the derann days, the results were often mixed. Die Hard, good sounds but not particular great in its quality, Silence of the lambs, a massive improvement, Madagasger Christmas caper, terrible, yet this last released was praised for having good sound, its actually poor sound in my opinion and most of those with the ability to rerecord have done so. Not something anyone should have to have done with a new release at that time, it had too much hiss, low volume level and a few pops, add to that how abrasive that stripe is, it's not good for the projectors heads.

A huge plus on the super 8s and one of the things i really do like are the cut downs, mini features and promos, they are great. It's one of the reasons why i would have really liked to have bought the home alone but at over 400 i simply cannot justify it when i'm picking up titles i like on 16 for under a ton like this one,

Witness. 1985 Harrison Ford

Tom,

Yes I agree with you about 16mm being generally cheaper. That 'Witness' looks a great print with stunning colour.

I think film prices can be hard to predict sometimes and often depends on the film title, stock and rarity. Another big factor is cult status. Buying 'Witness' for under £100 is good but try buying Star Wars, Temple of Doom, Back To The Future or Gremlins and you could well be paying 4 figures for it. In fact Star Wars in 16mm LPP could well go for £1400 whereas the Derann Super 8 equivalent could be had for as little as £800 (little he says ). Admittedly 16mm prints are rarer than Super 8 so that would push prices up too unless it is an old B/W British B movie from the 1950's for only £45 in 16mm.

As for new prints well Derann And CHC would often advertise that certain shorts were also available in 16mm but at a dearer price so Id be interested in the price difference now. I would love there to be a service though that could take digital Mp4 files and put them on Super 8 cheaply, I would then get some home video preserved on film.

Graham S

I dont think there is any guide to second hand films any more, generally, there is more junk for sale than good titles, and as said, when a good title comes up it can go for almost anything. As for Star Wars, I wish i had a batch of those.
It'll be interesting to see what the new releases go for when they appear, at present time, the few that do surface seem to go for the new price or slightly higher.

For now, i think a lot of people are waiting to see the outcome of the stripe problem, lets hope someone comes up with a solution.