I’ve already gotten hold of several rolls of 50D, and I can’t wait to try it out. HD scans of of properly shot Super 8 footage burned to Blu-Ray can yield amazing results on 16×9 TVs.

Never mind nostalgia, FILM is still the highest resolution capture format in existence. For dynamic range and color gamut, film leaves even high-end DSLR sensors in the dust. Thanks to the mass exodus of mid-tier filmmakers to embrace digital, even once astronomically-priced 35mm motion picture cameras are now within reach of aspiring FILMmakers everywhere.

For mere hundreds, not tens of thousands, I was able to purchase a perfectly-functioning 35mm camera, along with 5 accompanying lenses. For a mere fraction of the cost of a pricey HD cam or DSLR, I’m finally realizing my long-time dream of shooting 35mm footage. Presently, I’m stocking up on low-cost Kodak and Fuji motion pictures stocks that are readily available via Craigslist & Ebay, in preparation for shooting my first micro-budgeted feature.

For those who have always dreamt of shooting the real thing, a rare window of opportunity has opened up that may not stay open very long. Take the plunge. The sheer exhilaration of hearing that film racing through the camera is something that simple words cannot express. If you’re bored of running with the pixelated pack, see what Welles, Ford, Peckinpah and Kubrick found so utterly intoxicating.

Film might just be the fix you’re looking for…

Color reversal stocks are gone, but Kodak is wisely making the best of a bad situation in this instance.

I thought myself a few weeks ago that they were finished, but when they announced their willingness to spin-off the film division from the parent company, hope was renewed.

How, or why, the continuation of film profoundly disturbs some people is a total mystery to me. Film will stand or fall on its own econonomic and aesthetic merits, but to paint this simplistically as an issue of nostalgia and technophobia is absurd.

The most skilled technicians I know value both film and digital and are highly skilled in both mediums. They produce “moving images” and don’t bring the level of discourse down to fashionable techno-bashing, but use the tool that works the best to deliver their message to the masses.

Right now, for me, the only significant major advantage of the medium (over digital) is its latitude. You can comfortably over- and under-expose film without losing visual information. In other words, the dynamic range gives you much more room for maneuvering in situations with strong contrast. Digital sensors simply aren’t yet there. Otherwise, the sheer number of pixels, and their individual bit depth, allow for so much detail in the visual information that you can manipulate that image into anything you want.

For Kodak, being on the ropes, introducing another film stock (and especially Super-8) today clearly means that this is not a strategic, long play. For Super 8 fans out there, it is a wonderful moment. Still the reality remains, and it is that not many years down the road, we’ll all be nostalgically reminiscing of the technology, workflow, obstacles, frustrations, as well as the artistic gratification that film used to give.

Vinyl seems to have stayed alive despite the practicality of CD (and subsequent digital formats). I’m not quite sure, though that Super 8 (or any other film format, for that matter) will be able to avoid the ultimate fate. In order for vinyl to remain viable, all that was necessary was some vinyl press to stay in business. Turntables are still alive, and few makers still make them (it is quite cheap to do it), and some demand remains for the format. With film, in addition to some Kodak of this world (that would continue making it), one would need some lab to continue to process it, and that represents the level of inconvenience that will be difficult to justify, just for the sake of keeping the format alive.

We have all been observing the enormously rapid pace of advance of digital image acquisition technology (think back only five years — the emergence of AVCHD, for example). It is obvious that the pace won’t slow down. It makes sense to expect the digital imaging devices to continue to increase pixel count, and, hopefully, the dynamic range (the only serious disadvantage vs. the film). In parallel, the computing devices will continue to make digital video less and less of a CPU burden, storage will continue to get less expensive and more accessible, and, most likely, all current perceived advantages of film will be erased. There is no reason to doubt that the pace of changes would significantly slow down. Therefore, the realistic expected life of film as a medium caon’t be too long. Single-digits, most likely (in years).

The problem Kodak and other Super8 companies and I face is that there are few ways to let the younger “digital” generation know about low-cost film techniques and services. For example, I could write an eBook on shooting film, but marketing it in our digital world would be very hard.

Since there are few discussions of film — congratulation for posting this good news — few people know about it, and so each year less film is shot. Really, nothing looks like film, especially Super8. It has a unique esthetic — as all those who posted they were using film are well aware of.

Lastly, shooting film does not mean you don’t also shoot digital movies.
Steve Mullen

And I’m sure they think it would be easier to shoot digital and run it through magic bullet any way

you can also process by hand btw… I do this quite often. Of course you won’t get the clean pristine film result of a lab, specially not on your first try, but I manage to get very good result. C-41 color process is easy and relatively cheap to get and is very similar to the the cine equivalent used by labs, you just have to get dirty and remove the protective backing at the end…