Business screen magazine (1946)

'Jiisl because you're working in Super 8 does nol rean you shouldn't use professional standard" inhc past. One hell of a lot of the pi liiLtion values we have given to in isirial films in the last twenty have been for our own egos. fiees who have seen these values put into the films don't really ihe difference, but we've done I hat way mostly for our own \nd. admittedly, the clients have j, J ihem. too. But most clients are II si.irting to count up the cost of kind of production for certain of films, and they just can't them any more. Mind you, il', not talking about the big PR film f( theatre and TV showings, I'm i.ing about the kind of picture you I to train an auto mechanic, or a ipputer programmer, or the neat, ijple little sales film you can put suitcase projector." 'ul why Super 8? he is asked. What ■nore expensive about 16inni than •er S? The best Super 8 cameras [not too unlike 16, and you've still almost every other problem of lion picture production to work — regardless of the format of the Here is what Wolfe has to say: "For one thing, your equipment is less >ensive and much lighter weight, u've got less overhead, less rental lense. It doesn't cost a fortune to y", and you can operate it yourself, ickly and efficiently, usually with assistant necessary. Raw stock it is significantly lower. And worknt and release print costs are much ^er. il'Spccifically. I use a Canon DS8 (^nera, which takes a 100 ft. roll of ijuble Super 8 film. It's well-made. hi its own gate, and you get 10 j^nutes of running time on one roll <) film. That's equivalent to 365 ft. e 16mm film, almost a whole 400 ft. iigazine. It loads fast automatically i d you don't have to lug around 1 avy magazines. "My raw stock, processing and ' irkprint costs for ten minutes of III come to about $40. In 16mm. I s would be approximately $90. 'ncn you are shooting 10-1, 12-1, as t infrequently happens in docui:ntary work, these costs can deftely mount up. "It all adds up to savings — savings equipment, savings on crew, and .ings on film. I'm positively coniced that on the small screen there very little difference in quality iween Super 8 and 16mm origi•ted film and the viewer is not going I be able to tell the difference." Here is how Wolfe works. He is now shooting Kodachrome II, although he makes regular tests on any other new stocks as they are introduced in Super 8 and DS8 to see if anything belter becomes available. He is now testing 1152 which can be had on special order in DS8. The kodachrome is developed by Kodak at Fairlawn, N.J. and then sent to KinOLu.x lab in New York for a onelight Super 8 color (7389) work print. This, and his sound tracks, are edited on a synchronizer custom-made by Precision Laboratories in Brooklyn which combines a French Muray Super 8 viewer ganged up with two 16nim magnetic heads so that a differential gear maintains frame to frame sync. When workprint and sound are completed and approved, the original is matched to the work print. Wolfe does this by pure visual inspection, no edge numbers. "This is no real problem," he says. At each side of splices (there were 96 splices in the Scholastic film) exactly three frames are added to the original, so that what he has at this point is a matched original to sound-synchronized work-print plus six frames which will not be printed at each splice. The original in this form now goes to Cineffects. a New York optical house, for a liquid gate blow-up with scene-to-scenc density timing, to 16mm color internegative (7271) using a "zero cutting" printing technique in which the three frames on each side of the splice do not print. Wolfe has, at this point, a 16mm internegative with no splices showing, and an exactly matching sound track on 16mm sprocketed magnetic tape. These go to Cine Magnetics laboratory for reduction printing with scene-to-scene color correction to Eastman color pre-striped release stock. The prints, as we have previously pointed out, and as seen on Scholastic's attache-case projectors, are entirely satisfactory. Henry Wolfe is asked some questions: // you believe that strongly in Super 8. why not print directly from Kodachrome to a Super 8 color reversal stock? "The main reason," Wolfe says, "is that you'd have to go from a "B" wind original to an "A" wind print, which will not take a magnetic stripe as well — it just won't adhere properly. 1 also think that the quality is better doing it this way, although you'd be surprised how good the KinOLux 7389 one-light work iarch/ April, 1972 prints turn out." How about the physical problems of handling all that 8mm spaghetti? "We heard the same thing when editors went from 35mm to 16mm," Wolfe says. "Super 8 is actually easier to edit than 16mm. and believe me, I've handled many thousands of feet of both. There is an orientation you have to go through. Everything is compact — small reels — you can stick things on the editor in two seconds. I think I gain two days for a typical film on cutting in Super 8 against 16." There are other short cuts you could make — use one of the new syiw systems, make your own mixes — why not? "Just because you're working in Super 8 does not mean you shouldn't use completely professional standards," Wolfe says. "I don't believe in Rube Goldberg devices, and that's what some of these amateur sync systems are. I do believe in letting the labs and service houses do the things they do best — it's foolish for the professional film worker to try to compete with them." Your Scholastic film had no lipsync. Would this be a problem to you? I don't see any problem at all," Wolfe says. "I've been so busy I haven't got around to it yet, but there is a simple modification in the Canon you can get from Greg Valteri in California to provide a sync pulse generator and automatic slate and you can then work with any of the familiar recorders: Nagra, Arrivox, Uher. My custom-made Precision Labs synchronizer then gives me exact frame to frame lip sync. So, it looks like we've now got another way to make industrial films. Whether the system proves itself in practice as well as in the claims Henri Wolfe and a few other pioneers make for it remains to be seen. It is true that hardly a month passes without another new piece of equipment coming on the market to fill up the holes. The day may soon be coming when Super 8 production can no longer be ignored. As we pointed out in the title to this article: Are You Ready for Super 8 Production? The answer depends on what vou're looking for, what kind of film you're planning. In other words, it is "Maybe." Is Super 8 Production Ready for You? The answer seems to be: "not quite yet", unless you're willing to improvise, to find new solutions, as Henri Wolfe is now doing, n 23