super super8 ?

[marc]

What kind of lens would you have to use if you widened the gate on the regular 8 camera? Would the lens mount have to be repositioned so as to be dead center in front of the elongated frame?

[MovieStuff]

What kind of lens would you have to use if you widened the gate on the regular 8 camera? Would the lens mount have to be repositioned so as to be dead center in front of the elongated frame?

It totally depends on the size of the circle of illumination (COI) for the lens being used. On some older Regular 8mm cameras, the merely used repackaged lenses from 16mm cameras, which would have a huge COI and nothing more than enlarging the gate would be needed. I suspect that most any R8mm lens would also work. I base this on countless R8mm transfers we've done where the image clearly spilled off both edges of the film and was sharp as a tack edge to edge. In fact, some regular 8 cameras are already achieving "Hyper 8", it would seem, only the owners aren't aware of it because A) The viewfinder doesn't reflect viewing the outer edges of the film and B) the typical R8mm projector crops the hell out of the image, so the owner doesn't even know there's more image to be seen.

Those of you that shoot R8mm film all the time should pull out some of your footage and see if the image spills off both edges. You might already have a "Hyper 8" camera!

Roger

[jukkasil]

I still have something new (I'm working with it and my idea seems to work), you guys haven't thought here!

A little secret: The image-area will be 7,47 x 4,2 mm (16:9), still don't want to say more. 8)

[mattias]

ok, so it's not "ultra 8", not your horizontal cartridge design and not anamorphic? perhaps some kind of diagonal approach to use the area between the sprocket holes without having to crop vertically? :-)

/matt

[jukkasil]

ok, so it's not "ultra 8", not your horizontal cartridge design and not anamorphic? perhaps some kind of diagonal approach to use the area between the sprocket holes without having to crop vertically?

/matt

OK, here is one picture:

http://www.sorb-i-tol.com/hyper816mm.jpg

I call the format as Double Hyper 8. The film material is normal 16 mm with 2 sprocket holes or double super 8/double 8mm.

You'll shoot the footage rotating 90 angle of camera like in vista 35mm format.

So, the image area 7,47 mm (the height of normal 16 mm frame) x 4,2mm (almost the half of free space between spockets) is in the real 16:9 mode. Also 2.35:1 aspect ratio is possible without any problems with COI. You need to modify film gate and viewfinder, image area would be like for example 9,87 mm x 4.2 mm .

With 16 mm film material it's very easy to modify for example K-3 (or another 16 mm camera) to shoot DH8 (16:9) format, just cover half of film gate and the viewfinder. I just did it yesterday, the viewfinder (TTL) is smaller, but it's 16:9 mode and works just ok.

So using 30 meter (16 mm) reel you'll get 60 meter of film material (2x 30 m), meaning 5.4 minutes shooting 25 fps, 5.6 minutes shooting 24 fps.

I'm just making the first prototype using K-3 body (only couple original parts like film gate, viewfinder, rotating shutter etc.) for my JSC-1 camera, which will be in this DH8 format (you can also change same camera easily back to 16 mm or super 16).

It will be crystal synched (I try to get also 100 fps speed in it) with time lapse and perhaps time exposure features.

How to transfering digital the DH8 format?

With 16 mm projector or with Workprinter (super8/r8 version need some modifications WP-16 you can transfer them very easily) etc.

[marc]

Then the camera would have to be held sideways when shooting?

[mattias]

that's very clever. i was wondering if a rank gate can be reoriented to capture such a format. anyway, what's the real benefit of dividing the frame this way instead of horizontally? seem like the negative area would be pretty much the same anyway since neither will give true 16:9 without some cropping, although i think 3:2 might require a little less than 8:3, which on the other hand is almost exactly 2.35:1.

/matt

[jukkasil]

Then the camera would have to be held sideways when shooting?

Yes, that isn't big deal, I'll make my own construction for new handle/tripod connection for that camera too.

Here is another pic of my idea:

[MovieMaker]

Sorry, but I´m a little bit confused now :oops:

The outcome will be (after splitting the 16mm film) a Regular8mm film (regarding to the sprocket holes) with the frame beeing parallel to the holes, right? It then has to be turned 90 degrees during the transfer?

Jeez, you guys sometimes come up with things.... :roll: - but it´s really fascinating what evolves when a few dedicated persons gather and communicate in a forum like this... =D>

MovieMaker

[MovieStuff]

How to transfering digital the DH8 format?

With 16 mm projector or with Workprinter (super8/r8 version need some modifications WP-16 you can transfer them very easily) etc.

Actually, if you used double 8mm film in your camera instead of 16mm film, then you could do some modifications to your existing WorkPrinter that might allow you to transfer your footage.

First you would use a standard splitter to split the footage into two different 8mm strips. If the gate and pressure plate of your 8mm WorkPrinter were enlarged to accomodate the "taller" frame, then all you'd need is a circuit inline with the synch cord that would "skip" every other frame. Why? Well, since there would be twice as many sprocket holes as you need, it would simply take two pulls of the claw to position each frame. So the transfer would work like this:

1) The claw would pull down the first half of the frame but the "skip circuit" would block any signal from reaching the mouse.

2) The claw would then pull down the second half of the frame and the "skip circuit" would then allow the synch signal to pass through to the computer and the frame would be captured.

3) The process would then repeat itself.

Now, I don't know if the COI of the existing lens would be big enough to accomodate the vertical image. It might be close, but another lens could be substituted, I suppose.

Here's a wild thought: (probably not practical but fun, anyway) What if you DIDN'T use the skip circuit and you actually captured both halves of the frame as a full video frame. Then, later in post, use some sort of batch processing to turn the images 90 degrees and mate them together with a soft edge split? Or, just put your video camera on its side during capture of the left and right halves? That would double your video resolution during capture, I would think. Plus, you wouldn't need to modify your current WorkPrinter at all!

Most people capture to a standard DV file but, since you actually capture to a series of uncompressed stills, the part about seaming together the pairs doesn't seem like much of an extra step. Of course, it all sounds easy as I write this. There would some serious alignment issues but think of the increase in resolution per frame during capture! Woo-Hoo!

Roger

[Carlos 8mm]

That's why I once suggested creating a "Hyper-8" camera using R8 instead of S8, since the sprocket holes on a regular 8 camera already are on the frame line and regular 8 cameras have the existing benefit of a metal pressure plate. All you'd have to do is open the gate and the job is pretty much done.

Yes Roger, it's easier to modify a Reg 8 camera in this case.
But remember that the distance among the sprocket holes in Reg8mm is 3,81mm and the height of the holes is 1,27 mm.

So, 3,81mm-1,27 mm = 2,54mm will be the high of the "Hyper-8 mm" frame. (less high than if you use Super 8 or DS8).
in consequence the frame will be very wide and will have loss of vertical resolution.

Carlos.

[Carlos 8mm]

Hi Jukka,
as I told you before, I like your idea.
If you design the camera for DS8 film the frame size will be very close to 9,5 mm format. (obviously it's much easer to find different film stocks in 16 mm than Double Super 8 ).

I've a doubt: It's possible to get 16 mm double perf negative film stocks?

Carlos.

[Carlos 8mm]

Hey Jukka, I was thinking,

Why 7,47 x 4,19 mm instead 7,47 x 4,81 mm?

4,81 mm is the wide of the Reg8mm frame, so you can get a litte bit higher frame than Super 8 (4,23 mm).
That means more vertical resolution !

What do you think?

Carlos.

[Cranium]

SOMEbody mentioned this before, maybe in another thread.
At least I THINK they did. I replied that I liked the idea, but maybe I was confused about what they were talking about.
When you mentioned the frame size, I knew what you were going for (I did these last week!) But I came up with a tad taller frame. Your image looks like you have an awfully large frameline between the tops of the frames.

[marc]

would'nt the short focal length lenses cause vigenetting?