> Mindless design. No optical viewfinder, just a flip out video screen. Plus,
> it is overpriced.
The projected price of the initial "limited edition” version is $2000, with a
less expensive “standard edition” supposedly to follow. It’s a film camera, so
the real cost is in the stock and processing:
> Filmmakers using the new Kodak camera can send the 50’ cartridge to Kodak for
> developing and for a $100 developing fee Kodak will mail back to the
> filmmaker the developed film on a reel as well post a scanned digital version
> of the 2.5 minute film in a password protected cloud file.
I’d have to guess the concept and pricing reflect a similar approach to The
Impossible Project’s new design Polaroid film camera, also very expensive.
These things seem targeted at cost-no-object users in Hollywood and hipsterdom,
who get off on having whatever tool – vintage or new-fangled – has been used by
some cel;ebrity maker in some high-profile project.
> Before the reborn Super 8 camera has even hit store, big Hollywood names such
> as directors Steve Spielberg, Christopher Nolam, and J.J. Abrams have
> endorsed the product.
For reference, Pro8mm in Burbank sells rebuilt Beaulieu 4008’s for $2000.
I’d expect folks who want to do experimental work in S8 to stick to old Canons
and Nizos or whatever shows up in decent condition at the local thrift store or
Jeff: what’s the problem with having what amounts to video assist versus a dim
optical finder? Isn’t the good news here for photochemical filmies that some
sort of stock and processing options will remain available from Kodak a while
longer now that they have this thing to support?
There’s a 46 second test clip from a Kodak prototype on YT
[http://tinyurl.com/yayv8yok] complete with plastic pressure-plate registration
flutter, dust and scratch in the negative glitches, and a nice chunk of crud in
the gate. Ahh, the memories...
FrameWorks mailing list