size of 8 mm film :)

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by Ken Weitzel, Aug 2, 2004.

  1. Ken Weitzel

    Ken Weitzel Guest

    Hi...

    Wondering if anyone here happens to know what
    the actual image size is on old 8 mm and/or super 8
    movie film is?

    I know the question sounds ridiculous, but looking
    at a 35 mm piece of film it looks much more than
    4 times as big as I remember movie film was.

    Thanks, take care.

    Ken
     
    Ken Weitzel, Aug 2, 2004
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. Ken Weitzel

    MLS Guest

    Hi:

    Found what you wanted on a site in Australia! Standard 8 has an image
    dimension of 4.88 by 3.68 mm, and Super 8 has an image dimension of
    6.24 by 4.22 mm. Interesting bit of trivia.

    Regards,

    Lee

    On Mon, 02 Aug 2004 01:40:14 GMT, Ken Weitzel <>
    wrote:

    >
    >Hi...
    >
    >Wondering if anyone here happens to know what
    >the actual image size is on old 8 mm and/or super 8
    >movie film is?
    >
    >I know the question sounds ridiculous, but looking
    >at a 35 mm piece of film it looks much more than
    >4 times as big as I remember movie film was.
    >
    >Thanks, take care.
    >
    >Ken
     
    MLS, Aug 2, 2004
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. Ken Weitzel

    Don Guest

    The 8mm dimension referred to the width of the film, including sprocket
    holes.

    Don


    "MLS" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > Hi:
    >
    > Found what you wanted on a site in Australia! Standard 8 has an image
    > dimension of 4.88 by 3.68 mm, and Super 8 has an image dimension of
    > 6.24 by 4.22 mm. Interesting bit of trivia.
    >
    > Regards,
    >
    > Lee
    >
    > On Mon, 02 Aug 2004 01:40:14 GMT, Ken Weitzel <>
    > wrote:
    >
    > >
    > >Hi...
    > >
    > >Wondering if anyone here happens to know what
    > >the actual image size is on old 8 mm and/or super 8
    > >movie film is?
    > >
    > >I know the question sounds ridiculous, but looking
    > >at a 35 mm piece of film it looks much more than
    > >4 times as big as I remember movie film was.
    > >
    > >Thanks, take care.
    > >
    > >Ken

    >
     
    Don, Aug 2, 2004
    #3
  4. John "re-enactor" Kerry should be an expert as well!

    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Some people claim that there's a woman to blame, but I think it's all...

    Richard's fault!

    Visit the Sounds of the cul-de-sac at www.richardsfault.com
     
    richardsfault, Aug 2, 2004
    #4
  5. Ken Weitzel

    Ken Weitzel Guest

    MLS wrote:
    > Hi:
    >
    > Found what you wanted on a site in Australia! Standard 8 has an image
    > dimension of 4.88 by 3.68 mm, and Super 8 has an image dimension of
    > 6.24 by 4.22 mm. Interesting bit of trivia.
    >
    > Regards,
    >
    > Lee


    Hi Lee...

    Thanks so much, really appreciate the info! :)

    Just in case anyone's interested, the reason I wanted
    to know was because I have a friend in a really
    sad situtation.

    A recent house fire destroyed all her photos and neg's;
    all she has is a couple of 50 year old 8mm movie films...
    only has those because they were off site.

    Anyway, she doesn't want to risk projecting them, fearing
    that the (plastic ?) may be dried and brittle, perhaps
    even burn easily. She is willing to bring them along
    when she visits Winnipeg, gently unroll them, and scan
    them. First, I wanted to crop a slide to 8mm size,
    scan it, and see if we can get some individual pics.

    A really quick and dirty test shows that they're not
    gonna be good by any stretch of the imagination,
    but probably get some 3 or 4 inch prints that will
    be much better than nothing :)

    Thanks again...

    Ken
     
    Ken Weitzel, Aug 2, 2004
    #5
  6. Ken Weitzel

    Ken Weitzel Guest

    Don wrote:

    > The 8mm dimension referred to the width of the film, including sprocket
    > holes.
    >
    > Don



    Ahhh, that explains it!

    I know that I can hold a slide up to the light and
    kind of see what it is, even with my real old eyes...

    I also know that 50 years ago I had much younger eyes,
    and couldn't see hardly a thing holding movie film
    up to the light.

    Thanks, and take care.

    Ken
     
    Ken Weitzel, Aug 2, 2004
    #6
  7. "Ken Weitzel" <> wrote in message
    news:QojPc.155701$od7.75122@pd7tw3no...
    >
    >
    >
    > Thanks so much, really appreciate the info! :)
    >
    > Just in case anyone's interested, the reason I wanted
    > to know was because I have a friend in a really
    > sad situtation.
    >
    > A recent house fire destroyed all her photos and neg's;
    > all she has is a couple of 50 year old 8mm movie films...
    > only has those because they were off site.
    >
    > Anyway, she doesn't want to risk projecting them, fearing
    > that the (plastic ?) may be dried and brittle, perhaps
    > even burn easily. She is willing to bring them along
    > when she visits Winnipeg, gently unroll them, and scan
    > them. First, I wanted to crop a slide to 8mm size,
    > scan it, and see if we can get some individual pics.
    >
    > A really quick and dirty test shows that they're not
    > gonna be good by any stretch of the imagination,
    > but probably get some 3 or 4 inch prints that will
    > be much better than nothing :)
    >
    > Thanks again...
    >
    > Ken

    ----------

    A suggestion... if it is worth it in time and effort - see if you can find
    an old 8mm editor / splicer. The kind where you put the reel of film on one
    side and hand crank it to the take-up side but that also allows projection
    at very low power / and low heat to a small viewing screen.

    Would make it a LOT easier to screen the film and select target frames to
    work on. May be able to find one cheep in a local "junque" shop, or a pawn
    shop, if you are anywhere near a bigger town or city.

    Journalist
     
    Journalist-North, Aug 2, 2004
    #7
  8. Ken Weitzel

    Timmy Guest

    On Mon, 02 Aug 2004 05:56:41 GMT, "Journalist-North"
    <> wrote:

    > Anyway, she doesn't want to risk projecting them, fearing
    >> that the (plastic ?) may be dried and brittle, perhaps
    >> even burn easily. She is willing to bring them along
    >> when she visits Winnipeg, gently unroll them, and scan
    >> them. First, I wanted to crop a slide to 8mm size,
    >> scan it, and see if we can get some individual pics.
    >>


    I have many 8mm home movies that are over 50 years old and they
    project just fine.

    Suggest you load up a film and project just a few frames to see how
    they work.

    The best would be to have the films converted to CD. Using the right
    software you could then choose which pictures you want and print them.

    Remember you are dealing with a small image and you will not get the
    quality that you get with 35mm esp larger prints.

    Dave
     
    Timmy, Aug 2, 2004
    #8
  9. "Ken Weitzel" <> wrote in message
    news:QojPc.155701$od7.75122@pd7tw3no...
    SNIP
    > First, I wanted to crop a slide to 8mm size,
    > scan it, and see if we can get some individual pics.
    >
    > A really quick and dirty test shows that they're not
    > gonna be good by any stretch of the imagination,
    > but probably get some 3 or 4 inch prints that will
    > be much better than nothing :)


    If you inspect individual frames, they will be grainy and often not
    very sharp (partially due to the low shutterspeed of the individual
    frames). You can improve the graininess by averaging several frames of
    a stationary subject, a technique used in astronomy. There is even
    free a program available that will do the stacking and aligning work
    for you, http://aberrator.astronomy.net/registax/index.html , but it
    has a bit of a learning curve. A commercial set of Photoshop plug-ins
    that could be helpful is "Optipix"
    (http://www.reindeergraphics.com/optipix/) because it can do sub-pixel
    alignment and averaging.

    When the graininess is reduced (for which you can also use programs
    like "Neat Image"), the image or composite will tolerate higher levels
    of sharpening.

    You may even want to try an application like "Unshake"
    (http://www.hamangia.freeserve.co.uk/), which could reduce traces of
    camera shake of individual frames. Since the images won't be too
    large, it would be not too timeconsuming to try different settings.

    Bart
     
    Bart van der Wolf, Aug 2, 2004
    #9
  10. Ken Weitzel

    RSD99 Guest

    These old films *can* be "rescued" ... but not really cheaply.

    A search on

    telecine 8mm

    will give you many sources ... including (selected at random):

    http://www.moviestuff.tv/8mm_telecine.html

    http://www.8mm.filmshooting.com/telecine/index.php

    http://www.homemoviedepot.com/

    http://www.rainbowpixels.com/video.htm

    http://www.filmtransfer.com/super-8mm-16mm-film-transfer-conversion.asp














    "Ken Weitzel" <> wrote in message news:2YgPc.152027$Mr4.90112@pd7tw1no...
    >
    > Hi...
    >
    > Wondering if anyone here happens to know what
    > the actual image size is on old 8 mm and/or super 8
    > movie film is?
    >
    > I know the question sounds ridiculous, but looking
    > at a 35 mm piece of film it looks much more than
    > 4 times as big as I remember movie film was.
    >
    > Thanks, take care.
    >
    > Ken
    >
     
    RSD99, Aug 2, 2004
    #10
  11. Ken Weitzel

    Ken Weitzel Guest

    Journalist-North wrote:

    > "Ken Weitzel" <> wrote in message
    > news:QojPc.155701$od7.75122@pd7tw3no...
    >
    >>
    >>
    >>Thanks so much, really appreciate the info! :)
    >>
    >>Just in case anyone's interested, the reason I wanted
    >>to know was because I have a friend in a really
    >>sad situtation.
    >>
    >>A recent house fire destroyed all her photos and neg's;
    >>all she has is a couple of 50 year old 8mm movie films...
    >>only has those because they were off site.
    >>
    >>Anyway, she doesn't want to risk projecting them, fearing
    >>that the (plastic ?) may be dried and brittle, perhaps
    >>even burn easily. She is willing to bring them along
    >>when she visits Winnipeg, gently unroll them, and scan
    >>them. First, I wanted to crop a slide to 8mm size,
    >>scan it, and see if we can get some individual pics.
    >>
    >>A really quick and dirty test shows that they're not
    >>gonna be good by any stretch of the imagination,
    >>but probably get some 3 or 4 inch prints that will
    >>be much better than nothing :)
    >>
    >>Thanks again...
    >>
    >>Ken

    >
    > ----------
    >
    > A suggestion... if it is worth it in time and effort - see if you can find
    > an old 8mm editor / splicer. The kind where you put the reel of film on one
    > side and hand crank it to the take-up side but that also allows projection
    > at very low power / and low heat to a small viewing screen.
    >
    > Would make it a LOT easier to screen the film and select target frames to
    > work on. May be able to find one cheep in a local "junque" shop, or a pawn
    > shop, if you are anywhere near a bigger town or city.
    >
    > Journalist


    Hi Journalist...

    Wonderful idea, thank you!!!

    Went over to ebay; searched, found, bid, and won
    two of them... one looks to be about a 3 inch screen,
    the other maybe 5 inches. Wondering if I might not
    do even better taking a picture of one of those screens
    than scanning. Worth a try, anyway.

    And on the off-chance that anyone else here is a nostalgia
    buff, there's all kinds of that stuff there... Even
    unopened boxes of film. Nice memories :)

    Thanks again, and take care.

    Ken
     
    Ken Weitzel, Aug 2, 2004
    #11
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. B. Peg

    Equating monitor size to film size question

    B. Peg, Jan 31, 2004, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    7
    Views:
    490
    Dan Wojciechowski
    Feb 4, 2004
  2. Phil Edry
    Replies:
    11
    Views:
    1,227
    Derek Gee
    Oct 11, 2004
  3. Sharp Shooter

    DSLRs or Slide Film or Colour Negative Film? ;o)

    Sharp Shooter, Jun 20, 2005, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    10
    Views:
    1,118
  4. Rick Baker
    Replies:
    6
    Views:
    1,221
    Scott W
    Mar 17, 2006
  5. Replies:
    5
    Views:
    3,975
    Michael Benveniste
    Jun 13, 2006
Loading...

Share This Page