Talk:Super 8 film

Ektachrome

The article mentions Ektachrome to replace Kodachrome when manufacture and processing ended for the latter. But Ektachrome was available much earlier to allow for available light filming, I believe at ASA 160. Gah4 (talk) 19:54, 20 August 2019 (UTC)

@Gah4: An Ektachrome film did become available in the 1970's. You are correct in that it was 160 ASA. However, the film was designated as a 'type G' (as opposed to the more usual 'type A' for the super 8 format). It was a daylight balanced film that was allegedly usable in artificial lighting.

In theory, it could only be used in cameras that were designed to accept it as it was missing one of the notches normally present in type A super 8 cartridges (the lower one). Its absence moved the daylight conversion filter out of the optical path. The camera also had to operate with 160 ASA film (coded via the upper notch). Earlier cameras, which ignored the notch and always assumed artificial light film, could not officially be used with type G film. However, if the camera was able to detect that 160 ASA film was loaded, it was possible to use it by changing the camera to artificial light mode (removing the daylight conversion filter). 81.154.179.214 (talk) 15:00, 23 February 2022 (UTC)

Thanks. I had to look up to be sure, that Type A is 3400K and Type B is 3200K. It seems that Type F is 3800K for clear flash bulbs. As well as I can tell, type G is somewhere in between. The idea of the higher speed was to avoid artificial light, so not much reason for type A. But also, people are much less bothered by too warm balance than too cold. Something lit by birthday candles (if I remember right, one example) will be expected to be warm. Or one could use external filters. Gah4 (talk) 22:43, 23 February 2022 (UTC)

Type G was a daylight balanced film. It's important characteristic was that it was more tolerant of colour temperature changes than the then available Kodachrome film. The higher speed coupled with Ektachrome being a substantive film meant that the grain was much more noticeable. 81.154.179.214 (talk) 13:52, 24 February 2022 (UTC)

The Ektachrome that is available now for super 8 is completely different to the Ektachrome from the 1990s even up to where it was end of lined in the late 2000s. The two film stocks have nothing in common with each other except the name. The original Ektachrome was a vivid colour (VC) film stock designed to provide richly saturated colours (especially blues). The current Ektachrome is a daylight balanced filmstock that produces colour accurate colours as near as possible to what you saw them originally. The current Ektachrome like Ektar 100 was designed from the ground up to be scanned also, the fact that it can be projected is just a benefit of Kodak making it a positive film --120.22.132.33 (talk) 08:46, 5 March 2023 (UTC)

I am not sure how you define completely different. If it is still E6, it isn't completely different, but might be a lot different. I doubt Kodak completely started over, but also that it isn't exactly the same. Gah4 (talk) 22:00, 8 March 2023 (UTC)