Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Kodak resurrects Super 8

kodak.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 202 posts

Re: Kodak resurrects Super 8

#11

Post by ghaff »

smacktoward wrote: post #3

I'm strugging to figure out who exactly this thing would be for . Amateurs for home movies? Nope, digital will always be cheaper, and faster/more convenient to work with to boot. Aspiring filmmakers? Nope, if you want to shoot on film professionally you'll want at least 16mm to avoid the magnification/graininess Super 8 brings with it. People nostalgic for the blurriness of old home movies? Do any of these actually e…

Please tell me their CMS got misconfigured and thought it was April 1. Who knows? Maybe there is an absolutely brilliant marketing person at Kodak but I'm having trouble seeing it.

I mean. "There are some moments that digital just can't deliver, because it doesn't have the incomparable depth and beauty of film." Um, we're not talking 70mm Panavision here. We're talking Super 8. Has whoever wrote this ever seen a Super 8 movie?

Re: Kodak resurrects Super 8

#12

Post by smegel »

rfrank wrote: post #8

If Kodak is scanning all of the photos and putting them into the cloud themselves, does that mean they have rights to said images?

What amazes me is the lawyers haven't been able to come up with some legalese that allows companies to transfer your data around their internal systems for your own use without stating "we can do whatever we want with your content".

Re: Kodak resurrects Super 8

#14

Post by ghaff »

dietrichepp wrote: post #9

I see USB and... SD card slot on the back? HDMI and... 3.5mm audio? One of the most characteristic features of Super 8, at least to me, is the complete lack of audio (at least, on most Super 8 works). So if you went to a theater to see something on Super 8 there might be a live band playing the soundtrack. I wonder if Kodak is doing something like putting audio on the SD card and then storing digital synchronization…

Super 8 film could have an oxide strip for magnetic sound.

Re: Kodak resurrects Super 8

#15

Post by sitharus »

smacktoward wrote: post #3

I'm strugging to figure out who exactly this thing would be for . Amateurs for home movies? Nope, digital will always be cheaper, and faster/more convenient to work with to boot. Aspiring filmmakers? Nope, if you want to shoot on film professionally you'll want at least 16mm to avoid the magnification/graininess Super 8 brings with it. People nostalgic for the blurriness of old home movies? Do any of these actually e…

The same people who buy impossible project instant film.

Sure you could shoot a perfectly in-focus colour corrected image and filter it, but there's something fun about not knowing the result instantly. It's the reverse of when digital cameras came out, then instant was exciting.

Re: Kodak resurrects Super 8

#16

Post by drglitch »

ethbro wrote: post #6

Hearing the name "Kodak" just makes me sad these days. From the wikipedia entry, "From the $90 range in 1997, Kodak shares closed at 76 cents on January 3, 2012" .

As sad as that is, it's a pretty long life for a company that was killed by mis-management: they invented the digital cameras but chose not to cannibalize their incumbent analog business. To combat demise, they chose to fire people and become an IP shell. Last try at survival was to sell off most/all IP and license its name. The rest is history.

Re: Kodak resurrects Super 8

#17

Post by Someone1234 »

rfrank wrote: post #8

If Kodak is scanning all of the photos and putting them into the cloud themselves, does that mean they have rights to said images?

No.

Photographs belong to the person who pressed the shutter release. The actual format or medium of the photograph (digital, print, negative, whatever) is irrelevant to the copyright, which is created during the act of taking a photograph.

So remember: Next time you hand someone your camera to take a picture of you, that person effectively owns the copyright on that image. Including a monkey[0].

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monkey_selfie#Copyright_issues

PS - Although I'm sure you have to give them a license to your copyrighted photo so that they can display it back to you on their website. It is standard industry practice. Doesn't mean they have redistribution rights or own the copyright however.

Re: Kodak resurrects Super 8

#18

Post by dietrichepp »

ghaff wrote: post #14
dietrichepp wrote: post #9

I see USB and... SD card slot on the back? HDMI and... 3.5mm audio? One of the most characteristic features of Super 8, at least to me, is the complete lack of audio (at least, on most Super 8 works). So if you went to a theater to see something on Super 8 there might be a live band playing the soundtrack. I wonder if Kodak is doing something like putting audio on the SD card and then storing digital synchronization…

Super 8 film could have an oxide strip for magnetic sound.

Right, but most Super 8 works don't have sound.

Re: Kodak resurrects Super 8

#19

Post by meric »

drglitch wrote: post #16
ethbro wrote: post #6

Hearing the name "Kodak" just makes me sad these days. From the wikipedia entry, "From the $90 range in 1997, Kodak shares closed at 76 cents on January 3, 2012" .

As sad as that is, it's a pretty long life for a company that was killed by mis-management: they invented the digital cameras but chose not to cannibalize their incumbent analog business. To combat demise, they chose to fire people and become an IP shell. Last try at survival was to sell off most/all IP and license its name. The rest is history.

We weren't in the company. It can be hard to tell. You could open a beauty therapy shop, and it's revenue increase every year, and suddenly after the introduction of cheap laser treatments and race-to-the-bottom competitors, in one year you could face a reduction of 70% of your revenue.[1]

[1] Anecdote.

Re: Kodak resurrects Super 8

#20

Post by AnimalMuppet »

dietrichepp wrote: post #10
AnimalMuppet wrote: post #5

Interesting. But it doesn't solve the worst problem I've ever had with analog film: The developer lost the rolls that had our honeymoon pictures on them. (As compensation, they were generous enough to offer us... blank replacement rolls. We were not impressed.) That's the advantage digital has - you don't mail the pictures anywhere. Nobody can lose them for you. (Yeah, you can still lose them yourself...)

Tip from the pros: if the pictures are irreplaceable, then divide them in half. Send half to the developer. If it gets ruined, you've only ruined half. This is how wedding photographers who shot on film avoided getting sued into oblivion by angry brides (and yes, there are many, many photographers who have been sued into oblivion by angry brides, contract or no contract).

Yeah. I figured that out from losing my honeymoon pictures...

:-<

Post reply on HN