I submitted this post, but I don't think it showed up. Maybe I missed it, and I
apologize if that's the case. Nevertheless, I amended it:
To re-qualify my comments on digitizing super 8, my intention was not to
categorically state that the option I described in my original post for
digitizing super 8 was the first and last word on how to do so, hence my
putting the word, "information" in quotations--which btw, is a term that
technicians use, not myself. As an artist, the questions I asked myself prior
to choosing my digitizing path were: What look do I want? Which digitizing
technology will help me achieve that look? What look/effect will a given
technology give me that I didn't intend? and, Which screening contexts will I
be presenting in? So there is no 'proper' path or resolution, save the one that
will best embody, manifest, and support your intentions. As I mentioned in my
prior post, I've projected my compressed rez images (via mini dv, dvd and .mov
file) on a theatre size screened and it "looked stunning", meaning that to my
tastes, there was no *perceivable* loss in any respect from what I saw on my
colorist's monitor during my online--none, and I have an obsessively
discriminating eye (note: projection eq is a separate matter). If I'd intended
to blow it up to 35mm film, then I would definitely have made full rez
transfers. That said, depending on the project, I may have desired the increase
in grain should I have chosen a compressed transfer prior to a 35mm film
enlargement. Two critical factors are the type of transfer device (eg,
Millenium vs Spirit) and the operator her/himself. Both must be optimal *for
your needs*. I spent a solid 3 months doing tests with a half dozen different
services/transfer units. In fact, Jeff K was one of the people I consulted with
on the way to making my final decision. I believe Jeff is involved with frame
by frame scanning which indeed is capable of producing the greatest resolution,
thus it is ideal for archiving. His knowledge and experience in that area is
much appreciated. But while I would have preferred frame by frame scanning, I
was not interested in sifting through--and scratching--over 150 rolls of shot
super 8 to choose which shots I wanted to scan. I preferred the more fluid
process of going straight from the processing lab to the transfer center, where
I sat in with the operator and decided right then and there if I wanted a
particular shot. Over the years, so many of the debates on Frameworks debates
regarding the interface of aesthetics and technical matters invariably get
reduced into ping ponging dialogues on scientific data. And while said
interface is certainly a critical part of an artist's creative process, I
firmly believe it should be embraced less in absolutist terms, and more in the
spirit of how can one can be flexible in order to manifest all that is unique
about any one project.
Ken www.crookedbeauty.comwww.kenpaulrosenthal.com
_______________________________________________
FrameWorks mailing list
[email protected]
https://mailman-mail5.webfaction.com/listinfo/frameworks
