I'm not sure how many Frameworks' folks have seen Matthew Epler's open source "film scanner" <http://kinograph.cc/>. It's still pretty new and definitely not for everyone. If you have access to a 3D printer and have some old DSLR's to spare (same shutter life problem), it may be worth a DIY attempt.
http://www.instructables.com/id/Kinograph-v01-DIY-Film-Scanner/ - Warren On Wed, Jul 23, 2014 at 7:26 PM, Dave Tetzlaff <[email protected]> wrote: > Since so many Frameworkers continue to use photochemical film > 'acquisition' (sic), and distribution/exhibition opportunities are just > getting ever more digital, it would seem that telecine/scan techniques and > services are ever more important to our little community. > > I think it would valuable for list members to continue to offer their > knowledge and experiences -- good, bad or some of each -- with different > DIY techniques, maybe different pieces of gear of varying price and > availability, and different firms that offer transfer services, including > the naming of names. > > ...... > > The tricks with off-the-wall telecine for S8 would be: > > 1. Finding a projector that holds constant speed, and has fairly even > illumination across the frame rather than a hot spot in the middle. > > 2. Using a video camera/DSLR that has variable frame rate, and tuning it > to the speed of the projector. Most "prosumer" models from Panasonic and > some from Canon have such an adjustment. Ideally, you'd want a camera that > can drop down to whatever the fixed speed on the projector is, probably > 18fps, or go up to a multiple of projector speed (e.g. 36 fps). If you can > get a projector that does 24fps, it might even work with un-adjusted 24P, > but many S8 projectors are only in the ball-park of their rated speeds. > Variable-speed projectors might be a possibility, but you can't hit precise > speeds with them, and they're more likely to drift. So you'll never be able > to adjust a variable speed projector to a constant frame-rate camera. > > 3. If you can only match camera and projector at a projection frame-rate > other than what the film was shot at (say 24fps vs. 18fps) it's no big > deal, as you just change the speed in the NLE. For most material, it should > look fine. If you're projecting at the 'wrong' speed to a variable > frame-rate camera, I'm not sure if over-cranking to a multiple (e.g. > shooting 24fps projection at 48fps video) would yield smoother results when > you drop it back to 18fps in the video editor. Anybody know? > > 4. As Dana said, playing with the shutter speed on the video camera can > MINIMIZE flicker, but it's highly unlikely to get rid of it. Whether the > minimal flicker is acceptable is a question for your own tastes and > purposes. One of the best senior video projects one of my students made was > shot on Super-8 and telecined off a wall to a basic DV-NTSC camcorder. The > video had a lot of flicker, but it was perfect for the aesthetic of the > project. > > In the one regular class I taught where students shot on photochemical > film (16mm) they still finished in FCP, and toward the end of my teaching > we had gone from NTSC to HDV. I had telecined the students footage to NTSC > with a 5-blade (Singer-Telex, and later an Elmo), which was tricky enough > that I had to do it myself, but when we got Canon XHA1s I just set up a > regular Pageant and that hit sync with the 24F mode without any tweaking. > The results looked very nice to my eye, and the students could do it > themselves. But 16mm projectors are a lot more regular than most Super 8 > machines. But if you can get an even, steady image on the wall, I'd guess > HD video of it should be more than acceptable for most purposes > > 4. Since a certain amount of trial and error is involved in getting any > DIY telecine adjusted, you'll want to have some not-valuable footage to do > that, so you can get your precious new footage done right in the fewest > number of passes. In addition to getting the best sync/least flicker you'll > want to find the best manual exposure. One setting may not work for all > shots, since even Super 8 has a lot more latitude than video. Auto-exposure > will be slow to react to shot changes, and will mess up anything where the > frame is darker or lighter than average. > > 5. All of this assumes you're running un-spliced film through the gate. > Splices will mess everything up. As far as I know, the only way to get a > quality transfer of spliced film is by having it scanned. > > 6. I have tried using the mirror-box attachments for telecine with no > success. I had a relatively more expensive one I got on eBay that had good > optics and was built like a tank. Try as I might, I could never get the > projector, the box, and the camera aligned properly -- and I'm pretty > handy: made my own bench for the projector with special mounts for the box > and tripod. Probably could have gotten it right with a more sophisticated > set-up, but shooting a screen was a lot easier, and working fine. I put the > video camera right next to the right of projector, which minimized parallax > to the point no one ever really noticed. You wouldn't want to get behind > the projector, as you'd get light leaks from the lamp-house. I projected > onto a piece of standard matte-white poster board affixed to a piece of > particle board clamped into a Workmate maybe 6 ft. in front of the lens. I > could completely darken the room. Actual walls are usally not the best, > being a bit uneven in reflectance, not exactly flat, and often blemished in > ways you don't notice otherwise because they're just walls. Portable movie > screens have issues, too. Forget silver-lenticular and glass bead off the > bat, and even a matte white screen can have a little texture or surface > ripple you wouldn't see from a screening distance but could show in video > re-photography. Cheap poster-board can have surface irregularities, too. > Just get a sheet of whatever the art store has that has the most even > matte-white finish - probably the foam core stuff, and affix it firmly to > whatever vertical surface is most convenient. I just made a little frame of > black gaffers tape to hold my screen in place on the backing board. Be > careful taping anything to a real wall of piece of furniture you want to > keep the paint/finish on. Gaffers tape comes off of most things clean if > you're careful and it hasn't been there too long. The blue painters tape > comes off nice, but may not be sticky enough to hold your makeshift screen > in place (I think 3M has a patent, and theirs is superior to all the > knock-offs). Duct tape comes off of nothing clean. It may be (or may not) > be useful in hurricanes, but it has no use in any AV application (and yes, > I learned that the hard way in my ignorant youth...). > > ........ > > Since Dana mentioned Costco, I checked 'em out online. > They subcontract everything out to a company called YesVideo, which is > also used by CVS, Walmart, Rite-Aid and Meijer (for those of you in > Oh-Hi-Oh). > The Costco page is : > http://www.costcodvd.com/services_and_pricing-film.aspx > You can deal with YesVideo directly (http://www.yesvideo.com/) but it's > cheaper through Costco. > > Obviously consumer home-movie oriented, yesvideo.com's basic service > turns your film into a web video you can view online, but can't download. > For an extra fee, they deliver you one of more SD DVDs. They take S8, R8 > and 16mm original. > > The yesvideo site lists prices for the online service (sans DVD) by reel > size: > 50 ft. 8.99 > 200 ft. 29.99 > 400 ft. 59.99 > So if Ben puts his 12 rolls of S8 onto bigger reels, he can see them > online for $90. :-( > > Costco only offers a package with two DVD copies plus the online access. > 17.99 for 150 ft. + .11 ft. after. Which would come to $67.49 for 1200 ft. > Obviously a better deal than going direct to YesVideo. At least you could > rip the DVDs to video files with MPEG Streamclip or such. (Didn't check CVS > for comparison.) > > There was a chat box online at yesvideo.com, and I asked the rep a few > basic tech questions, like what frame-rate and codec the online versions > were, whether the SD DVDs were just standard NTSC 60i or 24P. I may as well > have been speaking Martian. He took my email address, and said he'd have a > member of the Movie Team get back to me. > > So, does anyone have any experience with these YesVideo folks? > > There's a lot of technology in the process that could vary in quality. Are > they using a scanner, a telecine projector, a hybrid like the Moviestuff > rigs? If it's not a scanner, what kind of imager is it. Do they do anything > with exposure or color, and if so what? What kind of raw file do they > capture to, (or do they have some high tech hardware to go straight to > MPEG2)? What kind of data rate are they giving the MPEG2 file, and how good > is the compression algorithm? > > They have links to press clips from Wired, WSJ, Bloomberg, and Woman's Day > on their page, and to presumably glowing customer testimonials, none of > which I bothered to click. > > ........ > > Granted that Ben's OP indicated 'professional' telecine is beyond his > budget, I'll add what I know about two such services. > > Movette in SF specializes in high-quality transfers of old home movies > that might be suffering from shrinkage, fading, bad splices, etc. AFAIK, > they're the only commercial service in North America with a Kinetta, though > it's not mentioned on their website, which doesn't seem to have been > updated in awhile. ***Maybe it's a secret? :-) Since Buck and Jeff are > longtime Frameworkers, maybe "Pip Chodorov sent me" gets you entrance to > otherwise locked doors?*** One of these days, I'll be digging my old films > out of the closet and taking them to Buck. (Looking forward to meeting > you...) > > Pro8mm in Burbank, on the other hand, specializes in transfers of freshly > shot stock. If you do a web-search, you'll find some negative comments and > some very positive ones from folks who've had work done there. I've met > Phil Vigeant, and he seems like a good guy. My take is that dealing with > Pro8mm is like dealing with most film labs: if you just send 'em stuff in > the mail with an "I need this done ASAP" 'tude, you might not get the best > results. On the other hand, treat the staff like human beings, take the > time to ask polite questions and do a little schmoozing, get to know the > people, show some love for what they do and for film as an art, and you'll > get their best effort. After having bad experiences with other telecine > services (NOT Movette, just to be clear), Frameworker Ken Paul Rosenthal > took his stuff to Pro8mm. He went down to Burbank with the footage > personally, Phil let him sit in on the transfer session. Ken has been > ecstatic with the results and with his interaction Phil. And, as Ken is a > friend, I can testify that no-one who can get through a tech session with > Ken and remain buddies afterward can possibly be an asshole. > > > > > _______________________________________________ > FrameWorks mailing list > [email protected] > https://mailman-mail5.webfaction.com/listinfo/frameworks >
_______________________________________________ FrameWorks mailing list [email protected] https://mailman-mail5.webfaction.com/listinfo/frameworks
