method of copying film to video tape

[Rpm Parker]

Any suggestion and info on the subject would be very much appreciated. I have just got round to this job after about 20 years away from amateur film making. Thanks


------------------
Ron

[MovieStuff]

Well, here's a shameless plug for my product:
http://www.afterimagephoto.tv/workprinter.html

I recommend the WorkPrinter-2, which seems to be the most popular.

Roger

------------------
Roger Evans
MovieStuff
http://www.afterimagephoto.tv/moviestuff.html

[technicolour]

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Courier, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Rpm Parker:
Any suggestion and info on the subject would be very much appreciated. I have just got round to this job after about 20 years away from amateur film making. Thanks


<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Hi Ron!,

I live in sussex UK too, Jessops do telecine (the proper name for the process) and i dont think its as expensive as the pro stuff, not sure how much it costs though because they havent printed the prices for years.


------------------
Jim

[Matt Pacini]

You can certainly telecine your footage like we all have, or you can do it yourself for a fraction of the price.
Go back and look on this board under listings on "Workprinter".
I'm getting mine this week, and others on this board have ordered theirs.
When you read the details on this mighty machine, you will get excited about it I'm sure, just like the rest of us.

Matt Pacini

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

[Nigel]

It is my opinion that a good Xfer can only be had via a Rank or other high-end professional device. Look into Cinepost out of Atlanta. Good Luck

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

[MovieStuff]

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Courier, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Nigel:
It is my opinion that a good Xfer can only be had via a Rank or other high-end professional device.
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

And you can only get a good image if you shoot on 35mm as well, right? Just what constitutes a "high-end professional device"? A super 8 camera? I find it odd that one can generate the footage with a home movie medium but it can only be tranfered using a "high-end professional device".

Also, everyone has a budget limitation and "good" is a very relative term. True, a flying spot scanner with a DaVinci color corrector is technically better, but how many people can really afford to maximize that value? At the rates the Rank houses charge per hour, about all most super 8 users can afford is to do is SAY they had their footage Ranked. Without the budget to fine tune and tweak their imagery, which takes time, the footage rarely reflects the potential of the situation.

To me, going to a Rank without enough money is like saving your pennies to check into the tiniest room at a swanky hotel in Vegas. You can technically make the claim that you stayed there, but did you really get the same treatment and benefits as the high dollar guests? If not, then what's the point?

I am hardly saying that the WorkPrinter is as good as a Rank. On the contrary, anyone that has followed this saga knows that I have gone out of my way to NOT make image quality an issue, since is is relative to each person's needs, experience, footage and equipment. However, I do believe that doing it yourself gives you ONE thing that the Rank houses will never give you: Time.

In my opinion, time can make the difference between an "okay" transfer on a Rank that breaks the bank and a "satisfying" DIY transfer that meets all the asthetic needs required while letting one still buy groceries.

My two cents....

Roger

------------------
Roger Evans
MovieStuff
http://www.afterimagephoto.tv/moviestuff.html

[crimsonson]

Ditto Roger

In my experience there is actually two reasons to do Super8 Rank:

1. A serious project ("serious" being up to you)
2. To try it one time to actualize expectations.

Dollar per dollar, going up a format (16mm in this case) will affect your project's quality (in so many different ways) much more than just Ranking.

Saving to get a Workprinter,
Dom

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

[seekaee]

Question,

I heard a rumor, that someone slowly ran some processed neg film through his projector with a specialized bulb and videotaped each and every frame.Afterwards He used Premiere to screencapture/edit the frames into a digital filmstrip.

Is there any truth to this at all? Or is it just another pipedream.




[This message has been edited by seekaee (edited November 27, 2001).]

[MovieStuff]

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Courier, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by crimsonson:

Dollar per dollar, going up a format (16mm in this case) will affect your project's quality (in so many different ways) much more than just Ranking.
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Well, that is exactly the point. Super 8 is a terrific medium, but it is an EXACTINTG medium that doesn't lend itself to "casual" acts of handling like 16mm.

For instance, you could take a typical 16mm Bell and Howell Filmo with a fungus laden Wollensack lens and shoot off exposure by a couple of stops on high speed color negative and have a one light, unattended Rank session to VHS and it will, more likely than not, STILL come out on par if not better than S8 Kodachrome shot on a state of the art camera and handled under perfect conditions transfered to BetaSP.

But at what price?

So, we've all gotten used to the fact that we're making movies with microscopes and that errors are magnified and that everything we do has to be contemplated in advance to maximize the resources available. In that sense, the very act of shooting in super 8 is just an extension of that methodolgy.

If money doesn't matter, then shoot in 16mm and make life easier. But, because money does matter, then it is a bit self defeating to work so hard at saving money and being clever and doing everything yourself and then get to the transfer houses and find that, while they'll take your membership fee, you really don't get to use the pool.

Of course, digging a hole in the ground and filling it with water isn't the same thing as having access to a nice pool, but if you never had the resources available in the first place, then not having that kind of access at all doesn't represent a loss, it simply means a change of resources. Get out the shovel and the garden hose or sweat it out!

If one can afford a complete Rank session, then that is the way to go. But if you can only afford to get your foot in the lobby just long enough to write them a check, there is no value to be found, except for the Rank house; they get your money and you get a rush job.

That is why I feel I have seen some DIY film-chain transfers that turn out more satisfying. I use the term "satisfying" because, even if you DO have money to spend on a Rank transfer, there will always be something that is left unfullfilled or underachieved. As I pointed out, there is always a limit to a given budget, no matter how big. At least with a DIY, you have the element of time on your side. Given a fair degree of snap and the willingness to experiment, I think that a DIY transfer is very practical for the super 8 producer. Will it produce a product as good as a Rank transfer? Possible yes and posslby no. But, if you can't afford a "proper" Rank transfer to begin with, then either answer is academic.

Roger

------------------
Roger Evans
MovieStuff http://www.afterimagephoto.tv/moviestuff.html

[This message has been edited by MovieStuff (edited November 27, 2001).]

[MovieStuff]

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Courier, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by seekaee:

I heard a rumor, that someone slowly ran some processed neg film through his projector with a specialized bulb and videotaped each and every frame.Afterwards He used Premiere to screencapture/edit the frames into a digital filmstrip.
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I've never heard that rumor, but I really don't know what kind of "special bulb" there would be or how it would come to play such an important part in the process. In the WorkPrinters I build, I replace the standard projection bulb with a cheap ($1.00) 40 watt bulb from the hardware store. I'd hardly call it special, but I suppose if it helps to not burn the film while you slowly run it through the projector at about 6 fps, then I guess that's special. Using Premier is a good way to build up a series of frames for playback.

Wait a minute...

A special bulb, 6fps transfer speed, Premier...

Hey, maybe I'M the rumor!

Roger

------------------
Roger Evans
MovieStuff
http://www.afterimagephoto.tv/moviestuff.html