One Light Rank?

[MadFor3D]

I have 200' of footage I want transfered with a Rank transfer. Noting that most of it is b&w, and that the primary reason for getting the footage Rank transfered is to have it flicker free, the best image quality, and syncable to the sound stuff I recorded... Do I really need scene to scene color corrections? Wouldn't a one light Rank transfer be enough?

This is something I don't really understand. What's the real advantage of having scene to scene corrections if you can adjust it later when its captured to your computer? Seems like having it done *one light* would save a great deal of money.

Thanks,

Madrone


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

[Alex]

Excellent analysis, it would take me half and hour to come up with a short concise answer to your statement.

If I have time this weekend, I'll try.

------------------
Alex

[Matt Pacini]

Well, just like the original shoot, if you lose information, you CAN NOT just make it up in the computer.
There is a limit to what you can fix, and if you transfer a dark scene, for instance, and they don't do what they can to pull out all the detail in the shadows during the transfer, it will be lost forever. You will not get it back in the computer.
All big budget feature films that are transferred to video, have not only scene to scene, but shot to shot correction.
It's just not a process that is automatic.
They have so much control in a telecine bay, but that also means they HAVE to make decisions as to how to transfer.
Generally, the better (and flatter) your original footages is, the less you need correction. Unless you're going for a certain look, or you made mistakes, etc., you will be OK for a basic transfer with a one light (depending on how picky you are).

For only 200 feet of film, you're spending a hell of a lot of money for a Rank, especially if you do scene to scene transfers.
You're going to have to pay for gate rental, no matter if you're transferring 50 feet, or 5,000 feet, unless you go to Super 8 Sound for your transfer (which I don't recommend).

For less money than a single Rank transfer, you can get one of Roger Evan's Workprinters.
It's frame accurate, and then you can do your own transfers for nothing from now on!
That's what I'm doing.
(Look up the Workprinter post from a couple weeks ago for more info, & check out his website).

Matt Pacini


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

[MovieStuff]

Hey, Mad!

Matt is correct. Even if your film were exposed perfectly, video has less latitude for handling highlights and shadow areas than your film original. Therefore, in an ideal situation, you would adjust the brightness and color of each cut as it comes up on the monitor for the best look WHILE you are transferring the film; not after the fact. As Matt stated, if you don't, and detail gets lost in the shadows or highlights, then that detail is gone forever and no amount of adjusting in Premier or other NLE systems will ever get it back.

Here's the link for the WorkPrinter:
http://www.afterimagephoto.tv/workprinter.html

Feel free to ask any questions! You are EXACTLY the kind of user that the WorkPrinter was designed for!

Roger

[Alex]

According to a S.M.P.T.E. magazine article, BW video has fifty more lines of video resolution than color video resolution...so BW film has more video latitude than color film.

(footnote: I probably should not have used the word "so" up above)

It is possible to do a "one light" and "perhaps" not lose anything to either clipped white levels or crushed blacks.

You may find however that the extra 1/2 to 1 hour of time it takes to transfer your BW footage on the rank and properly correct most of the levels could save you dozens of hours in video correction time on the computer.

If you want to learn how to do correcting, and will be using scopes and such, then you could try the "one-light" rank transfer.

But you must analyze the footage before editing to make sure no video bright levels are clipped, an that no dark levels have been crushed to zero ire.

If your levels are somewhere between 7.5-100 on the Video IRE scale, you can probably make further adjustments to optimize the look.

So, you may save $ 75.00 - $ 200.00 on the transfer, but spend a dozen or more hours making corrections...but hey, if you have the time, what the heck!

You will learn about the intricacies of video level correction and save money.

One compromise solution might be to one-light the BW and take a little longer for the color footage, of which you have less of.

------------------
Alex

[This message has been edited by Alex (edited September 29, 2001).]

[This message has been edited by Alex (edited September 30, 2001).]

[Matt Pacini]

Unless you're a rich boy, I just can't see going in and spending $500-$800 on 200 feet of film!
That's 10 minutes, and then what's it going to be after you edit?
Two minutes? Three?

This is a no brainer.
Get The Workprinter.
It's less money than this transfer seesion is going to cost you, and like I said, you can then transfer for free from now on.
Don't think about it, just do it!
You're not REALLY entertaining the idea of Ranking that 200 feet for that much money, are you?

If so, I have some swamp land I want to sell you...

Matt Pacini

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

[Alex]

That would be a separate issue.

200 feet of film, if transferred in 30 minutes, would cost between $75.00 - $ 150.00 plus stock depending on where you go...

If the Transfer session took one hour, it would cost between $150.00-$300.00 plus stock.

------------------
Alex

[MovieStuff]

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Courier, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Alex:
According to a S.M.P.T.E. magazine article, BW video has fifty more lines of video resolution than color video resolution...so BW film has more video latitude than color film. So it is possible to do a "one light" and "perhaps" not lose anything to either clipped white levels or crushed blacks.

You may find however that the extra 1/2 to 1 hour of time it takes to transfer your BW footage on the rank and properly correct most of the levels could save you dozens of hours in video correction time on the computer.
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

"Dozens of hours" to correct 10 minutes of film? Man, I'm glad I'm not paying you by the hour to do my editing!

Correcting 10 minutes of film shouldn't take more than a half hour or less. I can NOT imagine what would take dozens of hours, especially for black and white video. I do color and density corrections all the time during editing and never have I spent "dozens of hours" per 10 minutes of film. I'd starve to death!

Beyond that, your observations about film resolution and associated latitude are incorrect. If more resolution within a format resulted in more latitude, then K40 would be the best all around for all shooting, all the time! You'd get fine grain AND terrific latitude. But the fact is that you only gain latitude when you increase resolution by going to a larger format using the same emmulsion. In other words, the same scene shot on the same film stock in both Super 8 and 35mm will show more latitude in the 35mm frame than in the super 8 frame. That is why still photographers (like myself) that are requested by agencies to provide transparencies of a product do so on 4x5 even though the image won't be reproduced any bigger than a magazine layout, for which 35mm resolution would be fine. By going to a larger format, one gains latitude and lower contrast but can still shoot on the same film stock; in this case, reversal, as per the client's wishes.

Therefore, higher resolution does not increase latitude for the same size film image. K40 has more resolution than Ektachrome 160 and you don't need to be a rocket scientist to figure out which is more contrasty. In fact, regarding film, the opposite of what you are saying is actually the truth - Within the confines of the same format, slower film means finer grain which results in more resolution but higher contrast (less latitude). Faster film means more grain which results in less resolution but lower contrast (more latitude). That is why Plus-X has less latitude than Tri-X and also why Plus-X has less grain than Tri-X.

Beyond that, you can't really transpose video resolution characteristics onto film at any point.

Roger

[This message has been edited by MovieStuff (edited September 30, 2001).]

[mattias]

> Correcting 10 minutes of film shouldn't take more than a half hour or less.

log: 20 minutes
capture: 15 minutes
scene by scene color correction: 30 minutes
render: 100 minutes
back to tape: 15 minutes
restarting your computer, having coffee and so on: 30 minutes
total: 3.5 hours.

:-)

/matt

[Alex]

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


Correcting 10 minutes of film shouldn't take more than a half hour or less. I can NOT imagine what would take dozens of hours, especially for black and white video. I do color and density corrections all the time during editing and never have I spent "dozens of hours" per 10 minutes of film. I'd starve to death! <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

It depends on the Non Linear Editing system you are using.

Some systems don't allow you to see a "before and after", you render what you want, then either you like it or you don't. A very cumbersome procedure.

For somebody starting out, which was my point, it can be a very time-consuming procedure...especially if you have built a time-line and done rendering and then decide you need to change video levels in the middle of a built sequence.

Why compare your level of competence to the posters level, who is just starting out?

It is an unfair compairison to make.

You probably work with someone over your shoulder, as a result, you know exactly what you need to get the job done as efficiently as possible...don't assume someone starting out will automatically be at the level you are at after many years of doing what you do.

Plus, comparing the corrected result to a wavefrom/vectorscope makes it take longer because not all systems have the waveform vectorscope easily accessible.

Many of the NLE systems have poor graphical representations of the Waveform, Vector Scope, which makes it even more difficult to evaluate what you are doing, especially a beginner.

Also, are you doing double monitor work? Many new NLE users think they only need one monitor, and that adds an extra layer of time accessing different programs and procedures, finding clips...

I bet you have a two monitor system, which significantly reduces the time it takes to do virtually any task because it makes mult-tasking that much easier.

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

Beyond that, your observations about film resolution and associated latitude are incorrect. If more resolution within a format resulted in more latitude, then K40 would be the best all around for all shooting, all the time! You'd get fine grain AND terrific latitude. But the fact is that you only gain latitude when you increase resolution by going to a larger format using the same emulsion.

<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Apples and oranges...I'm comparing Color to BW in the same format.

The additional BW resolution of 50 lines over color allows for greater latitude in "correcting" the signal after the fact.

So, the rank transfer can be farther off for the BW transfer and still be "saved" versus the color film.


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


In other words, the same scene shot on the same film stock in both Super 8 and 35mm will show more latitude in the 35mm frame than in the super 8 frame. That is why still photographers (like myself) that are requested by agencies to provide transparencies of a product do so on 4x5 even though the image won't be reproduced any bigger than a magazine layout, for which 35mm resolution would be fine. By going to a larger format, one gains latitude and lower contrast but can still shoot on the same film stock; in this case, reversal, as per the client's wishes.

<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I don't think this relates to the difference in correcting BW and Color in the same format.

My point was that a BW transfer is more forgiving in the transfer process. It can be "off" way more than color and still be "fixable".

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

Therefore, higher resolution does not increase latitude for the same size film image. K40 has more resolution than Ektachrome 160 and you don't need to be a rocket scientist to figure out which is more contrasty.

<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Again, the issue is not one color stock versus another, it is BW versus Color.

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

In fact, regarding film, the opposite of what you are saying is actually the truth - Within the confines of the same format, slower film means finer grain which results in more resolution but higher contrast (less latitude). Faster film means more grain which results in less resolution but lower contrast (more latitude). That is why Plus-X has less latitude than Tri-X and also why Plus-X has less grain than Tri-X.

<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

The point I was making is all of these BW stocks should probably survive a one light transfer rank transfer and be correctable when doing Non Linear Editing.

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

Beyond that, you can't really transpose video resolution characteristics onto film at any point.

Roger

[This message has been edited by MovieStuff (edited September 30, 2001).]<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Sure you can, BW film transfered onto video has more resolution than Color Film transferred onto video.

you can play with contrast, set-up/brightness without worrying as much about color and hue issues.

If you were choosing which aspect of a transfer to fully correct, I would choose the color over the BW, as I said in my previous post.

The BW has a greater chance of being within a range that can be properly adjusted at a later time.

The Devils Advocate position to what I just said is the Telecine person may be able to do overall BW adjustments faster during a film transfer session than Color.




------------------
Alex