-
Matt, I just want you to know that I'm with you 100% on this.
Hard drives are cheap these days, there's no reason I can think of NOT to scan at 2k or better. Especially with HD right around the corner (my company already has "reasonable" HD editing tools in development)
Why should I capture everything twice? I'll get it in at better res than anything available RIGHT NOW, then I'll have it for future use.
Your plans for the workprinter are pretty much right on with mine. SOoo...
I've been doing a little research on the high quality stills front. The new Canon showed promise, especially with the software from www.breezesys.co.uk. Unfortunately, it's about 5 seconds for transfer though the (yucky!) USB. I got an email back from Chris Breeze today, suggesting an Olympus that can apparently do 10fps, but I haven't looked for one yet.
I'll be REALLY interested in seeing the results of your hotrodded workprinter.
------------------
Mikel Z
-
I have no qualms about what Matt P is doing.
I am just confused on the actual use of a high res pic of his frames. High scan even in high budget production is only used for composites ( to be used in high end systems like fire and inferno ).With those 2k scans how will he edit?
If he does offline with it - would it not be easier, faster and less resource intensive to just go straight to a video format?
If the scans are his master for 35 or 16 or s16 who will pay for the laser transfer. It is difficult enough to find somebody to pay for a S8 feature transfer, it would be almost ridiculous to find somebody to do laser transfers.
"Especially with HD right around the corner "
Yes for high end production companies. HD Cam is still far from accessible not to mention there are also less company with HD editing capabilities.
Cranium: a detail explanation of your plans would be nice and might illuminate this discussion. In particular how will you leap over the 9 MEGABYTE PER FRAME obstacle in editing. Uncompress video is about 1 MEGABYTE PER FRAME and a SCSI Raid is needed to edit that. What kind of drives are you using?
If you offlined, why not just go to video?
BTW- An Arri laser transfer is about $100 per second.
------------------
-
I'm not offlining anything.
I'm going to do exactly what my two good friends who do FX all the time do (they've worked on The Cell, The Matrix, etc.)
(they helped me on Lost Tribes, then moved to L.A. and got work in the industry doing CG stuff).
Use targa files in Premier and AfterFX, then when you preview (or make a video dub), you render out low res files.
I haven't done this myself (obviously, because I haven't had hig-res files from film before), but they do this stuff 8-14 hours a day, so they will walk me through all of it, no problem.
I've done enough pestering them with questions to know that it's do-able, and this is how they do it. I've watched them at work. No bid deal.
(Yes, lots of hard drive space will be required, but in reality, I suspect that I'll bring the file sizes down to somewhere around 1K or so. To whatever res it takes to show S8 in all it's glory!)
And as far as laser outputting, I'm not going to do that either.
My next two Roger Evans (Moviestuff) orders, are going to be for:
1. A 16mm Workprinter
2. A system to shoot film off a monitor with a cine camera.
Don't laugh, that's how it was done in the days before laser film output.
I read a great interview with the one of the guys who works at ILM for like a million years now,(wish I could remember his name... it wasn't Muren), and he described how they did the FX in Young Sherlock Holmes. (Fun movie, by the way).
He said they emptied out a cupboard in the kitchen, where they had a big hi-res monitor with a 35mm film camera pointed at it, set up to single frame shoot off the monitor!
They would never show clients this rig, because it looked so cheesy, but it worked pretty freakin well, if you ask me.
If it's good enough for Young Sherlock Holmes, it's good enough for me!The FX in that movie were great. Certainly not substandard.
So, eventually, if eveything goes right, I'll be doing all this stuff in-house.
I won't have to send anything out but to have my film processed.
Matt Pacini
------------------
-
Matt P
"Don't laugh,"
Far from it. As this forum knows, you are one of those individuals who takes those risks for the sake of your film, for the sake of Super8. Keep taking those risks for us MAtt!
Like I said, I just wanted to pick that brain. Once in a while something useful pops out http://www.hostboard.com/ubb/wink.gif
------------------
-
yeah, i think matt is doing the right thing too, just trying to point aout the possible flaws in his plan/argument. i would want somebody to do the same for me if i was to spend thousands on something completely untested.
> Use targa files in Premier and AfterFX, then when you preview (or make a video dub), you render out low res files.
cool. i like to preview on a video monitor and have complete real time access to the material while i edit though. imagine having to render just to be able to view how a straight cut will look. couldn't you just render a low res version from the stills for editing, keeping the same time code, and then just "relink media", or whatever it's called in other programs than fcp, to get back to the the high res file when you're done? i did pretty much this all the time before i got my editing setup at home four years ago: rendered stuff from the editing station at work to cinepak, put on a cd, edited at home, took the project file back and linked it to the high res files. worked great and gave me the best of several worlds.
/matt
[This message has been edited by mattias (edited November 08, 2001).]
-
I'm not planning to edit in full resolution. I'm just capturing. Capture the high quality stills, downconvert to the current standard I want to use, then edit with that avi. But I still have the hi-res stuff JUST IN CASE. I can always render it out to HD or whatever I want (hi-res DivX?) later. Bottom line is, if I'm going to put the time in to capture 100,000 frames of something, why not do it as high as I can once? Put the film in the can.
You're right. It'd be tough to find a system that could do 9MB/frame. But I've happily worked with 1.7MB tgas with no problems in real time.
MDLZ
------------------
Mikel Z
-
[QUOTE]Originally posted by mattias:
[B]yeah, i think matt is doing the right thing too, just trying to point aout the possible flaws in his plan/argument. i would want somebody to do the same for me if i was to spend thousands on something completely untested.
(Matt Pacini responds):
mattias, I appreciate the comments you've made.
I hope I don't sound too argumentativ,e sometimes I kind of poke someone with a hot iron, just to bring more information out of 'em! Hope it's not too annoying! Thanks for the advice, I certainly do realize there are those among this board that have much more experience than me in certain areas.
mattias:
"cool. i like to preview on a video monitor and have complete real time access to the material while i edit though. imagine having to render just to be able to view how a straight cut will look. couldn't you just render a low res version from the stills for editing, keeping the same time code, and then just "relink media", or whatever it's called in other programs than fcp, to get back to the the high res file when you're done? i did pretty much this all the time before i got my editing setup at home four years ago: rendered stuff from the editing station at work to cinepak, put on a cd, edited at home, took the project file back and linked it to the high res files. worked great and gave me the best of several worlds.
/matt"
(Matt Pacini responds):
Yeah, I may end up doing that too.
I'll sort it all out as soon as I get the system up and running, as to what the best method will be.
My FX buddies I referred to, are usually doing shots that are several seconds in length, and rarely over a couple minutes, so it's a whole different ballgame. Whatever I figure out, it's gong to be at least passable, even if I have to compromise, and did I mention that it will be CHEAPER THAN TELECINE????????
Matt Pacini
------------------
-
BTW- An Arri laser transfer is about $100 per second.
---
BUT a really nice quality 2k EBR, very close to Arri laser is 325 per minute at WWW.DVFILM.COM from any res Quicktime Files. You can output the edited program to a bunch of No-Compresion, Hi Res MOV files an get it transferred.
Jose
------------------
-
> I kind of poke someone with a hot iron, just to bring more information out of 'em!
yeah, me too, haven't you noticed? ;-)
/matt
-
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Courier, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by mattias:
> I kind of poke someone with a hot iron, just to bring more information out of 'em!
yeah, me too, haven't you noticed? ;-)
/matt<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
Well, at least we understand each other! Thanks for the usefull pointers. I will admit, I'm no genius at video.
Matt Pacini
------------------
