Another nice WorkPrinter transfer!

[MovieStuff]

This one is from happy WorkPrinter owner Jukka Sillanpaa in Finland! This was only a test for his initial set up and the speed hasn't been adjusted but it came out so sharp I'd thought I'd share it with you.

http://www.sorb-i-tol.com/huvipuisto1.mpg

Dig the groovy 70's look, man.

Roger

[Nigel]

Moviestuff--

I don't want to seem combative. Nor, do I want to say what you are doing is bad/wrong. I think your workprinter does some cool stuff--It fulfills a niche that is needed for sure.

However, do you really think it can compete with a Rank or Spirit??? I am happy to pay 225 dollars an hour. I think that is a steal.

In other words I am a Liberatarian and Capitalist. Sell Me Your Goods.

[MovieStuff]

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size=2 face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">quote:</font><table border="0" width="90%" bgcolor="#333333" cellspacing="1" cellpadding="0"><tr><td width="100%"><table border="0" width="100%" cellspacing="0" cellpadding="2" bgcolor="#FF9900"><tr><td width="100%" bgcolor="#DDDDDD"><font size=2 face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Originally posted by Nigel:
do you really think it can compete with a Rank or Spirit??? </font></td></tr></table></td></tr></table></BLOCKQUOTE>

Hi, Nigel!

Well, "compete" is a relative term. But, then again, you're asking the wrong person, actually. Instead, you'd need to ask the 80+ customers that have bought these units that were disatisfied with the results they were getting from attempted Rank transfers with an inadequate budget.

I've done my share of Rank transfers over the years in all formats. A flying spot scanner is THE way to go...IF you have an adequate budget and especially if you are shooting negative. And while the WorkPrinter will handle negative just fine, the majority of my customers are shooting reversal. In that application, the Rank is almost overkill and the sheer mass of its potential can hardly be chipped at with the type of budget that most super 8 users have at their disposal. The analogy I use is that going into a Rank session with an inadequate budget is like having access to a high performance race car with only a buck for gas. You won't even get it up to speed much less win any races.

I make no pretenses about the quality of the WorkPrinter units as they are totally dependent on the quality of the camera being used. I also know that, regardless of the calibre of the camera, the WorkPrinter will never be as good as the Rank, on a purely technical level.

-HOWEVER-

From an asthetic level, I would say that the WorkPrinter holds its own if, for no other reason, the user can work with the image unhurried by accumulating hourly rates until they get something that is satisfying to their asthetic needs. Does it bother them to know that possibly their footage could look better if transfered on a Rank?

Doesn't appear to and I think I know why.

Access to a Rank, even with a decent budget, doesn't automatically mean a better image, as can be attested to by anyone that has spent a bundle on a super 8 Rank transfer and been dissapointed by the final results. Results from one transfer house to the next will be different, even off the same footage, depending on how hurried the operator is as well as their own level of experience. By "experience" I don't necessarily mean in just turning knobs and pushing buttons but interfacing with the client and understanding (or even caring) what the super 8 client wants.

And I think the term "super 8 client" is an important part of the equation here. Someone that has shot 16mm or 35mm for most of their professional lives is accustomed to the ins and outs of a Rank transfer and arrives ready for battle, both financially and psychologically. They know how to keep one eye on the clock, one eye on the monitor and one eye on their budget. But most importantly, they HAVE a budget.

The typical super 8 client has only two eyes, and not three, and has never been in a Rank session (assuming they can even AFFORD a supervised session). They go in, nervous as **** , hoping to just get out of there with something, ANYthing, that is usable from their footage, without having to mortgage the farm.

Because of this, the fact is that most super 8 transfers are unsupervised and you and I both know that you will NOT get the best results, especially off pesky reveral footage like Kodachrome, which was never really designed for replication of any kind. It is difficult to shoot, difficult to get consistant density and generally needs a bit of babying for best results during transfer...all of which takes time. Tick-toc, tick-toc, ka-ching, ka-ching.

Oh, sure, the Rank is going to be sharper but, frankly, it isn't THAT much sharper than a WorkPrinter that uses a decent 3 chip camera. Oh, sure the color on the Rank will be better but it isn't THAT much better to warrant $200+ an hour times three. And let's face it, anyone that can't afford a three chip camera probably won't have the budget for a supervised Rank session, either.

All these things make up the total transfer experience. So it isn't just a technical matter of the WorkPrinter versus the Rank. The Rank is better; no doubt. Races are also won by only 3/10ths of a second as well. On a scale of 1-10, with a Rank being a "10", I'd say the WorkPrinter with a good three chip camera is a very comfortable and modest "8". I'll take that second place position anytime.

Is it good enough for "professional use"? I have quite a few ex-Rank customers that think so. Is it good enough to meet YOUR needs? Probably not because you fall outside the profile of the typical super 8 customer. You are a working professional that is used to the environment and results of a Rank session. To you, it isn't just about the equipment but about the unlimited potential that the Rank offers and you have made it very clear that you are the type of person that is willing to save up his money for the EXACT desired camera or piece of equipment later instead of buying something cheaper now. I think that for you, the Rank -and only the Rank- will meet your very high standards.

However, many WorkPrinter customers have found that there is sometimes just as great a value in having unlimited access to less potential as there is in only limited access to greater potential, especially if working on a shoestring budget. If that weren't true, then super 8 would not have survived all these years as a creative tool. Despite the limited potential, there is unlimited artistic freedom, which is the whole idea behind super 8 to begin with.

The WorkPrinter embraces that ideal and offers the independent something that is an ideal substitute for an alternative that is, really, NO alternative since their budget can't support it. Can't afford 16mm? Then shoot super 8. Can't afford a Rank transfer? Then buy a WorkPrinter. Same logic.

But again, you're asking the wrong person. On my website, there are email links to WorkPrinter customers that can tell you why they like the darned things. Even better, why not send in a 50 foot roll of Kodachrome for a free test? Being a pro, I'm sure your stuff would look just terrific.

http://www.moviestuff.tv/offer.html

Then you'll know first hand what the differences are.

Roger

[MovieStuff]

Here's another nice one from Jukka:

http://www.sorb-i-tol.com/lapset.mpg

Their server seems a little sticky. Let it load completely for best results, I've found. I'll be downloading it to put on my site later.

Roger

[GREATwarEAGLE]

Moviestuff, your response to NIGEL was very well said. You defended yourself and your efforts with maturity and a sensible point-of-view. But like Nigel, I usually never settle for what in my mind is the best. And I have been searching for Ranks to handle my footage.

But your transfers are mighty impressive. You got me on the fence. I'm probably gonna send you 100 ft in a few days or so just to see for myself.

As for the clip of the children, is that from WORKPRNTER or DV-8?

Also, is there anyone among us on this hostboard that you have handled transfers for?

[MovieStuff]

The clips above are from Jukka's WorkPrinter. Of course, one of the problems with streaming web images is you really can't tell a whole lot about contrast or resolution, which is why I offer the free tests. I like posting these clips just to show that people are doing things out there with them. Also, the registration on both the WorkPrinter and the DV8 is far superior to the Rank any day of the week and these clips often show that really well. In these post-jittery cartridge days, that means a lot. [img]smile.gif[/img]

BTW: The DV8 works much like an optical printer at only 3fps transfer speed, which means each 50 foot roll takes about 20 minutes to transfer. The free test is, therefore, generally limited to about a minute but we will also transfer an entire 50 foot roll if time allows. As such, a 100 foot transfer would incur the usual transfer fees.

Looking forward to your footage!

Roger
http://www.moviestuff.tv

[MovieStuff]

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size=2 face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">quote:</font><table border="0" width="90%" bgcolor="#333333" cellspacing="1" cellpadding="0"><tr><td width="100%"><table border="0" width="100%" cellspacing="0" cellpadding="2" bgcolor="#FF9900"><tr><td width="100%" bgcolor="#DDDDDD"><font size=2 face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Originally posted by GREATwarEAGLE:

Also, is there anyone among us on this hostboard that you have handled transfers for?</font></td></tr></table></td></tr></table></BLOCKQUOTE>

Yes! Aaron (supa8sixteen) sent me about 50 rolls to transfer and his stuff came out just great. Also, Tayman (becomesdeath) also sent some footage that came out really nice. Bryan Smith (hightreason) sent quite a few rolls for his class project where his instructor said the transfers looked as good as a Rank. Michael Ahumada (fastfilms) sent in some STUNNING Plus-X that was probably about the best looking super 8 black and white footage we've ever transferred. Jim Dunn is also a repeat customer with some fun footage he's had transferred several times. Most all have posted some sort of positive review here on this forum or Andreas's forum. There are quite a few other lurkers of this forum that have transferred as well but I'd have to go through my records. These are just from the top of my head.

Roger

<font color="#a62a2a" size="1">[ July 06, 2002 10:34 AM: Message edited by: MovieStuff ]</font>

[jukkasil]

Hi All!

I must add some info for this discussion, because all started with my first WP test files.

Well this lapset.mpg is the part of my first real 15 meter Workprinter transfer I did yesterday.

These old 70's clips were just short part of another 15 meter film I tried couple days ago.

So, I'm just studing to use that nice WP-3 machine as good as possible to get better looking stuff out!

I'm using very normal mini-dv home camera named Sony PC-100 (this little pocket one), so I even haven't any 3 ccd camera like Sony TRV900 etc.

But, I really love the quality I can get with my WP-3/Sony PC-100/DVRaptor combination.
For example today they showed one old Jimi Hendrix document from Finnish TV station containing lot of super 8 material (I saw Mitch Mitchell with Canon 814 camera in that film!) and I must say that my own WP transfer tests look much better than these BBC ranked ones!


OK, I put also one mpg-file more to my server:

http://www.sorb-i-tol.com/minidvsuper8.mpg

I insert some super 8 footage to mini-dv material which were shot in same situation.

Try to download files using the right button of your mouse and play file then direct from your own harddisk, now it works better.

[tfunch24]

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size=2 face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">quote:</font><table border="0" width="90%" bgcolor="#333333" cellspacing="1" cellpadding="0"><tr><td width="100%"><table border="0" width="100%" cellspacing="0" cellpadding="2" bgcolor="#FF9900"><tr><td width="100%" bgcolor="#DDDDDD"><font size=2 face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Originally posted by MovieStuff:

There are quite a few other lurkers of this forum that have transferred as well but I'd have to go through my records. These are just from the top of my head.

Roger

&lt;font color="#a62a2a" size="1"&gt;[ July 06, 2002 10:34 AM: Message edited by: MovieStuff ]&lt;/font&gt;</font></td></tr></table></td></tr></table></BLOCKQUOTE>

Just to save Roger the trouble of going through his records, I'm one of the lurkers for whom he has transferred S8 footage. I've had six rolls of film (3 Ektachrome, 3 Kodachrome)transferred via the DV-8 and I was very pleased with the transfer.

Had I the cash I would invest in a Work Printer.

Just my $.02.

Tom Funch

[Nigel]

My comments are based on quality. I was simply asking if Roger thought that quality of his workprinter was up to "snuff." He answered my questio with his 1-10 scale. I think that Roger is trying to do some really great stuff. And, I see some great uses for the workprinter.

However, I will pay the 225 an hour for Pin-Registration and dead on 29.97 video frame rates. That said I also would like the abilty to Xfer material that will go no further than my home at a cheaper rate.

Good Luck

PS--Roger, I gave you a Five Star Rating.