Offer to telecine 50ft 8/s8mm or 100ft 16mm uncompressed HD

[T-Scan]

It plays choppy on my media player, but I get the idea in terms of color and resolution. It looks soooo much nicer than my single chipper captures it almost bumbs me out.

[idrawthings]

what's the price per foot?

[cubsfan45]

what's the price per foot?

First roll is free. It's $.50/ft thereafter. The only other place doing 8/s8 uncompressed from what I've seen is Bonolabs and they're charging around $.95/ft for a flat-light transfer and all the way up to $2.68/ft for scene-by-scene color-correction so hopefully this is a good deal. We also have some specials running on our website this month.

-Eugene
http://www.filmtransfer.com

[Will2]

Can you encode to Quicktime? I'm a Final Cut Pro and Avid user.

[Evan Kubota]

As several others posted, are your finished files Quicktime?

[cubsfan45]

As several others posted, are your finished files Quicktime?

Our uncompressed files are processed as .avi Blackmagic codec. These file are compatible with FCP after downloading the codec from Blackmagic’s website. We decided to not offer .mov a) generational loss was visible after transcoding to .mov, b) transcoding would add to the cost of the project, c) already compatible.

Even though our deliverable for a project is an external hard drive formatted for NTFS, there are free tools for OS X that can read the drive’s data.

If any Mac users can foresee other issues, let me know so we can work it out.

Thanks,

-Eugene
http://www.filmtransfer.com

[mattias]

We decided to not offer .mov a) generational loss was visible after transcoding to .mov

in that case you're doing something wrong. copying uncompressed digital data is always a lossless operation. this said i know some tools behave strange and i'm not suggesting you bend over backwards to solve it. avi works ok on the mac and if you really need quicktime the job is yours to convert it.

/matt

[mattias]

btw you don't need the black magic codec for regular 4:2:2 8 or 10 bit files. these files are compatible with the apple uncompressed codec, which will also give you correct gamma correction to match the other qt codecs, like dv and h.264.

/matt

[low grade moron]

Images were captured to 1920x1080 10 bit 4:2:2 uncompressed, cropped to remove sprocket holes, and encoded to WMV HD codec at 10000 kbps.

although your mpeg looks satisfactory, though of less quality than even a standard definition true 10 bit uncompressed transfer using a legitimate telecine machine such as a Diamond or Shadow or Spirit, your statements are very misleading.

simply put, you cannot turn water into wine with software tricks, when your hardware is not able to deliver pinot noir in the first place.

your camera is not capturing 1920 x 1080, it is capturing a much smaller pixel count on a smaller chip and "upressing it". and its internal hardware does not process 10 bit colour at 4:2:2. so you are wasting your time when we examine this step of your process alone. to enjoy those specs, one must use $100,000 cinema HD cameras, rather than consumer HDV cameras.

[mattias]

your camera is not capturing 1920 x 1080, it is capturing a much smaller pixel count on a smaller chip and "upressing it". and its internal hardware does not process 10 bit colour at 4:2:2.

1440x1080 as a matter of fact. not much smaller but certainbly significant. problem is there's no standard for uncompressed 1440x1080 so it *has* to be upressed to be captured. the camera is 8 bit though, that's for sure, and there's a working standard for that which you can use so the extra 25% for 10 bits is a waste.

one must use $100,000 cinema HD cameras, rather than consumer HDV cameras.

the xl h1 connected through sdi is not really an hdv camera anymore. if it makes anyone happier i'm sure you can remove/destroy/burn the hdv part of it altogether. it also accepts high quality lenses, the biggest drawback of most hdv cameras, and it's priced at least three times over the consumer cams too. to me it seems more like a low end pro camera rather than a high end consumer one. it competes with the xdcam and varicam, not the z1.

/matt

[cubsfan45]

Images were captured to 1920x1080 10 bit 4:2:2 uncompressed, cropped to remove sprocket holes, and encoded to WMV HD codec at 10000 kbps.

although your mpeg looks satisfactory, though of less quality than even a standard definition true 10 bit uncompressed transfer using a legitimate telecine machine such as a Diamond or Shadow or Spirit, your statements are very misleading.

simply put, you cannot turn water into wine with software tricks, when your hardware is not able to deliver pinot noir in the first place.

your camera is not capturing 1920 x 1080, it is capturing a much smaller pixel count on a smaller chip and "upressing it". and its internal hardware does not process 10 bit colour at 4:2:2. so you are wasting your time when we examine this step of your process alone. to enjoy those specs, one must use $100,000 cinema HD cameras, rather than consumer HDV cameras.

"The Serial Digital Interface (SDI) terminal of the XL H1 is able to deliver full resolution uncompressed HD/SD SDI at a 4:2:2 color space at 1.485 Gbps.
" This is straight from Canon's website. That's why this "HDV" camera is so phenomenal because it has professional features such as this. Compared to other HDV cameras which only have the option of capturing 25 Mbps, this stands out in the field, and under $10K is a steal for what it offers. So my statements are not misleading. The only advantage that the $100,000 cameras offer are 1/2" and 2/3" CCD's. You can quote me on that.

When talking just standard definition, look at the article that compares MovieStuff's equipment against a Rank Turbo or similar - http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,1759,1620686,00.asp . Enough said.

- Eugene
http://www.filmtransfer.com

[mattias]

"The Serial Digital Interface (SDI) terminal of the XL H1 is able to deliver full resolution uncompressed HD/SD SDI

it delivers it for sure, i don't think sdi supports anything less. the question is what data the camera is using to process the signal before sdi output. we know that the camera uses 1440x1080 ccd's for example, it's in the specs, ande i believe the dsp is 8 bits only, so the so called full resolution *is* upressed from something lower. no big deal, so is the very high end hdcam format for example, but since we're talking numbers we might as well use the real ones.

/matt

[Will2]

it competes with the xdcam and varicam, not the z1.
/matt

It doesn't really compete with XDCAM or Varicam, its just a step up from most HDV "pro" cameras including the Z1... XDCAM (at $25,000) codec is really state of the art and not nearly the compromise that HDV is and the Fujinon lenses for those machines are amazing. Of course the variable frame rate of XDCAM and Varicam also put these in a different league than any HDV camera as well.

[christoph]

the XDCAM codec is in fact very similar to the HDV codec, the thing that differs is ccd size/quality, signal processing and lens choice.

that said, the sample posted does show good sharpness and high resolution but still sufffers the same color and contrast problems as other workprinter transfers.

so i guess you'll have to decide what is more important to you, color/contrast (go for a SD rank or shadow/spirit transfer) or high resolution of a workprinter HD... you cant have both on an affordable level.

+ christoph

[Scotness]

Eugene - have you seen the Andromeda - it's a hacked DVX100 - where they take the signal straight off the ccd's before it's compressed and get 10 bit 4:4:4 at greater than 720P

see
http://www.reel-stream.com/

Scot