Telecine to digibeta and transfer to minidv a good option?

[MovieStuff]

For private home transfers I don't think speed is that important, but when you run a business speed is crucial.

I think the better way to look at it is that volume of output is crucial. If you are a one-man shop, then workflow is more crucial than the speed of the transfer unit. This is because there are always other things that need to be done, such as organizing the films, cleaning and prepping, editing, color correction, DVD authoring, etc. If these things can be done while the film is being transfered, then the volume of output pretty balanced because the output of the telecine unit doesn't get ahead or behind the person's ability to deal with the volume created. But if you have multiple employees and you are trying to run everything through one unit, then that can change the efficiency factor, regardless of transfer rate. In other words, even if you transfer in real time, if you have employees finishing up footage faster than your transfer unit can produce product for them to work with, then you also have a problem. Thus, speed is secodary to volume and efficient workflow. Fortunately, WorkPrinters are cheap enough that small shops can add more units as their volume increases. This maintains efficiency of workflow and also adds redundancy, which is always a smart thing to do, if possible.

That is why I'm currently designing and will soon build and test out a new custom made regular 8mm gate for the FDL and Quadra telecine machines....

Wow! Totally cooool! I remember you telling me you were thinking about doing that but I wasn't sure if you were able to implement it or not. You could start a side business selling these to other Quadra users. I'm sure they would love to have that capability.

Roger

[Andreas Wideroe]

If you are a one-man shop, then workflow is more crucial than the speed of the transfer unit. This is because there are always other things that need to be done, such as organizing the films, cleaning and prepping, editing, color correction, DVD authoring, etc. If these things can be done while the film is being transfered, then the volume of output pretty balanced because the output of the telecine unit doesn't get ahead or behind the person's ability to deal with the volume created.

I agree to the idea, but disagree because I think all transfers should be supervised. That's how it's done here to ensure good quality. All scenes are checked against WFM and vscope and if needed colour correction is added, black level/brightness is adjusted and ofcourse hair and dust is removed if something should show up in the gate.

When running a supervised session the only thing you can do simultaniously is put on a DVD for encoding and post messages in this forum if you have a second computer that is.

Andreas

[MovieStuff]

If you are a one-man shop, then workflow is more crucial than the speed of the transfer unit. This is because there are always other things that need to be done, such as organizing the films, cleaning and prepping, editing, color correction, DVD authoring, etc. If these things can be done while the film is being transfered, then the volume of output pretty balanced because the output of the telecine unit doesn't get ahead or behind the person's ability to deal with the volume created.

I agree to the idea, but disagree because I think all transfers should be supervised.

I agree with the idea but disagree because most home movie transfer shops don't even know what a vector scope or waveform monitor is. I think that most people should clean and prep their film, too, but I find that idea is pretty radical to most people trying to operate transfer businesses in a competitive market. They don't have the money to spend on a FlashScan or even a used Bosch line array (even if they knew what that was). You're looking at film transfers like a person that loves film but it is my estimation that the large portion of people transferring home movies today have never shot 8mm film in their lives and some have never shot film of any kind, ever. The goal of my equipment is to recognize how my clients operate and offer a solution that is practical for them yet still produce good results. There is nothing to prevent someone from using a vector scope and waveform monitor with their WorkPrinter or Sniper units if they want, of course.

Roger

[Uppsala BildTeknik]

I agree to the idea, but disagree because I think all transfers should be supervised. That's how it's done here to ensure good quality. All scenes are checked against WFM and vscope and if needed colour correction is added, black level/brightness is adjusted and ofcourse hair and dust is removed if something should show up in the gate.

Andreas

Exactly my point!
Even if you skip the adjustments and color corrections if you end up with a hair in the gate and the machine have transferred like 200 feet of film unsupervised with a hair, you are up for a retransfer... ;)

[VideoFred]

Hey Kent,

How do you deal with this:

As you know very well, a reel of film from uncle Ben contains indoor scenes immediate followed by outdoor scenes, overexposed and/or under exposed. Seldom good exposed

Can you let the Flashscan run unattended on this kind of footage?
And does it need post processing anyhow?

Post processing means splitting dark and bright scenes, apply different level values on them etc....

In my opinion, this takes most of the time.
Good automatic hardware or software filters could help a lot.

I have made some calculations:
If I would work 8 hours/day, five days/week on film only,
I would have to ask 2-3 Euros/minute transfered film at least.
Only then I would make good money (with my system)
Authoring and soundtrack included.....
Uncle Ben is not good with NLE....

But most customers wont pay that much... 1 euro/minute is what most transfer companys are asking here in Belgium and in the Netherlands.
And even then people are complaining about the price.

PS: I am talking about R8 and S8 home movies....
A potential h-u-g-e marked, in my opinion.
There must be kilometers of film, out there....
Waiting to be transfered, hehe...

Fred.

[MovieStuff]

Even if you skip the adjustments and color corrections if you end up with a hair in the gate and the machine have transferred like 200 feet of film unsupervised with a hair, you are up for a retransfer... ;)

Funny, that never happens in our shop. We clean our machines and we clean the film thoroughly before each transfer (as I'm sure you do, as well). Also, the gates on our units are enlarged so, even if there were a hair at the edge of the gate, it is outside the picture area. It would take some seriously dirty film for a hair to end up in the viewing area of a transfer, IMHO.

Roger

[Uppsala BildTeknik]

Can you let the Flashscan run unattended on this kind of footage?

I guess I could, but I never do. I want quality and supervised transfers.

And does it need post processing anyhow?

Yep, we always give all films a post processing in NLE. To get them as good as possible.

Post processing means splitting dark and bright scenes, apply different level values on them etc....

Yep, splitting to as many scene cuts as needed. some reels hardly need any tweaking at all, and some are horrible and eat up so much time...

In my opinion, this takes most of the time.
Good automatic hardware or software filters could help a lot.

Well, yeah. But there are no automatic filters that are as good as the human eye at seeing what/how a scene is supposed to look...

[Uppsala BildTeknik]

Funny, that never happens in our shop.

Roger

Wow, you have never seen a hair in any of your transfers... Ever? 8O
You must be the first person on this earth who works with filmtransfers and has never gotten a hair in any of the transfers.

The enlarged gate is all good, but it is still a gate, and hair can get stuck in it. at least from my experience.

It is better not to have a gate at all. ;)

[MovieStuff]

Funny, that never happens in our shop.

Roger

Wow, you have never seen a hair in any of your transfers... Ever? 8O
You must be the first person on this earth who works with filmtransfers and has never gotten a hair in any of the transfers.

I doubt it.

It is better not to have a gate at all. ;)

Which, of course, begs the question: How can you get a hair stuck in the gate of the FlashScan if you don't have one? ;)

Roger

[Uppsala BildTeknik]

Which, of course, begs the question: How can you get a hair stuck in the gate of the FlashScan if you don't have one? ;)

Roger

Actually, I have done it. Twice! :lol:

It doesen´t have a real "gate" like the one in a projector, but it has pins that the film runs over, they "flatten out" the film. And even though we cleaned the film with clean cloths, and then it runs over another set of cloths just before it goes to the mechanism and "scanning part" of the scanner, STILL a freakin long hair (like doghair or something) has stuck to one of the pins and danced in the frame.

And those pins are further from the image than the enlarged gate ever can be. 8O

Weird, huh? Makes me wonder what people do to their films. Sometimes they are all clean and nice, sometimes you can collect piles of shit from just one reel (well, maybe like a 200ft reel, but anyway). Amazing.

[MovieStuff]

Makes me wonder what people do to their films. Sometimes they are all clean and nice, sometimes you can collect piles of shit from just one reel (well, maybe like a 200ft reel, but anyway). Amazing.

Yes, I know what you mean. It's like the stored them in their cat's litter box or something.

Roger

[Actor]

They don't have the money to spend on a FlashScan or even a used Bosch line array (even if they knew what that was).

How about enlightening some of us poor uneducated folk and tell us what exactly both these items are. :?

[mattias]

um, they are high end film scanners, yet much more affordable than the real deal.

/matt

[Patrick]

There is a local telecine shop that also sells second hand cine and video equipment. The manager was showing me this super 8 projector he had for sale and claimed that it didn't have a gate !?!?!?!

I wonder how light makes it way out through the lens then.........!