Telecine. What would you do?

[Tom Doolittle]

Okay, here's the deal...

I've got roughly 20,000 feet of 8 and S8mm film to transfer. The vast majority of it is home movies from the 1950s right on up to last week. Some of it is a bit more special, with some mild historical significance (the '62 World Series, original Vietnam War combat footage, etc.).

The owner of this collection has previously transferred some of the material to video, and was very unhappy with the results (poor colors, bad registration, low resolution). He wants it done better, he wants it done frame by frame, and he wants it done for less than $2500. He has asked me to do the job, and I get to keep whatever equipment I obtain in the process.

Here's what I have to begin with:

Three projectors
Three large boxes of film
A Mac
A crappy MiniDV cam
A budget of $2499

Moviestuff? Elmo? Homebrew (modify one of my exisiting projectors)???

How 'bout these guys? Anybody read German?
http://www.laendchen.de/

What would you do?

[Uppsala BildTeknik]

Wow. Low budget for a lot of film...
If frame by frame is what he wants then Moviestuff is the only frameaccurate thing you have as an option.

But you will be doing it for free, I guess you know it? Well almost totally for free anyway, you get to keep the equipment and a hundred bucks or similar.

I guess renting a high quality camera for the job is the way to go, buying a camera is too expensive, and using a crappy camera doesen´t sound so smart.

Just so you are prepared for the time it will consume, one week won´t be enough. Just transferring it won´t be done in a week with 8 hour working days (with a WP), and then you need to convert, colorcorrect, edit, compress, author to DVDs, output, burn, test the DVDs, and so on. 8O ;) 8)

If it was me someone asked? I would give the answer: "Raise the budget, or do it yourself. Or forget the frame by frame and find the cheapest place you can find and get it done with poor quality. But the price will be cheap."

I wouldn´t work for weeks and just keep the equipment as payment... 8O

[Tom Doolittle]

If it was me someone asked? I would give the answer: "Raise the budget, or do it yourself."

Try telling that to your father-in-law.

[Uppsala BildTeknik]

Try telling that to your father-in-law.

No problem.

Seriously, maybe he doesen´t understand how much time it takes to do it correctly? Just the pure transferring won´t be done in a full 40 hour working week. Then you need to split the reels to scenes with different need for colorcorrection, fiddle, twiddle and play with it in editing programs, compress, author, output, burn...

And if you are not familiar with colorcorrections and editing programs learning that takes time too...

A relative can ask you to help them, sure. If it takes like a day. Or even a weekend. But they cannot expect you to take a few weeks of vacation from work just so you can get their films transferred... ;)

If he gets mad because you won´t do it, then he doesen´t deserve the help to begin with. ;)

[Tom Doolittle]

Try telling that to your father-in-law.

No problem.

Seriously, maybe he doesen´t understand how much time it takes to do it correctly? Just the pure transferring won´t be done in a full 40 hour working week. Then you need to split the reels to scenes with different need for colorcorrection, fiddle, twiddle and play with it in editing programs, compress, author, output, burn...

And if you are not familiar with colorcorrections and editing programs learning that takes time too...

A relative can ask you to help them, sure. If it takes like a day. Or even a weekend. But they cannot expect you to take a few weeks of vacation from work just so you can get their films transferred... ;)

If he gets mad because you won´t do it, then he doesen´t deserve the help to begin with. ;)

Good points, but I did agree to help. The idea of finally having the equipment to transfer my own films had something to do with it. There is no big rush so I can spend months if necessary on the project. Ideally I'd have some kind of system set up to run on its own all day and night, but I doubt such sophistication can be had for $2500. I figure I'll run one or two reels a night until its done. I'll likely do a "one-light" for most of it, with no post correction at all. The idea is just to preserve as much image information as possible. My job is just to get the images saved. I'll let some other family member handle the color correction and editing.

[peaceman]

What about buying a good s8 projector for your father-in-law and keeping the originals only? They are superior in quality and probably last much longer then any digital medium. (Certainley only if its Kodachrome )

SCNR.

[Uppsala BildTeknik]

OK. If all you need to do is to get them digitalised then half of the workload is out of the picture. Putting the project over a long time makes renting a camera a bad alternative...

OK, here is how you do it then: Buy a WP and transfer a reel with your camera. If the quality is OK then that is all you need, transfer a reel or two each day until it is done.

If the quality is not good enough, get a better camera (out of the budget, but what else?).

Also, no onelight. Do it with automatic exposure. Old home movies won´t work well with onelight transfers, automatic exposure is the way to go.

[Uppsala BildTeknik]

What about buying a good s8 projector for your father-in-law and keeping the originals only? They are superior in quality and probably last much longer then any digital medium. (Certainley only if its Kodachrome )

SCNR.

Errr, yeah. Running 50 year old films through a projector each time you want to look at the films will preserve them. Because it won´t be done so often. ;)

One BIG advantage with digital media is how easy it is to view the old footage. Just pop in the DVD and off you go. Compare that to pulling out the projector, down with the curtains, up with the screen, oh and we need to splice this reel because last time the splice broke and some film got chewed up... ;)

Film doesen´t last forever, they get old, colors get twisted. You all need to digitalise you old films before it is too late. Keep the originals and keep the digital copies on the "current media" (DVDs today, hologram discs tomorrow, small metal cubes or plastic stamps in the future).

[MovieStuff]

Hi, Tom!

Contact me offlist at moviestuff@sbcglobal.net or give me a call at the number on my website.

http://www.moviestuff.tv

Roger Evans
MovieStuff

[Tom Doolittle]

OK. If all you need to do is to get them digitalised then half of the workload is out of the picture. Putting the project over a long time makes renting a camera a bad alternative...

OK, here is how you do it then: Buy a WP and transfer a reel with your camera. If the quality is OK then that is all you need, transfer a reel or two each day until it is done.

If the quality is not good enough, get a better camera (out of the budget, but what else?).

Also, no onelight. Do it with automatic exposure. Old home movies won´t work well with onelight transfers, automatic exposure is the way to go.

From what I understand, the Workprinter does not record frame-by-frame, correct? I would much prefer a digital frame-by-frame file over interlaced video output, but maybe this is asking too much given the budget.

I'll admit to being a total idiot when it comes to the post end of the film chain. I don't know squat about video cams, either. Would the money be better spent on a decent vidcam, running the footage through my projectors, and recording the image off a screen? Isn't this essentially what the Workprinter is doing?

Thanks for your help!

Tom

[MovieStuff]

From what I understand, the Workprinter does not record frame-by-frame, correct?

Actually, that is exactly what the WorkPrinter does. It lets you use your video camera to scan frame by frame directly off the surface of the film with no screen involved. Again, please contact me offlist and I will be happy to assist you.

Roger Evans

[christoph]

From what I understand, the Workprinter does not record frame-by-frame, correct?

yes, it's does, that's why it's so popular.

I'll admit to being a total idiot when it comes to the post end of the film chain. I don't know squat about video cams, either.

hmmm, unrfotunately that usually means that you'll either have to spend a lot of time in research, a lot of money in equipment or manpower, or live with semi-decent results.
there's no foolproof way to do a high quality tansfer on the cheap without experience.. it there was, all the transfer houses would be out of buisness.

Would the money be better spent on a decent vidcam, running the footage through my projectors, and recording the image off a screen? Isn't this essentially what the Workprinter is doing?

nope it isnt. it captures frame by frame direct of the gate.

incidentially the landchen route would be a great way to capture lot of footage even in the USA, but people usually go with the workprinter route because they are not familiar with how to handle the resulting digital media.

unless you want to spend a lot of time learning this kind of stuff anyway, i'd say hire somebody who knows his stuff. the results will be better, you'll have more spare time, and it might be cheaper too.

++ christoph ++

[Tom Doolittle]

unless you want to spend a lot of time learning this kind of stuff anyway, i'd say hire somebody who knows his stuff. the results will be better, you'll have more spare time, and it might be cheaper too.

++ christoph ++

Actually, this is not my area of interest. I much prefer running the camera to messing around with editing and the like. For now I just want to get a good archival copy of all this footage in a digital form.

[christoph]

Actually, this is not my area of interest. I much prefer running the camera to messing around with editing and the like. For now I just want to get a good archival copy of all this footage in a digital form.

then i'd say let somebody with more experience do this...
400rolls of footage, you should be able to find somebody who does it for less than your quoted budget..

some folks on this list run good transfer services, contact them and ask for an offer.
++ christoph ++

[peaceman]

Film doesen´t last forever, they get old, colors get twisted. You all need to digitalise you old films before it is too late.

I wildly disagree. Kodachrome-I stock from 60+ years ago has not even lost 5% of its color if it was residing in metal cans. It most likely lasts another 60 years easily.
In 50 years, we might be a lot better with true archiving skills. Today, no archive medium introduced in the last 20 years lasted longer then a couple of years. Who can read my old Atari HD? Ever tried to copy a 5.25" floppy? Did you also do data backups on VHS tapes to regret it? Or: Is the first CD you burnt on that $2000 dual-speed burner still readable? Really?

My point is that no recent medium (has proven to) last as long as film. Even if civilization stops, we lose all electricity and knowledge worldwide, a film is still readable to anything that can recognize pictures. Even with 70% colors lost and lots a scratches. Whatever holds your collection of 0s an 1s, it will not make any sense to anybody, especially not with scratches and 70% lost data.

One BIG advantage with digital media is how easy it is to view the old footage. Just pop in the DVD and off you go. Compare that to pulling out the projector, down with the curtains, up with the screen, oh and we need to splice this reel because last time the splice broke and some film got chewed up...

Bogus argument :-D
My projector is alway installed and bright enough to work at daylight. Through the extra moves you do for a true presentation (like curtains down etc.), you give the film a much more appropriate attention and dedication then popping that DVD into your computer.

Long story short: The only reason for copying to digital that I accept is the fact of making a copy, thus your film is no longer unique. That BTW is another quality of amateru film that I wouuld not like to dilute: Its uniqueness. Infinite value per roll!

Yes, my viewpoint is maybe a little radical today. :lol: