Here is a small sample of 64t shot with a Canon 1218 at full telephoto length from my window on a tripod. I scanned about 30 frames on my flatbed scanner and made a gif in photoshop/image ready. Then placed it on photobucket for everyone to enjoy. BTW this is my first post. Hello everyone.
Looks quite nice, colorwise etc. The registration is a bit jumpy. But so is the sprockethole jumping along. So this should be a scan/software problem.
What is the little vignette of the title?
There was some guy in the woods of Canada who constructed a robot to advance the film automatically and scan more length. Peruse the archive of the forum
Will2 wrote:Very cool. Now how long did it take to make that little clip that way?
Makes you start to think a Spirit is a bargain when you look at the time it takes to scan frame by frame, but very fun project, thanks for sharing.
It was 30 frames in one go. Sideways should take only a few seconds. And there is software for sprocket recognition and cutting the frames from the scan...
Will2 wrote:Very cool. Now how long did it take to make that little clip that way?
Makes you start to think a Spirit is a bargain when you look at the time it takes to scan frame by frame, but very fun project, thanks for sharing.
It was 30 frames in one go. Sideways should take only a few seconds. And there is software for sprocket recognition and cutting the frames from the scan...
Check this URL http://jiminger.com/s8/
If you are handy with computers you can use the software for the sampling of the frames.
Interesting observation there (for HD fanatics): It's about $200 and does a good enough job at 3200 dpi for a decent movie to be produced (and probably better than any professional Telecine outfit will do). I have run it at 4800 and produced movies but the raw scans just take up a lot more space and I'm not sure I'm getting any real benefit from it. If anyone has any reason why they think I should be scanning at the higher resolution, please let me know the reasons.
Thanks everyone, it was just a quick and dirty project I did with the first roll of film I got back from Dwayne's.
The last line of Jim Ingers ??? web page reads "If you finally decide it's just all too much, the guys at MovieStuff have a line of do-it-yourself film to video products that have produced better results than what I've been able to achieve."
I believe that sums it up for me. If I was to do more than a few frames I would look into the MovieStuff stuff.
My original thought was to use this small and other small clips on a Digital Picture Frame, but those do not support .gif images.
Does anyone know of a hack for those digital picture frames to allow video of some sort? I did a little searching - enough to come up with that almost all digital picture frames won't support gif so I quit looking after that.
Big Worm - Hi, it just took about 10 or 15 minuets to set up and scan. I just used masking tape to tape the film onto the 35mm carrier. If you look closely you can see the film is somewhat twisted or kinked right at the end. Again, this was just a quick and dirty project, I was not looking for high quality. I think they are neat and will do a few more. I've shown this to some family and friends and there response is pretty much "oh, ok.....well....ok....what am I looking at?" :roll: :roll: :roll:
ToddSmith354 wrote:Big Worm - Hi, it just took about 10 or 15 minuets to set up and scan. I just used masking tape to tape the film onto the 35mm carrier. If you look closely you can see the film is somewhat twisted or kinked right at the end. Again, this was just a quick and dirty project, I was not looking for high quality. I think they are neat and will do a few more. I've shown this to some family and friends and there response is pretty much "oh, ok.....well....ok....what am I looking at?" :roll: :roll: :roll:
Todd,
Real nice and keep up the good work! What you've accomplished is fantastic. My family also doesn't understand my obsession. Either you get it or you don't...
Tom Houston
Virginia
WorkPrinter-XP to HD Conversion & Beaulieu Battery Re-Celling:
http://www.FilmMaker8.com
I tried the flatbed method too.
I had a small footage of a WB cartoon. I scanned at 3600dpi the length of a sheet of paper with my good old Canon MP730.
To my opinion, that's really dirty. The line of scanning are visible and make some small interleaved artefacts like a bad-calibrated printer when you print.
