Workprinter: CaptureMate and Frustrations, hand in hand.

[arnaud]

Hi, I am experiencing some problems using the workprinter XP on a PowerMac G4 dual. The machine works perfectly with a proper Variax (220V here in France), but it's the sofware that is a bit of a problem. CaptureMate does recognize my Miro DC30+ video card but instead
of other sofwares like BTV or iStopMotion (both not fast enough to deal with 7,5 f/s capture) gives an unreadable Quicktime movie (a mix of frozen frames and strange flat colors).
The classical dv to firewire option gives good result with a Sony PD150 (of course only in 720/576 with dv quality compared to the Miro Card little compression ratio in analog) but keeps on freezing every two rolls. I have a freshly installed OS X.3.8 system and a Raid 0 made of 2 WD raptors discs (so speed writting is not an issue) with no other applications running.
Is there anybody who is experiencing the same problems on a Mac, what did you do? And do you know any sofwares that would be able to capture 8 f/s on a mouse up/down routine that would be more reliable than CaptureMate (no upgrade since november 2003 and the author did not respond to my email, but maybe he's on holidays).
Please don't tell me that I have to buy a PC too?
Thanks.
arnaud.

[MovieStuff]

CaptureMate does recognize my Miro DC30+ video card but instead of other sofwares like BTV or iStopMotion (both not fast enough to deal with 7,5 f/s capture) gives an unreadable Quicktime movie (a mix of frozen frames and strange flat colors).
The classical dv to firewire option gives good result with a Sony PD150 (of course only in 720/576 with dv quality compared to the Miro Card little compression ratio in analog) but keeps on freezing every two rolls.

In general, most of my Mac customers have reported that capturing in Quicktime on a Mac with the WorkRrinter-XP or Sniper is problematic. Rapid stop motion capture is very resource intensive and, at the very least, it is often hard to hold synch using the Quicktime option in Capturemate. Using the DV Stream option in Capturemate always works but, as you point out, is compressed as a standard DV signal while the Quicktime option theoretically should allow you to capture uncompressed. Obviously, if you are going to edit in the DV coded, then it makes little sense to capture uncompressed so you might as well just use the DV Stream function and make life simple. If you are wanting to capture uncompressed, then you have no choice but to use the Quicktime function but, again, even if you were feeding the Mac DV via firewire, there are synch issues capturing rapid stop motion with Quicktime at 8.5fps. It sounds like there are also other issues compounding that basic problem. CaptureMate is a terrific program but it was originally an animation program modified to work with the WorkPrinter and Sniper units. The Quicktime function is a vestige of the program's alternative life as an animation program and most WorPrinter users just use the DV Stream option instead.

Feel free to contact me offlist and I can help you more easily. Call me on my number listed on the website or forward your number and I will call you.

PS: If you are using OSX, I have had a recent report that CineCap works on a Mac using Virtual-PC. I have no direct experience with this, so no guarantees but it is something that I am looking into.

Roger
http://www.moviestuff.tv

[son-of-bubba]

I now capture in Quicktime (using Capturemate) with my MAC G4. I then import the Quicktime file into iMovie for editing. It has been working fine.

I tried to capture using the DV option but I found that Capturemate ignored the fps setting. For example, when transferring 50 ft of R8 the resulting file had approx 2 min 30 sec of material instead of approx 3 min 30 sec.

I guess I could adjust the frame rate after the file is created but I don't have software to do it and the Quicktime option is working.

My impression is that when I import the Quicktime file into iMovie that iMovie inserts duplicate frames to acheive the 30 fps rate but I haven't looked at it closely. Can anyone confirm ?

Pat De Marco

[MovieStuff]

One of the problems of real time transfer for home movies is that few customers bringing their home movies in for telecine know what speed they were shot at and the frame rate can vary several times within a single job depending on what camera it was shot and what format. It is not uncommon to see regular 8mm film shot at a variety of speeds, though super 8 is more often at 18fps than 24fps but variations in one job can still occur. The main advantage to capturing frame by frame is that you don't have to know what speed your film was shot at, so you can just set the film up to scan in mass volume. The playback can be determined more easily after you do all your scanning. Large volumes of film can be checked rapidly using the Speed Preview window of CineCap because you have random access to all your footage on the hard drive. That said, I am surprised that Imovie does not have a manual speed change function. I have never seen a NLE system that doesn't.

Roger
http://www.moviestuff.tv

[Uppsala BildTeknik]

One of the problems of real time transfer for home movies is that few customers bringing their home movies in for telecine know what speed they were shot at and the frame rate can vary several times within a single job depending on what camera it was shot and what format. It is not uncommon to see regular 8mm film shot at a variety of speeds, though super 8 is more often at 18fps than 24fps but variations in one job can still occur. The main advantage to capturing frame by frame is that you don't have to know what speed your film was shot at, so you can just set the film up to scan in mass volume. The playback can be determined more easily after you do all your scanning.

Roger
http://www.moviestuff.tv

I couldn´t disagree more! 8O

One of the big advantages of realtime transfer is that you can see the speed you are scanning at. If things go too slow, speed up, if they go too fast, drop the speed.

What you need to do with a frameaccurate transfer is check, check and check again. What if one roll is shot slower than the next? What if half the roll if shot at one speed and the rest a bit faster? You never know, unless you look at all the footage, or scan at realtime. ;)

[MovieStuff]

One of the big advantages of realtime transfer is that you can see the speed you are scanning at.

Yes but then you are already scanning and have to back up and run the film again if the speed is wrong. That's the point. I mean, how many times do you have to do that before you have essentially watched the film twice; once to check the speed and then once to scan it? Spot checking a large order on the computer via random access is much more efficient than backing up the film over and over because of random speed changes in the way the film was shot. Not terribly efficient in my book. Don't get me wrong, we sell plenty of CineMates to people that want to transfer in real time but it isn't my preferred way of operating. There's no right or wrong. It's all about personal workflow and what sort of product the customer wants. I prefer scanning frame by frame and then determining the speed later on but some prefer to transfer in real time. We try to accomodate both needs and are working on a real time, multi-speed unit as well but, for me, I like scanning in advance and then determining the speed later.

http://www.moviestuff.tv

[son-of-bubba]

Roger,

iMovie does have a manual speed change function but it is crude. It allows 2x, 3x, ,5x changes but that is it. When I upgrade to FinalCut Express I will have better control.

On your point, after you scan in mass volume how do you determine the correct speed ? Do you do a visual review until it looks right ?

My experience has been primarily with home movies from family and friends and so far 18 fps for R8 and 24 fps for S8 has looked right.

Pat De Marco

[MovieStuff]

On your point, after you scan in mass volume how do you determine the correct speed ? Do you do a visual review until it looks right ?

In CineCap there is a Speed Preview window that lets you rapidly look at your entire transfer. It is random access so you can spot check to see what the trend was in frame rate choice from beginning to end. CaptureMate has no such function.

Roger
http://www.moviestuff.tv

[Uppsala BildTeknik]

Ah, OK. I think we are talking about different things.

I was talking about "real" scanners that can change the speed by changing the pulldown pattern, not things like the cinemate that only uses one speed.

And if there is 4 seconds that goes a bit too slow is no problem for home-movies, there is a bigger chance that you miss the speed changes of a whole reel if you use only frame-accurate transfers that are not real-time.

If you are already color correcting the transfer you are already seeing the footage and can change the speed if needed to.

[MovieStuff]

If you are already color correcting the transfer you are already seeing the footage and can change the speed if needed to.

Exactly but if there is already a speed change (pulldown pattern) built in as a result of real time transfer, then that is going to be a problem if the speed is wrong because you have to reload and retransfer the footage. If it is frame accurate already in the computer with no speed change, it is a simple matter to isolate that footage and re-render it with the correct speed change without having to find the reel and retransfer the footage.
That is why I prefer frame by frame scanning over doing it real time.

If transferring on something like a Rank, where you can program in speed and color correction together, then that would be more efficient. But if you are transferring in real time on a system that can not be programmed and have to stop every time there is a speed change, back up, retransfer, and then also view the footage again when you color correct, that just ties up too much labor. In my opinion, automated hands off scanning is more efficient, labor wise, than having to employ someone just to man the unit and watch for speed changes on the fly.

If you are doing it all yourself, then I suppose that might not matter since you can't be editing and transfering at the same time, anyway, but if you have a large volume of film to get out, having someone to just load and start the transfer without having to watch for speed changes is going to be more labor efficient, especially if running multiple machines at once. You just scan in volume and then rapidly deal with the speed changes later on the computer. Again, while the computer is rendering there is still no labor involved and labor is what costs money; not machines. We color correct all our footage so we end up seeing it on the timeline, anyway. We have no need to watch it prior to or during transfer just to judge the speed. That would be a waste of manhours.

Roger
http://www.moviestuff.tv

[Uppsala BildTeknik]

Exactly but if there is already a speed change (pulldown pattern) built in as a result of real time transfer, then that is going to be a problem if the speed is wrong because you have to reload and retransfer the footage.

Hmmm, old scanners I guess. I can change the speed on the fly.

But if you are transferring in real time on a system that can not be programmed and have to stop every time there is a speed change, back up, retransfer,

Nope, I don´t.

[MovieStuff]

Exactly but if there is already a speed change (pulldown pattern) built in as a result of real time transfer, then that is going to be a problem if the speed is wrong because you have to reload and retransfer the footage.

Hmmm, old scanners I guess. I can change the speed on the fly.

But if you are transferring in real time on a system that can not be programmed and have to stop every time there is a speed change, back up, retransfer,

Nope, I don´t.

Respectfully, your statements make little sense and are at odds with each other. If you are transferring in real time, the only way you would know if the speed is wrong is if you notice it transferring at the wrong speed. If you just switch to a different speed on the fly during the transfer of that footage, then any footage previous to that switch will be at the wrong speed. You do not back up and retransfer that footage at the correct speed? According to your above statement, it would appear that you do not.

And if you just let the machine run without watching the entire transfer, don't you run the risk of letting a piece of footage go by at the wrong speed? And if that happens, there is no way to fix it in the computer due to the pulldown being built into the footage. You would then have to relocate that reel and retransfer that footage again. You avoid all of this by scanning frame by frame and addressing the speed changes in the computer after transfer.

No matter how you look at it, if you have no way to program your speed and color corrections prior to transfer, like a Rank, then transferring in real time is more labor intensive than just scanning frame by frame in advance and dealing with the speed issues downstream in the computer. This is true especially if you are going to give the customer frame accurate transfers with the correct speed and full color correction on all cuts. The only way around it is if you switch on the fly and just let certain parts of the film transfer at the wrong speed, after you notice the need for a speed change. That sort of defeats the entire point of this discussion, doesn't it?

Roger
http://www.moviestuff.tv

[Uppsala BildTeknik]

Respectfully, your statements make little sense and are at odds with each other. If you are transferring in real time, the only way you would know if the speed is wrong is if you notice it transferring at the wrong speed. If you just switch to a different speed on the fly during the transfer of that footage, then any footage previous to that switch will be at the wrong speed.

Really? And they have shot all footage at the same speed, always?

If everything is moving in "normal" speed then nobody is unhappy, right?

If the previous footage either had so little movements that you couldn´t tell it was not the correct speed neither can anybody else.

And I have had big reels that contained different speeds for sure, why would I retransfer the footage that looked good just because there is suddenly a speed change?

And if you just let the machine run without watching the entire transfer, don't you run the risk of letting a piece of footage go by at the wrong speed?

Yes, but I don´t let it roll without watching, that would mean no color correction either (other than in NLE of course).

I´m not trying to pick a fight, I just think it is much better, efficient and faster than frameaccurate transfers without realtime pulldown.

[mattias]

And I have had big reels that contained different speeds for sure

i'm with roger 100% here. how on earth did you know that it had different speeds and more importantly where the changes were before you saw it? unless you can generally detect, react and adjust in 1/24th of a second there's just no way you can do this without stopping and rewinding, or missing several seconds of footage. i guess what you're trying to say is that you do the latter. fair enough as long as your customers are fine with it i guess...

/matt

[MovieStuff]

Respectfully, your statements make little sense and are at odds with each other. If you are transferring in real time, the only way you would know if the speed is wrong is if you notice it transferring at the wrong speed. If you just switch to a different speed on the fly during the transfer of that footage, then any footage previous to that switch will be at the wrong speed.

Really? And they have shot all footage at the same speed, always?

Of course not. THAT'S the point! A typical transfer job will often require multiple speed changes. On a real time system, you can not determine if the speed is wrong until you watch it! So, what's the difference between watching a 16fps film twice in real time and not watching it all while scanning frame by frame at about 8.5fps? The difference is that watching it twice requires an operator to be there while scanning unattended does not. Unless, of course, one just accepts that certain sections of the film will have the wrong speed.

If everything is moving in "normal" speed then nobody is unhappy, right?

If the previous footage either had so little movements that you couldn´t tell it was not the correct speed neither can anybody else.

But if that is the case, then how would you know to change the speed? ;)

Obviously, if you notice enough of a difference to warrant changing the speed during the transfer, then you have already transferred footage with a noticable wrong speed built in. Your only choice at that point is to leave it and hope that no one will notice (as you suggest) or back up and transfer again.

And I have had big reels that contained different speeds for sure, why would I retransfer the footage that looked good just because there is suddenly a speed change?

The bigger question is why wouldn't you, especially if you are advertising frame accurate transfers with the correct speed? If you want to take the position that you don't have to back up and retransfer because you are gambling that the customer won't notice, then that is a totally different argument and, of course, not what we are discussing at all. If that's the case, you could transfer most 8mm and super 8 film on a cheap $1095.00 CineMate-20 and the majority of those types of customers wouldn't care either. But what's the point of having multiple transfer speeds on a very expensive system if you aren't going to give the customer the correct playback speed for their footage but, rather, what is merely convenient for you as the operator? Again, that is a totally different discussion that what we are having here.

And if you just let the machine run without watching the entire transfer, don't you run the risk of letting a piece of footage go by at the wrong speed?

Yes, but I don´t let it roll without watching, that would mean no color correction either (other than in NLE of course).

That is why your way is more labor intensive if you are going for the same end results. You HAVE to man the transfer. You have no choice. But scanning in volume frame by frame means that no one has to man the transfer because there are no asthetic decisions to make about speed and color corretion is going to take place more accurately in the computer, anyway. Unless you can pre-program your color corrections, then the best you can do is an overall adjustment and nothing frame accurate.

I´m not trying to pick a fight, I just think it is much better, efficient and faster than frameaccurate transfers without realtime pulldown.

Our clients demand correct speed and frame accurate color correction on all cuts and not just were convenient. You are not going to get that on any real time system without the ability to pre-program like a Rank unless you spend a great deal of time manning the transfer, backing up and then starting again. And if something gets by you that you don't notice until after it is on tape or in the computer, then you will have to find that reel and retransfer again because the pulldown is built into the original file. There's no way to avoid it.

There's no fight. Again, we do produce real time units but there are definate trade offs when working in both real time and frame by frame scanning. If your method works for your particular work flow, then that's all that matters.

Roger
http://www.moviestuff.tv