super 8 sniper transfer

[britta]

hej have anyone tried this telecine machine? worth the prize?
http://www.moviestuff.tv/dv8_sniper.html
many thanks

[Justin Lovell]

Hey Britta,

I'm using a dv8 sniper PRO, and have been very happy with the unit, and equally pleased with all the customer support from Roger (who builds the units).

I initially bought a WP XP to be able to transfer and supervise my own s8 transfer without having to travel to the US to have it done (I'm in Canada).

Since then I've branched out a little and run my own company, frame discreet ( http://www.framediscreet.com for samples of some of my sniper pro and WP XP xfers). I originally had NO GOALS to do this.. it just sort of happened from word of mouth on the work I was doing.

Funny how things work out...

[studiocarter]

Is that DVCAM full sized :?: HD?

Michael
Carter

[Justin Lovell]

DVCAM SD, not HD.

Everything is SD at the moment for me. I'm looking into a HD setup, but at the moment, the demand for HD isn't high enough to warrant an investment in the $5-10 000 range for the right camera/lens combination.. 8O

-unless you've got a big job coming up that you'd like me to do in HD

[JhnZ33]

... ( http://www.framediscreet.com for samples of some of my sniper pro and WP XP xfers)...

jusetan, very nice samples! I have a question for you. How do you get such smooth playback from your 8mm transfers?

My transfers mostly turn out jerky. They look a lot like a lower framerate video. Could it be something I don't have right? Or is it the film?

Thanks in advance,

JJP

[Justin Lovell]

Hey JJP,

What are you transferring with?
I capture all footage at native 24p with no pulldown. I apply the necessary pulldown (depending on the speed they shot at) with cinecap afterwards.

Anyone else having problems viewing my sample clips, I think I need to recompress the files for hinted streaming or something (I'm no whiz at streaming, I just know some people have had a hard time playing some of the clips).

[studiocarter]

unless you've got a big job coming up that you'd like me to do in HD

Nah, I'd rather buy one for Me

So, SD is standard definition or 720 x 480 :?:

My miniDV 3 chip cam has a blown pixel in manual iris so everything has to be done in auto or I get a little dot right in the middle that is very bright.
Therefore I'm looking at the new stuff. DV magazine for Feb. has an article on the Sony HVR-V1 HDV camera. In the 1990s I bought a Hi-8 instead of Digital8 to save a little money and regretted it later. I'd like to jump on it (the camera band-wagon) this round with both feet for once.

Michael Carter

[JhnZ33]

Hey JJP,

What are you transferring with?

I'm using a Workprinter XP and a Panasonic AG-DVC30 camera,



along with Cinecap.

I capture all footage at native 24p with no pulldown. I apply the necessary pulldown (depending on the speed they shot at) with cinecap afterwards.

I'm not understanding what you are saying here. How do you capture at 24P with no pulldown? I thought the Workprinter captured frame by frame? Such a statement would suggest (at least to me) that you are capturing in real time.

JJP

[/img]

[MoonstruckProductions]

Mr. Carter,

I personally think the V1U would be a good choice for film transfers. The new CMOS techonology seems like it would lend itself nicely to controlling proper brightness and contrast over the entire frame. My only reservation about the V1U is that it only has 1/4" chips. If you have an adequate light source it probably won't make much difference.

It also has HDMI output, so you could technically get a great HD stream as long as it can output to HDMI in camera mode.

Not to mention you get great HD resolution for less than $5000. Just think of all the fun things you can make outside of the film transfer world with it!

If you happen to pick one up, let us know how it looks.

-Scott

[studiocarter]

Scott,

That is such a subtle difference and easy to miss: V1U vers Z1U and such a big change, ie 1/3 vers 1/4.

There is always something to snag on.

An old Goko TC-20 I had used first to transfer film had a variable lamp that was very usefull for overexposed shots. Lowered, the light changed color, but on black and white film it didn't matter. What mattered is that much more information was recorded from overexposed film. It made all the difference. It was like auto sepia tone that way which was cool, er, warm.

Michael

[jhoneycutt]

Hey JJP,

What are you transferring with?
I capture all footage at native 24p with no pulldown. I apply the necessary pulldown (depending on the speed they shot at) with cinecap afterwards.

Hello Justean....

I have a old time Work Printer jr. that will only capture one frame a minute. I have been mostly happy with my transfers (but they do take a long time to do).

Using DodCap 1.35, I preform pull down at capture.

Are you saying I can have better quality if I check the box "None" or "after Capture"?

I am always after better ways to improve my transfers, but I don't really know the ins and outs of Cinecap.

Thanks

jack
Portland Oregon

[MoonstruckProductions]

I'm not understanding what you are saying here. How do you capture at 24P with no pulldown? I thought the Workprinter captured frame by frame? Such a statement would suggest (at least to me) that you are capturing in real time.

JJP

[/img]

I have to agree. I don't understand why anyone would apply a pulldown to frame by frame captures. Perhaps people are confusing pulldown with deinterlacing? Or maybe the capture software automatically combines the captured frames into a 29.97 video file. Which, to me, would defeat the purpose of capturing individual frames in the first place.

Can anyone shed some light on this subject?

-Scott

[MovieStuff]

I'm not understanding what you are saying here. How do you capture at 24P with no pulldown? I thought the Workprinter captured frame by frame? Such a statement would suggest (at least to me) that you are capturing in real time.

JJP

[/img]

I have to agree. I don't understand why anyone would apply a pulldown to frame by frame captures. Perhaps people are confusing pulldown with deinterlacing? Or maybe the capture software automatically combines the captured frames into a 29.97 video file. Which, to me, would defeat the purpose of capturing individual frames in the first place.

Can anyone shed some light on this subject?

-Scott

I posted this answer to the same question on another thread.

You need pulldown patterns to make your film footage play at the correct rate on video. Let's say that you want to transfer your film to NTSC video, which ostensibly plays at 30fps. If you shot your film at 30fps and transferred each frame of film to each frame of NTSC video, then it will be playing at the correct rate. But let's say that you shot your film at, oh, 15fps. If you transferred each frame of that film to NTSC video, the new frame rate for playback would be 30fps, which would be twice as fast as you want. So the easiest pulldown pattern would be to simply double every video frame or, rather, to spread each frame of film across four video fields. There is a special pulldown pattern for all the various frame rates (such as the 2:3 for 24fps on NTSC) and the pulldown patterns for NTSC are different than that required for PAL.

Roger

[christoph]

I have to agree. I don't understand why anyone would apply a pulldown to frame by frame captures.

because most people want to watch their transfers on a TV set which (at least in the states) only displays a 60i signal.

if you watch it on the computer only or have a HD set which does true 24p you can of course keep at 24fps, but then again you're out of luck if you've shot 18fps.

the advantage over a realtime transfer is that you get slightly sharper images and the typical "film on TV" motion pattern which people are used from the big movies. the downside is that you get interlacing patterns.

funny enough, i've deliberatly chosen to shoot on 18fps and slow it down to 25fps by averaging frames (essentially mixing them) because to my eyes that looks closest to the way i see super8 when i project it. with native 24fps the grain pattern changes too fast for my taste.

of course i also get more running time out of one roll ;)
++ christoph ++

[JhnZ33]

My question was more towards pre-post, during capture.

You wouldn't be applying pulldown during capture and you most likely wouldn't be capturing at 24fps when capturing frame-by-frame. Correct?

The way I always understood it, you apply pulldown to the file after capture to match the frame rate of the original film to the frame rate of the video system it will be displayed on. Is my understanding correct here?


JJP