2K scan of Pro8/12 stock (s8 DI research project, Chile)

[Daniel]

Hello Matthew,

Well, actually what you point is somewhat similar to what I had to do for the earlier test, as I had to provide a PAL EDL, but I wanted to transfer to NTSC for other reasons (Chile is NTSC zone).
So I removed the pulldown through Combustion and from that point you can ask Combustion to resolve the footage timecode or frame counter as 24 fps or 25 fps....

I agree that if you can edit directly in 24 fps and generate an EDL at 24 fps, it is a very transparent way to resolve that code issue... but you need to coordinate that with the scanner house, in order to be sure they will handle without problem the EDL at 24 fps. (it should be ok).

Regards,
Daniel

[Santo]

I'm amazed that there is not more traffic on this post. This is the most amazing "super 8 promotional" project ever carried out on super 8 using modern film stocks and transfer and serious lenses and professional design cameras, so I'm bumping this up again.

Looking at just that single still, it is 100% clear that this brings super 8 up to the level of "traditional" 16mm, and in many ways surpasses it, and includes everything I have always advocated on this board as the way to move towards super 8 as a viable film medium beyond providing "bad film" and "old home movie clips" in big productions. As have others, obviously. I'm not claiming I am alone. And yet, Carlos and a relative newcomer, and myself, are the only people making note of this thread's tremendous signifigance (Daniel's amazing and audacious strides) in super 8.

This may be a truly historic moment when super 8 is fully realized for the potential it has always had as a film-making tool -- something completely dismissed historically and laughed at in the USA as "home movie only" while in Canada is was pushed at the highest levels of the CBC and in much of Europe embraced as a worthy artist's medium.

Shame on this board.

[Uppsala BildTeknik]

Looking at just that single still, it is 100% clear that this brings super 8 up to the level of "traditional" 16mm

What I don´t get is why not shoot 16mm instead?
If you are VERY concerned about quality and are a professional why not use 16mm, it would give even better quality.

Why hang on to your old 8mm cameras and say "this can be as good as 16mm if I do everything perfect, have a good scan, use a good stock, use the legendary camera..." when you can use 16mm give it a good scan and use a good stock and I would be very surprised if it wouldn´t be better than the the 8mm.

[Santo]

I know that negatives don't work worth a darn with your workprinter-based transfer machine business, and that is unfortunate. This project is somewhat beyond what you're capable of dealing with -- theatrically released shorts and features. However that is no reason not to applaud the latest technology and "thinking outside the box" rationality involved.

Perhaps this first reply is indicative that I have rubbed too many anti-progress negative influences on this board the wrong way with my no-nonsense doses of logic and hard reality. I think the best move is to not drag Daniel's thread down with further comments (ie: with the responses that will follow), but to instead bump it up from time to time so that all vistors to this site can see.

Best of luck with this brilliant light showing the future of super 8, Daniel! With any luck at all, I will soon be receiving confirmation I will be following your lead down this futuristic path.

[Daniel]

Hola Santo...

Thank you .. I am very grateful of your message.. You understand what we are doing... It was not easy to set-up a project like this... in a country where there is still no transfer suite for super8... no industrial processing for super8 ...etc...
Budget in this kind of independant research project based on s8 for industrial application is a big issue ... and I am very grateful of a lot of people (family, friends, production and post-production houses etc..) that are helping me in order that we can complete in excellent technical conditions this project.
Of course that we are more than happy to read those positive comments here and in cinematography.com about our work and research proposal.

We have completed the studio shooting last week (with Panther grip), with al lot of material for digital composition through keying... and next week we will be shooting for one month the landscapes in the extreme south with vision2 250D stock custom loaded by Pro8.
Thanks again.
Daniel

[Uppsala BildTeknik]

This project is somewhat beyond what you're capable of dealing with

Ehhh 8O Did I say I had a datacine scanner? 8O Of course I don´t have anything to scan in this quality, but that is hardly the point.

The point is, WHY not use 16mm instead? Do you have a good answer to that, because I am curious. Do you know the answer yourself?

Of course hats off, congratulations, but why not 16mm is a valid question, don´t you think so?

[Carlos 8mm]

Quote:

What I don´t get is why not shoot 16mm instead?
If you are VERY concerned about quality and are a professional why not use 16mm, it would give even better quality.

Super 8mm will be allways Super 8mm and 16 mm will be allways 16 mm, using old or new film stock.

I think Santo´s point (and mine) is the fact that today (and tomorrow , I hope) the new generation of film stocks allows that S8 becomes a serious film format, leaving behind the historical concept of "home movie format".

Daniel´s test with V2 100T shows this fact. This Super 8 frame looks like a 16mm frame (using some High speed emusion) of 20-30 years ago.

And it will be while MP films improves day by day.

Carlos.

PS: Fuji will release a new 500T MP stock : FUJI ETERNA 500.

http://www.fujifilm.com/JSP/fuji/epartn ... EWS_812049


Ain´t good news ?

[Carlos 8mm]

Quote:

What I don´t get is why not shoot 16mm instead?
If you are VERY concerned about quality and are a professional why not use 16mm, it would give even better quality.

Super 8mm will be allways Super 8mm and 16 mm will be allways 16 mm, using old or new film stock.

I think Santo´s point (and mine) is the fact that today (and tomorrow , I hope) the new generation of film stocks allows that S8 becomes a serious film format, leaving behind the historical concept of "home movie format".

Daniel´s test with V2 100T shows this fact. This Super 8 frame looks like a 16mm frame (using some High speed emusion) of 20-30 years ago.

And it will be while MP films improves day by day.

Carlos.

PS: Fuji will release a new 500T MP stock : FUJI ETERNA 500.

http://www.fujifilm.com/JSP/fuji/epartn ... EWS_812049


Ain´t good news ?

[Carlos 8mm]

Oops,
double posting... :oops:

Sorry...

[ccortez]

i think santo is wrong in thinking that by not posting to the thread folks are showing lack of interest.

i for one am blown away by this thread. excited by the possibilities. and very quickly the conversation turned to technical details that are at the very limits of my understanding. (i'm learning, i'm learning...)

so since i talk too much anyway and am clearly out of my depth in this discussion, i thought i'd just listen.

put me on the record for a "WOW!" 8O

[steve hyde]

Santo,

I would not disagree with what you have said. I think the VISION 2 emulsions are amazing and if used skillfully, as Daniel has demonstrated, could be cut-into 16mm projects in ways that would yeild a beautiful composition....

The reason I shoot 8mm is simple: COST. It is approximately one third cheaper. If you factor 16mm camera rental into that S8 is probably a bit less than half the cost of 16 and that's shooting negative stock with shadow telecine....(I know others will argue that I'm wrong. Please tell me if I am)

I agree with Santo here -- I think this is a key moment for shooting 8mm and I think these new emulsions are a big part of this historic moment. I'd love to see more people shooting with 7217 and 7218.... I am... and as soon as I shoot four more carts I'm going to take it to transfer and I'll be happy to share my results....

Daniles still image is beautiful -- the most stunning still on this website to be sure , but what I would like to see is VISION 2 Super 8 shot through that Zeiss lens --with a 3 light transfer --color corrected scene to scene and output to DVD. Seeing the images in motion would be great.

Thanks again to Daniel for posting your image here. You guys are doing great work...

Steve

[Daniel]

Hello Kent Kumpula,

Why not use 16mm instead ?

Well... this is a research project... and the essential part of the fund were won during FONDART chilean 2004 national fund contest. This project that is called "Técnica de Intermediario Digital (2K) aplicada al formato de cine super 8mm" (or in english : Digital Intermediate technique (2K) applied to super 8mm cine format) have applied in the category of "investigación técnica-artistica" (technical-artistic research, but I prefer to say technical/creative). So the funds are clearly pointed in order to do a research.

Why not 16mm ? Well... in many place all over the world since many years.. (in Chile, for instance since 2001) many long-features have used entirely or partially the DI post-production technique (at 2k data resolution) for long-feature from s16/16mm source... with excellent final quality. For instance if one day you can see "Machuca" 2004's chilean long-feature.. it is a great local example of high quality theatrical film release (35mm) shot entirely on super 16mm and scanned through Spirit Datacine at 2K data resolution, 10 bits in log scale quantization.
So this explains you why - using super 8mm source - this is a valid innovative project.

Having say that.. I agree... because it is logical... that you should get a better image (in terms of overall resolution) in super 16mm v/s the same shot done in super 8mm and considering the same lens quality, same development, same DI post-production path...

However it is intersting to note that one laboratory specialist here in Chile, after seeing the one minute early test finalized in 35mm, said that the quality (of the footage below ISO 500) was comparable to an optical blow-up from s16/16mm media.
It is a subjective commentary... but interesting enough to be reported...

It is also true that some laboratory over the world are also doing extremely high quality photochemical blow-up from s16/16 to 35mm, in particular using 35mm Master Intermediate (direct blow up to Master Intermediate Positive in 35mm from negative s16/16 source).

A last point : this research project based on super 8mm media have considered a direct comparation with super 16mm (simultaneous shot with Classic Pro8 camera and Arri SRIII, same lens family, same emultion, same laboratory, same scanner and colorist, same color correction, same film recording ... production and post-production path).
Of course it is not possible to directly compare two media that have different aspect ratio, so I only consider to do a side by side comparation at the 2K stage conformation in order to be able to compare the same subject at same proportion in each side of the 2K image. This will be recorded back as the rest of the 2K conform to 2242 intermediate film.
With Best Regards,
Daniel

[reedsturtevant]

I feel exactly as CCortez: I am astounded by the scope of this project but I just listen because I have nothing of value to add :?

A last point : this research project based on super 8mm media have considered a direct comparation with super 16mm (simultaneous shot with Classic Pro9 camera and Arri SRIII, same lens family, same emultion, same laboratory, same scanner and colorist, same color correction, same film recording ... production and post-production path).
Of course it is not possible to directly compare two media that have different aspect ratio, so I only consider to do a side by side comparation at the 2K stage conformation in order to be able to compare the same subject at same proportion in each side of the 2K image. This will be recorded back as the rest of the 2K conform to 2242 intermediate film.

Daniel, what a fantastic controlled experiment. I would love to be able to see a 35mm print of this split screen comparison projected in a cinema! Of course a DVD or high-def file perhaps will be easier than a trip south of the equator 8O

[sarmoti]

I guess S8 can be 1/3 cheaper than 16mm if you just get some reversal stock and transfer it with a film chain device. But then you could do the same for 16. As far as I'm concerned, for professional work S8 only comes in 10% under 16 cost wise. This is for stock/lab and transfer and obiously excluding the gear. If you don't beleive me go to http://www.pro8mm. and look at their film/process/telecine package deals for 8 vs 16.

[sarmoti]

Sorry, forgot to make my point, which is, I shoot S8 do it for the look and I shoot 16 for the quality. Don't get me wrong, I like my S8 to be of high quality but I'm shooting it because it's a different tool in my palette and not because I think it's cheaper or because I can make it "look like 16". Good S8 can look like 16 and bad 16 can look like S8 just as much as good 16 can look like 35 and so forth.