Working with motion picture film in a digital enviroment

[Florian Noever]

Hello everyone,

My name is Florian, I'm studying cinematography at the Film Academy Vienna in Austria. I am currently working on my bachelor's thesis, which focuses on working with motion picture film in a digital environment. I’m very interested in film and its processes, and I've had the chance to gain some experience shooting short films on 16mm and 35mm.

The goal of my thesis is to create sort of a guide to help film students understand the current technical possibilities for working with film. However, I’ve found it challenging to find specific information and reliable sources, so I thought it might be helpful to reach out to a forum with members who have years of experience working with film.
The information I’m seeking includes:

• Technological Advances: What new technologies (both software and hardware) have been developed since the 2000s for working with film, both on set and in post-production?
• Film Developing Equipment: Have there been advancements in film developing machines? Are new machines still being manufactured, or is the industry relying solely on existing equipment?
• Industry-Standard Scanners: What scanners are currently considered industry standard, and why?
• Practical Resolution Limits: What is the practical resolution limit of modern Vision3 stocks? (I plan to conduct my own resolution test, but I’d love to hear personal insights from professionals.)
• DI Processes: How does a film DI (Digital Intermediate) process differ from that of a fully digital production?
• Print Creation: What machines are used to create film prints from a digital master?

I realize this covers a broad range of topics, but if anyone is willing to share their knowledge or point me toward useful resources, I would be very grateful. I think this could be a fantastic place to gather insights that aren’t readily accessible elsewhere.

Thank you in advance for your help!
All the best, Florian

[Robert Houllahan]

Some attempts at answers:

 

1. Tech Advances? film scans work exactly like any other on set dailies except the time offset of the lab and scan process, it is easy to drop ProRes or DNx proxies into a DIT cart for sound sync and on set previews just like any other show.

2. Film developing and film itself is a chemical miracle so IDK what you might think of as "advancements" in film processing, the process control and temp controls on film processors have been computer controlled since the 1990's and a film processor is very much similar to many other industrial manufacturing or process machines with pumps rollers and air knifes etc.

2.a  PhotoMEc in the UK and a number of smaller manufacturers build new motion picture film processors today.

3. The DFT Scannity the LaserGraphics Scan Station and Director and the Arriscan are the premiere industry film scanners today offering scans from 4K through 16K for motion picture film. There are a number of other smaller scanner manufacturers who take off the shelf machine vision cameras and combine them with RGB+IR LED lamps and a film transport plus software and GPU to build very advanced new scanner in a range of prices.

4. Resolution is always a hot and silly topic, film is fluffy clouds of silver and dyes and as such is not a fixed grid so in many ways the more resolution the scanner has the better those clouds are resolved. What is the practical limits for reproduction? IMAX 70mm is likely at least 12K and no digital projector does more than 4K native.

5. DI is just the film scan as the input to a color finishing process and there are many ways to control the image process and displays both digital and film.

6. Arrilaser 4k recorders the Imagica 2K recorder the Cinevator direct to print recorder and various new recorders built around LCD / OLED and Micro OLED are running to record digital to film today.

 

I would say that anything digital starts off complex and expensive and eventually becomes a commodity and that has happened with film scanning. I am sitting in a room with two LaserGraphics Scan Station machine and an Arriscan and a Xena which is getting an upgraded sensor. I have three DFT Spirit scanners in a room next door not in service. The three Spirits all built between 2006-2009 plus the DaVinci 2K color corrector cost a total of almost $5 million. The Arriscan and the LaserGraphics scanners I have plus the Xena cost less than $750K and you can build a extremely good scanner these days for less than $50K

[Jon O'Brien]

In my opinion, resolution past a certain point becomes self-defeating in narrative (fiction) storytelling ie. "movies."

Who wants to see the pores in an actor's face? Or the crumbs and microfibre wipe marks on a table that the talent are sitting at? 35mm prints and even Super 16 projected digitally are perfect for the 'artform' and 'entertainment form' we call the movies.

[Florian Noever]

Thank you @Robert Houllahan and @Jon O'Brien for responding.

 

 

[Florian Noever]

@Robert Houllahan, following up on your answers:

1. I’m curious about new developments specifically for working with film, such as the IndieASSIST for 16mm and 35mm cameras. Are there even any new advancements in film post-production?

2. So, processing machines today operate the same way as those that originally introduced computer control?

2a. That’s good to hear, I didn’t know that.

3. What is the industry-standard scanner for 65mm negatives?

4. I’m looking forward to conducting my own tests to see for myself what I feel is the practical limit.

5. What steps differentiate a digital DI from a film DI? I assume dust-busting is one aspect, are there others?

6. From what I’ve read about DI in the early 2000s, film recorders were used to create an interpositive, which was then used to produce a few internegatives from which many prints were struck. Alternatively, if they had access to more film recorders, they would directly create a few internegatives from which prints would be struck. If you want to create a film print today, what is the workflow like? I think CPC in London prints directly onto print film, what about other labs?

Thank you in advance; this is incredibly helpful information!

[Robert Houllahan]

On 11/11/2024 at 3:51 PM, Florian Noever said:

@Robert Houllahan, following up on your answers:

1. I’m curious about new developments specifically for working with film, such as the IndieASSIST for 16mm and 35mm cameras. Are there even any new advancements in film post-production?

2. So, processing machines today operate the same way as those that originally introduced computer control?

Linear film processors are a industrial / manufacturing type machine they have tanks and pumps and heaters they submerge the film in chemistry for certain amounts of time at certain temperatures and keep the chemistry contained in individual tanks and then dry the film once it is finished I don't know exactly what "advancements" might be made other than small process improvements and control improvements.

2a. That’s good to hear, I didn’t know that.

3. What is the industry-standard scanner for 65mm negatives?

 

The DFT OXscan 14K would be today's machine, 14K Sony Pregius 16bit mono sensor with RGB + IR

 

https://dft-film.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/12/OXScan-14K-Brochure_20201201.pdf

 

4. I’m looking forward to conducting my own tests to see for myself what I feel is the practical limit.

 

Good Luck

5. What steps differentiate a digital DI from a film DI? I assume dust-busting is one aspect, are there others?

 

I am not sure how you are defining the difference as DI = Digital Imtermediate which presumes film scans and film recording. DI is an older term.

6. From what I’ve read about DI in the early 2000s, film recorders were used to create an interpositive, which was then used to produce a few internegatives from which many prints were struck.

 

No multiple Estar Imternegatives were made to print from 2254 for example is a negative recording stock.

Alternatively, if they had access to more film recorders, they would directly create a few internegatives from which prints would be struck.

Yes multiple IN were made on 2254 to print from on continuous loop printers with processors attached that ran at up to 1500ft per minute.

If you want to create a film print today, what is the workflow like? I think CPC in London prints directly onto print film, what about other labs?

 

Arrilaser 4K recorders.

CPC has Cinevator 2K direct to print recorders that also record sound at the same time as picture.

Thank you in advance; this is incredibly helpful information!

 

[Florian Noever]

What I still not fully understand is how prints are made today. I guess if you would need only a few copies, you would directly print on film print stock at a place like CPC London using the Cinevator. What about films that have bigger film releases such as Oppenheimer which had around 80 35mm prints, do they still got out to IN and then struck the print from the IN or do the directly print on film print stock?

What film stock can the Arrilaser and Imagica record on? 

 

What I still don’t fully understand is how film prints are made today. If only a few copies are needed, I assume you could print directly onto film print stock using a system like the Cinevator at a facility like CPC London. But for larger releases, such as Oppenheimer, which had around 80 35mm prints, do they still create an IN and then strike the prints from that, or do they print directly onto film print stock?

Also, what film stock types can the Arrilaser and Imagica recorders print on?

[Mark Dunn]

23 minutes ago, Florian Noever said:

I guess if you would need only a few copies, you would directly print on film print stock at a place like CPC London using the Cinevator.

From digital, you could. I don't know the economics of film out vs. IN/IP but it seems unlikely it would be cheaper to go that way today.

23 minutes ago, Florian Noever said:

What about films that have bigger film releases such as Oppenheimer which had around 80 35mm prints, do they still got out to IN and then struck the print from the IN or do the directly print on film print stock?

"Oppenheimer" was shot on 65mm. and IMAX and released on 5/70, 15/70 IMAX and 35mm., so is an exceptional case.  Being shot on film there was no film out, all the prints were made conventionally. Various combinations of IN/IP were necessary to get the different formats out, but it was all photochemical, except for a small amount of digital compositing of visual effects in the detonation sequence. There was no CGI. You could call the process Nolanvision.

Edited November 13, 2024 by Mark Dunn

[Florian Noever]

I see, maybe Oppenheimer was a bad example.

What is the standard process today for making prints from a digital source, regardless of whether the original footage is film or digital? Is it Digital Data -> recording to IN -> Film Print, Digital Data -> recording directly to print stock, or perhaps another process?

How is sound typically handled in film prints delivered from a digital source?

[Robert Houllahan]

5 hours ago, Florian Noever said:

I see, maybe Oppenheimer was a bad example.

What is the standard process today for making prints from a digital source, regardless of whether the original footage is film or digital? Is it Digital Data -> recording to IN -> Film Print, Digital Data -> recording directly to print stock, or perhaps another process?

How is sound typically handled in film prints delivered from a digital source?

The Cinevator direct to 35mm print recorder is a fast and lower cost option for 2K to print, the bigger shows record on the 4K Arrilaser to 2254 IN stock and then the sound is recorded on another machine and the two are printed on a B&H panel printer.

The Arrilaser can record to IN stock or 50D 200t and 250D if it is equipped with the negative kit.

The Imagica records to IN stock.

[Tyler Purcell]

Digital source is recorded to either camera negative (CRT recorder) or Internegative which is more popular for 35mm (laser recorder). There are some machines like the Cinevator which use a DLP projector, they record directly onto print stock. 

There isn't a laser recorder made for large format, so you can see how that can be confusing. A standard 35mm movie, would record using an Arri Laser most of the time, which gives an internegative which would be used to go directly to print stock with. The soundtrack is added during this process. 

So IN>Print. 

Sound is recorded out using a similar method, tho the machines uses use a slightly different technology. The soundtrack would be added to the finished print as it was being made. 

Edited November 13, 2024 by Tyler Purcell

[Florian Noever]

Thank you all! I think I now have a basic understanding of today’s workflow for creating prints.

One thing I’m still curious about is the specific tools used in post-production when working with film scans. I know of software for dust removal and image stabilization, but are there other tools commonly used?

Edited November 13, 2024 by Florian Noever

[Tyler Purcell]

23 minutes ago, Florian Noever said:

One thing I’m still curious about is the specific tools used in post-production when working with film scans. I know of software for dust removal and image stabilization, but are there other tools commonly used?

Dust minimization is easy during the scan, with the proper lamp source and/or mix of IR pass like the Arriscan. 

Other solutions like a wet gate, can also help reduce dust and scratches before the scan. 

Once you have a good scan, you can then use software tools like Phoenix and DRS Nova, which are both pretty powerful tools. MTI (DRS Nova) is coming out with AI frame regeneration tools, which will fill in for damaged or missing frames automatically. It also has an automated scratch/dirt removing tool. I frankly like Nova over Phoenix, but their license is $1499/month, so you need to do a lot of restoration for it to be worthwhile. Phoenix is what I've been using for the last 3 years and it's decent, not perfect. It's extremely slow due it being CPU based not GPU based. But it's $349/month, so ya just deal with the speed issues. 

There are other newer tools which are going to be coming out shortly, using an AI workflow. I'm honestly shocked we haven't seen more of them, as film restoration could be easily done with AI. Interpreting what's being seen and then coming up with a fix for the issues, is basically the core functionality of AI to begin with. I just don't think the money is there for a lower-cost tool right now, but hopefully in the future, we will see more automated tools come to the forefront. 

[Ludwig Hagelstein]

16 hours ago, Tyler Purcell said:

Dust minimization is easy during the scan, with the proper lamp source and/or mix of IR pass like the Arriscan. 

Other solutions like a wet gate, can also help reduce dust and scratches before the scan. 

Once you have a good scan, you can then use software tools like Phoenix and DRS Nova, which are both pretty powerful tools. MTI (DRS Nova) is coming out with AI frame regeneration tools, which will fill in for damaged or missing frames automatically. It also has an automated scratch/dirt removing tool. I frankly like Nova over Phoenix, but their license is $1499/month, so you need to do a lot of restoration for it to be worthwhile. Phoenix is what I've been using for the last 3 years and it's decent, not perfect. It's extremely slow due it being CPU based not GPU based. But it's $349/month, so ya just deal with the speed issues. 

There are other newer tools which are going to be coming out shortly, using an AI workflow. I'm honestly shocked we haven't seen more of them, as film restoration could be easily done with AI. Interpreting what's being seen and then coming up with a fix for the issues, is basically the core functionality of AI to begin with. I just don't think the money is there for a lower-cost tool right now, but hopefully in the future, we will see more automated tools come to the forefront. 

Film Restoration with AI is a tricky thing. Film restoration is in most cases also about making a decision what to leave in, and what to take out. 

[Tyler Purcell]

6 hours ago, Ludwig Hagelstein said:

Film Restoration with AI is a tricky thing. Film restoration is in most cases also about making a decision what to leave in, and what to take out. 

I wasn't referring to removing grain, I was referring to removing dust/dirt. 

Edited November 14, 2024 by Tyler Purcell

[Florian Noever]

What software is the industry standard for post stabilizing?

Edited November 19, 2024 by Florian Noever

[Tyler Purcell]

48 minutes ago, Florian Noever said:

What software is the industry standard for post stabilizing?

DRS Nova has an excellent frame stabilizer, I would consider that the industry standard. I'm not happy with the Phoenix tool and Resolve can do it, but you need a backlit (offset color) perforation. It's also slow. 

[Florian Noever]

Hi everyone,

I have a few more questions that came up during my research:

1. I’m still trying to understand how sound is handled with the ARRI Laser and what kind of sound format is used. Also, what film stock is the sound recorded on, is it Kodak 2374?

2. I have a basic understanding of the two ways to create a 35mm film print today, but what is the workflow for making 70mm prints? Which recorders are used, and which scanners does Fotokem utilize?

3. What machines are used for contact printing? Are optical printing machines still relevant?

4. I know that scanners either stop at each frame for digitizing or continuously scan. Are there specific terms for these types of movements? Do the Lasergraphics scanner stop at each frame, or do they continuously scan?

5. From what I found, only the ARRISCAN provides pin registration, while the Scanity and Lasergraphics scanners use optical perf registration. Is that correct?

Thank you in advance! 🙂

 

Edited November 24, 2024 by Florian Noever
Writting mistake

[Dan Baxter]

On 11/8/2024 at 8:27 PM, Florian Noever said:

Hello everyone,
My name is Florian, I'm studying cinematography at the Film Academy Vienna in Austria. I am currently working on my bachelor's thesis, which focuses on working with motion picture film in a digital environment. I’m very interested in film and its processes, and I've had the chance to gain some experience shooting short films on 16mm and 35mm.

The goal of my thesis is to create sort of a guide to help film students understand the current technical possibilities for working with film. However, I’ve found it challenging to find specific information and reliable sources, so I thought it might be helpful to reach out to a forum with members who have years of experience working with film.
The information I’m seeking includes:

• Technological Advances: What new technologies (both software and hardware) have been developed since the 2000s for working with film, both on set and in post-production?
• Film Developing Equipment: Have there been advancements in film developing machines? Are new machines still being manufactured, or is the industry relying solely on existing equipment?
• Industry-Standard Scanners: What scanners are currently considered industry standard, and why?
• Practical Resolution Limits: What is the practical resolution limit of modern Vision3 stocks? (I plan to conduct my own resolution test, but I’d love to hear personal insights from professionals.)
• DI Processes: How does a film DI (Digital Intermediate) process differ from that of a fully digital production?
• Print Creation: What machines are used to create film prints from a digital master?

I realize this covers a broad range of topics, but if anyone is willing to share their knowledge or point me toward useful resources, I would be very grateful. I think this could be a fantastic place to gather insights that aren’t readily accessible elsewhere.

Thank you in advance for your help!
All the best, Florian

Hi Florian,

I don't work in the industry - but in terms of the film machines I'd say you should make a list of them. Film processors are getting thrown out by labs that are closing, you can still get rebuilt processors through MMT (and ultrasonic cleaners). I'm not sure who else is still doing it. Film printers, you'll need to speak to a lab about how printing works. Technologically the film cleaners have moved off Trike (the manufacture of it was banned under the Montreal Protocol), most of them use either Perc or 3M/its replacement, but the best cleaning solvent now is Isopar-G. The new Cinetech Hydra cleans with Isopar-G. Rewashing is how you get embedded mold out of the film, and rejuvenation machines of the past turned out not to be very archival so you need a lab that knows their stuff. For projection you can still get new portable 35mm projectors manufactured through Cinemec the cleaners for projectors are the Kelmars (they have 35mm and 70mm ones) or the Film-O-Clean for small-format. You can get the media pads for them through Film-Tech and also Film Guard in the US, there's other products available as well (Isopar-G for example - it's faster drying but Film-Guard is designed to be slow drying). Projectors shifted towards platters, and before the platter system was invented this giant contraption was conceived of:

Now you can use either platters or big huge reels (6,000ft and even larger). You can read more information about the Loop-Matic in the youtube video description.

The telecines and scanners have changed enormously since the 60's. This is a demonstration of how a telecine used to work:

More information here. The Rank Cintel "Flying Spot" telecines/scanner used a CRT light source. The next generation of tech moved to Xenon lamps, and then after that to LED. The LED lights in a current professionally manufactured scanner will flash once for each exposure - that's true whether it's R/G/B like an Arriscan, Director, DFT or Bayer like a ScanStation or Blackmagic Cintel. They have different diffusion methods to get the light even, some have glass integrating spheres and some have integrating cubes (light directed up through diffusion material. Prasad now sells the QUADRIGA INSPECTIONscan, and it's a unique device in the market in that it's designed to do film inspection work that is normally laborious for staff. The newest model Cintel from Blackmagic has an inspection option (to make the base damage visible) - but it can't scan edge-to-edge. The InspectionScan makes a damage report including shrinkage finding new damage since the last time it was inspected etc.

Now, the scanners. Blackmagic and FilmFabriek make retail product scanners. That's not the same as the other companies, the other companies are making specialised professional-use equipment. So while the imaging tech etc may be similar now, their capabilities are vastly different. That's why some people purchase a cheaper retail product device and are disappointed when it doesn't work the same way as a much more expensive device that carries a monthly support contract to pay. So when you hear people say "Blackmagic need to change the sensor" - it's true it has a noisy 4K CMOSIS chip camera in it, but it's the only machine-vision camera they make and the only one that will work with it - their products are not designed to be modular. Modular means you can change something in the future, eg put that new brighter light for the latest G3HDR+ model into an older one - that can't be done, and neither can the camera. So even if they change the camera in the next model you need to buy the entire scanner - ~USD $35,000 all up, you will not be able to buy the camera itself and install it as some people expect.

FilmFabriek is different and you can read their story here. They were always designed as "modular" but retail - so no ongoing support contract to pay.

The Home Movie to VHS transfer market from the 1980's onwards used Elmo Telecines, and those were replaced starting in 2005 with Tobin Cinema Systems devices and you read that history here. Urbanski Film can service them now in the US for enthusiasts who like old tech and want to have them running, I'm not sure who services Elmos and Tobins in Europe. MovieStuff entered the scene as well, but those devices made by Roger Evans were different. Roger was a part of the DIY scene as was the late Daan Müller who invented the precursor to what is now the FilmFabriek HDS+, and Roger's goal was to go to frame-by-frame digital 8mm sacrificing quality to achieve that goal. For some reason some of the home movie scanning people purchased them, probably because they didn't realise that an Elmo or TCS TVT-8 is what they wanted (they go straight to NSTC or PAL no computer needed). These days there's a company called Film-Digital that sells those projector-mechanism telecines.

When you hear people say that the Blackmagic Cintel just needs a new camera and will be like a ScanStation, there's a lot they're not saying. So here's a photo for reference:

That shows the complete Euro Format kit for the LaserGraphics ScanStation. The gates/skid plates for 9.5/17/24mm and the tri-format rollers for the Euro Format. You take all the normal 35/16/8 tri-format rollers off the front of the machine and then put those on, and you put in the appropriate film gate. That one film transport module (the motor) supports 35/24/17.5/9.5/8mm - six different film gauges all at once. Blackmagic Cintel 1 and 2 (the sproket transport ones) can only do 35mm and 16mm, and the capstan model ones can do 8mm but at very modest resolution. Hopefully the photo gets across a thousand words to explain just how different they are (the retail product devices and the specialised professional-use equipment).

Blackmagic's Cintels are still professional devices however, some facilities have them sitting right next to the top pro tech gear. For what they can do they're a complete bargain, that's why I think it's unrealistic to think Blackmagic would want to change their business model with it - doing that now would leave behind many of their customers who rely on them. Libraries, Archives, etc.

At the very top end you have the Arriscan XT which can even do wetgate scanning, the DFT devices, and LaserGraphics sells the Director. Mid-range you have Kinetta, DCS Xena, the ScanStation and its derivatives. For inspection work you have the Cube-Tech QUADRIGA INSPECTIONscan, it is very expensive, Filmic Technologies sells a device with similar goals in mind for 16mm only - and that's through the regular sales agents (Urbanski Film in the US, Gencom in NZ, etc). I fear that if people compare the price of a Filmic EZ16 and an QUADRIGA INSPECTIONscan they will make the same mistake that some people have made when comparing the price of a Blackmagic against something else. If you want to see how they work you need to go somewhere that actually has one and see it for yourself, or get the manufacturer to show it to you. That way you won't have incorrect expectations/assumptions.

So in summary, I'd say the changes in telecines and digital scanners if we're talking specifically from 2000 through to 2024 would be that: 1. it's no longer just for television use and for Hollywood special effects and early digital restorations, 2. the next market was post-production more widely and then the Archive market, 3. the devices have become more specialised and more capable in what they can do, 4. the cost of the devices has come down substantially, 5. there's many different companies making them. 35mm specifically that's Blackmagic, Digital Cinema Systems, LaserGraphics, Arri, Digital Film Technology, Kinetta, and Cube-Tech.

On 11/25/2024 at 7:01 AM, Florian Noever said:

• I know that scanners either stop at each frame for digitizing or continuously scan. Are there specific terms for these types of movements? Do the Lasergraphics scanner stop at each frame, or do they continuously scan?

• From what I found, only the ARRISCAN provides pin registration, while the Scanity and Lasergraphics scanners use optical perf registration. Is that correct?

The Arris have a sproket-drive transport modules for 35mm and 16mm. They also have a capstan-drive/sproketless one, but it will slow the scanner down a bit to use it. For normal use you'd use the sproket transport. But remember, the Arris, LaserGraphics and DFTs out there in the real world are very different to each other - those companies have improved and changed their designs both in terms of hardware and software compared to their earliest models.

Yes, the film transport modules have changed significantly since 2000. Older scanners had what are called "projector loops" in them and that was so that the film would be held steady in the gate while in continuous motion that's also required for sound readers. Intermittent-motion scanners can't really do audio except by image extraction which obviously won't work for magnetic sound. Note that the Director which is intermittent motion and full R/G/B sequential can't do magnetic sound, but the ScanStation can. So that's one advantage of continuous-motion. I don't know what the normal industry terms are, I'm outside of it - but projector loop, film transport module (see photo), sproket drive, capstan drive, direct drive, intermittent motion, and continuousness motion would be the terms I would use.

As mentioned above that one transport module does 6 different film gauges all at once - that's a significant difference between it and a professional device from 2000. A Rank Cintel in 2000 could do 35mm, 16mm, and perhaps 8mm but most of them wouldn't have been capable of 8mm. No Euro-Formats etc. You had to feed it low-contrast film only or you'd crush the detail - so negatives and what are called "TV prints" or low-contrast prints for telecines. Now you can put normal contrast and even really contrasty prints through the modern scanners and they have the ability to get excellent shadow detail. That's important for archives, libraries, home movies, and even professional restorations where you might want to scan a reference print for color grading the camera negative, or where you need to use a print because the negatives are gone or are incomplete.

My best,

Daniel

Edited December 3, 2024 by Dan Baxter

[Robert Houllahan]

On 11/24/2024 at 3:01 PM, Florian Noever said:

Hi everyone,

I have a few more questions that came up during my research:

1. I’m still trying to understand how sound is handled with the ARRI Laser and what kind of sound format is used. Also, what film stock is the sound recorded on, is it Kodak 2374?

2. I have a basic understanding of the two ways to create a 35mm film print today, but what is the workflow for making 70mm prints? Which recorders are used, and which scanners does Fotokem utilize?

3. What machines are used for contact printing? Are optical printing machines still relevant?

4. I know that scanners either stop at each frame for digitizing or continuously scan. Are there specific terms for these types of movements? Do the Lasergraphics scanner stop at each frame, or do they continuously scan?

5. From what I found, only the ARRISCAN provides pin registration, while the Scanity and Lasergraphics scanners use optical perf registration. Is that correct?

Thank you in advance! 🙂

 

The Arrilaser V1 and V2 only record picture to intermediate or camera negative they do not record sound.

Optical sound for 35mm has a number of possible formats 1. Dolby SR stereo analog. 2. Dolby Digital 3. DTS timecode 4. SDDS and out of these SDDS is not used anymore I believe. The sound track is recorded to 2374 or 2378 monchrome stock using a Westrex or newer sound recorder.

For 70mm it is mostly answer printed but IMAX and FotoKem (I think ) have Celco Fury CRT recorders.

Bell&Howell 35mm and 70mm panel printers are used to combine picture and sound elements onto positive print stock.

Scanning tech has three major technologies, 1. Line Scan like the DFT Scannity which is continuous motion true RGB 2. Intermittent true RGB with pin registration and a monochrome area scan sensor with multi flash like the Arriscan or Director, the Arriscan uses a mechanical pin for registration and the Director is intermittent with machine vision registration. 3. Continuous motion with a color Bayer sensor like the Scan Station and others.

[Florian Noever]

@Dan Baxter thank you for your detailed response!

[Florian Noever]

@Robert Houllahan 

Okay so, it doesn't matter if it is analogue or digital sound it will always be printed on a sound negative and the combined with the picture negative, right?

 

What do you mean by answer printed, what does the process look like?

 

What I still don't get is how for example the Scan Station has an Area Scan Sensor but is able to do continuous scanning, is the light source generating powerful enough flashes for very short exposure times to scan continuously? Do the Scanity and Arriscan use flashes as well, or continues light?

[Dan Baxter]

1 hour ago, Florian Noever said:

What I still don't get is how for example the Scan Station has an Area Scan Sensor but is able to do continuous scanning, is the light source generating powerful enough flashes for very short exposure times to scan continuously? Do the Scanity and Arriscan use flashes as well, or continues light?

They all flash, like this:
https://moviestuff.info/moviestuff-_mark-ii/
(That shows a FilmFabriek Pictor). Extremely short exposure, and running the film too fast will blur it of course.

The Arriscan has a rolling-shutter camera, I think it's now the only scanner with one, everything is global-shutter. So it has to hold the film very steady to do its thing, and it flashes multiple times per frame to get its scan done. The light has a glass integrating sphere.

[Tyler Purcell]

On 12/6/2024 at 9:34 AM, Florian Noever said:

Okay so, it doesn't matter if it is analogue or digital sound it will always be printed on a sound negative and the combined with the picture negative, right?

Right, it's combined after the fact unless you use something like a Cinevator, which records direct to print stock, that CAN record soundtrack at the same time. I think it's the only device that can however. 

On 12/6/2024 at 9:34 AM, Florian Noever said:

What do you mean by answer printed, what does the process look like?

Answer print is a generic term for creating a print off a set of originals. 

Panel printers are really cool. They have multiple incoming rolls of film, which are contact printed to original stock. They aren't necessarily setup for color grading, they're just for one light printing. The stock runs through two different print heads on some of them, where the picture head is the same distance from the sound head as the projectors are. 

On 12/6/2024 at 9:34 AM, Florian Noever said:

What I still don't get is how for example the Scan Station has an Area Scan Sensor but is able to do continuous scanning, is the light source generating powerful enough flashes for very short exposure times to scan continuously? Do the Scanity and Arriscan use flashes as well, or continues light?

Most of the modern lower-cost scanners are area scanners. Higher shutter speeds these days and as you said, more light, can do multiple captures and combined them to create even an HDR image in a single pass. Since they align the perforations (frame) later, they can take as many images as they want, as long as it's within the imagers range. You actually don't even need that much light with modern digital imagers. Our basic Film Fabriek scanner, works similarly and the imager is very good, ultra low noise floor. 

Scanity and Arriscan both use monochrome imagers (non-color) and create the color by flashing individual color lights (RGB-I) at the imager and then the hardware/software turns those black and white registries into color, similar to how YCM separations work. So no, the lights flash different colors. For HDR, it would flash R+B+G, R+B+G and then an infrared pass, which helps mask out the dirt/dust. The Arriscan however, is slow compared to a ScanStation and even Scanity. So if your customers aren't paying $1.50 a foot, you need something faster like a ScanStation, which does a very good job. 

[Simon Wyss]

6 minutes ago, Tyler Purcell said:

The stock runs through two different print heads on some of them, where the picture head is the same distance from the sound head as the projectors are.

That’s a misconception. The printing heads are farther apart. The correct picture-sound displacement is achieved by a corresponding lace-up of image and sound negatives.