MWA scanners look like FilmFabriek...or FilmFabriek look like MWA

[Perry Paolantonio]

I don't know how to respond to this because you're just jumbling up a bunch of terminology.

Maybe read up on how log scans and data transfers work?

 

[Robert Houllahan]

6 hours ago, Tyler Purcell said:

It's how the Cintel II works. It's how the Spirit works. It's how the Imagica works. Those are the 3 other machines we use on a regular basis.

I have not used the Cintel but I have put allot of film through the very last generation Spirit 2K/4K and had the latest of the now very old Imagica scanners. Out of the two the Spirit far surpassed the Imagica as a data scanner but it was also an older noisier line scan sensor machine with a old hot Xenon lamp and somewhat limited dynamic range. My 2K / 4K Data Spirit had the newer PhantomII software similar to the Scannity but without that newer scanners LED lamp control and higher dynamic range. I retired my two running Spirit scanners and they are for sale.

The Arriscan was (I think) the first of the really modern scanners which does really proper base calibration and delivers really true very low noise 16bit scans. There are no color grading controls on the Arriscan like on the Spirit or  Imagica as they are not needed.

When setting up a scan on the Arriscan the scanner RGB LED Lamp is calibrated to the clear part of the base of the film stock you are scanning, this procedure finds clipping for each RGB channel on the most trans-missive  part of the film stock. In 2-Flash HDR the scanner does the first flash to this setting and the second flash at 10X the light. The Monochrome ALEV sensor is 14bit and the second flash makes a true 16bit scan that is virtually noiseless, or I have not been able to find sensor noise in color negative on the Arriscan. The full 0.0 to 3.4+ density range of color negative can be captured in this scan as Log 10bit or 16bit and then you have the full range to work with in the grade, no correction needed in the scan. The Arriscan can read the film Keycode and switch exposure calibrations on the fly in a scan roll. The Arriscan XT has a newer ALEV sensor and the Alexa is at the very top of the list for camera dynamic range so the Arriscan for some of it's fussiness it really the gold standard.

The LaserGraphics Scan Station scanners work the same way as the Arriscan calibration does when doing a scan, the scanner runs a base calibration to maximize the dynamic range of the 12bit Sony Pregius sensor and then a second flash for 14bit which can be adjusted for time. For most practical purposes a 2-Flash Pregius Scan Station can capture the density range of the film, and then that gets graded after the scan with full range.

If a scanner does not work this way by doing a film base calibration it is basically an obsolete machine built on far less than ideal methodology and engineering than is available today. I cannot imagine having to slog through trying to get the best scans out of film fiddle **(obscenity removed)** around with that kind of a scanner.

[Tyler Purcell]

14 hours ago, Robert Houllahan said:

If a scanner does not work this way by doing a film base calibration it is basically an obsolete machine built on far less than ideal methodology and engineering than is available today. I cannot imagine having to slog through trying to get the best scans out of film fiddle **(obscenity removed)** around with that kind of a scanner.

Thanks for the explanation. I honestly didn't know the Scan Station and Arri Scan were cable of setting up base calibration per roll, that's great. Have you gotten that to work with the Xena as well? 

I guess you're right, the key here is that without automated density checking beforehand and an automatic compensation system, the scan will be kinda umm not great. We've worked around that by extensive testing and finding settings that do give optimal results, but I fret it does take a bit of effort in post to bring them back to a sensible result. Compressing the data into a log look, doesn't really matter much, the DR of the 16 bit Tiff files our scanner can deliver, is good enough. 

I would buy a scan station, we finally have the place to put one, but I first need the clients. That's the hard part. Nearly all of our clients are restoration work and our scanner does a good job for that, especially due to the custom wet gate and clamping gate. For negative work, it's challenging because there are so many people heavily discounting their services on the west coast. To get in the door, requires a stroke of luck. Every year at NAB, I talk to Brett about getting a machine and he's been very copasetic, but it's all about that initial client who will pay for at least the monthly bill. At this point, we do better servicing cameras and doing restoration, neither of them have any real overhead.

 

 

 

[Robert Houllahan]

On 2/1/2025 at 3:08 PM, Tyler Purcell said:

Thanks for the explanation. I honestly didn't know the Scan Station and Arri Scan were cable of setting up base calibration per roll, that's great. Have you gotten that to work with the Xena as well? 

Compressing the data into a log look, doesn't really matter much, the DR of the 16 bit Tiff files our scanner can deliver, is good enough.

 

Rennie is working on the Xena software to do a base calibration, it is a manual setup now.

The Sony Pregius and Pregius S 4K 5.4K and 6.5K sensors used in most scanners today are 12bit so 16bit Tiff or DPX is 4bits per channel of wasted empty space. If they do not have a proper Linear to Cineon Log space conversion for 10bit Log that is also a problem.

[Tyler Purcell]

4 hours ago, Robert Houllahan said:

If they do not have a proper Linear to Cineon Log space conversion for 10bit Log that is also a problem.

Oh yea, the FF absolutely does not do this. 

[Robert Houllahan]

On 2/3/2025 at 2:12 AM, Tyler Purcell said:

Oh yea, the FF absolutely does not do this. 

They should.

Also for CFA scanners you really need a lamp that is not just RGB but RO/G/B/W and a adjustable matrix for the Bayer Demosiac in addition to the proper LIN to Cineon conversion. There is allot of fussy tuning and tricks to make a Bayer camera with huge color channel bleed work as well as they do on machines like the Scan Station.

Allot of reasons why true RGB scanners with a Monochrome sensor just make better color scans.

[Tyler Purcell]

14 hours ago, Robert Houllahan said:

They should.

Also for CFA scanners you really need a lamp that is not just RGB but RO/G/B/W and a adjustable matrix for the Bayer Demosiac in addition to the proper LIN to Cineon conversion. There is allot of fussy tuning and tricks to make a Bayer camera with huge color channel bleed work as well as they do on machines like the Scan Station.

Allot of reasons why true RGB scanners with a Monochrome sensor just make better color scans.

Yea it has a RGBW lamp, which is good at least.

I work with scans from the scan station and scanity all the time because we also do post. I haven't really ever seen an amount of adjustability in those scans that aren't present in my scans. So I'm not quite sold on working in a Cineon color space. I get the consistency aspects, especially when clients are looking for a specific metric to grade from. A lot of clients want to drag the film into their timeline and have it automatically apply a LUT to convert it. Honestly, I've got our workflow so tight, I could create a 3D LUT for resolve that works on nearly anything and simply give it to our clients as they walk out the door.