SUPER 16MM, SCANNED TO 2K AND OUT TO 35MM...

[Daniel Aranyo AEC]

I AM ABOUT TO GO SHOOT A MOVIE IN SPAIN.

THE PRODUCERS PROPOSAL IS TO SHOOT ON SUPER16MM, SCAN IT ON 2K, COLOR TIME DIGITALLY AND GO BACK OUT TO A 35MM PRINT.

I HAVE SHOT EXTENSIVE 35MM, SUPER16MM BLOWN TO 35,ETC...BUT NOT YET THIS COMBINATION.

PLEASE ADVISE ME IN THE SPECIFICS OF WHAT I SHOULD RESEARCH AND EXPECT.

ARTICLES ? PROJECTIONS OF SAMPLES IN LA ?, WEBSITES ? PERSONAL TIPS...

THANK YOU SOOOOOOOOO MUCH !!

THIS FORUM IS AMAZING !

DANIEL ARANYO

CINEMATOGRAPHER

[John Pytlak RIP]

Super-16 to Digital Intermediate is a very good option for origination for 35mm release, especially if image manipulation is desired.

 

http://www.dga.org/news/v29_1/evnt_digrevo...=current&UID=24

 

http://www.cinematography.com/forum2004/in...p?showtopic=835

 

http://www.editorsguild.com/newsletter/May...termediate.html

 

http://www.cinematography.net/Pages%20GB//...r16_to_35mm.htm

 

http://www.kodak.com/US/en/motion/16mm/pos...=0.1.4.11&lc=en

 

http://www.kodak.com/country/US/en/motion/...ngDreamsP.shtml

 

http://www.kodak.com/country/US/en/motion/...volutionP.shtml

[Alex Ellerman]

John -- those were some great links! Very informative stuff on the D.I. process and the reinvigorated state of S16.

 

* edited to add... I read this excerpt from one of the links... "We use a CELCO eXtreme Nitro HD film recorder, which produces spectacular images..."

 

Any comments on the CECLCO eXtreme film recorder, anybody?

 

Thank you~

 

t.t.

[Nitin Sagar]

hi i'm a Dp based in india... i have just coproduced a shot a film S16mm scanned on spirit corrected on lustre confirmed on fire and printed via arri laser.... have just finished doing the trailer...looks good...u must have tried 7218.....i shot d entire film 18....dude i think the stock is made for digital post...

 

lets keep in touch

 

best regards

nitin sagar

[John Pytlak RIP]

have just finished doing the trailer...looks good...u must have tried 7218.....i shot d entire film 18....dude i think the stock is made for digital post...

 

I'm very happy the 7218 worked so well for you. :) Have you also tried the other Kodak VISION2 films 7212, 7217, and 7229?

[Naven]

I'm trying to do research on shooting a super16 short and telecine to hd. i'm trying to find out if it's possible to get it telecine just direct to hard drive and not simply an hd medium. I've never worked with HD just hoping to get the best quality out of a super16 telecine. Can it be transfered to that medium? if so normaly more expensive then a tape medium?

thanks

[Landon D. Parks]

i'm trying to find out if it's possible to get it telecine just direct to hard drive and not simply an hd medium.

No matter if you have it scanned to HDCAM or 4:4:4 Uncompressed HDD. You still have the 2k resolution. Unless you scan it at 4k, which is way out of bound for 16mm film, and even most high end studio 35mm pictures.

 

Even then, then 4k resolution is usually downsampled to 2k for editing. The main advantage to 4k scan is From what I have heard: Better Contrast.

 

The main advantages to 4:4:4 storage is that it's not compressed. But, again, Im not sure there is a telecine that does recorde to hard drives. Never worked with a Telecine before.

[Phil Rhodes]

Hi,

 

> No matter if you have it scanned to HDCAM or 4:4:4 Uncompressed HDD. You

> still have the 2k resolution.

 

No, you don't.

 

Most HD standards are 1920x1080 pixels or less, which is more than 10% less than 2K data at 204xx1556 (given you lose vertically for a comparable aspect ratio). Not a huge loss, but it ain't the same thing.

 

> The main advantage to 4k scan is From what I have heard: Better Contrast.

 

Drivel! The main advantage to 4K scan is more resolution - finer detail. If the contrast differs between a 2K and a 4K scan then there's something very wrong with the scanner!

 

> The main advantages to 4:4:4 storage is that it's not compressed.

 

Well to be specific it isn't colour-subsampled; a JPEG is a compressed 4:4:4 image. In general practice, though a 4:4:4 image won't be compressed - but that's not specifically what it means.

 

> But, again, Im not sure there is a telecine that does recorde to hard drives.

 

There certainly are, and what's more, there's slower film scanners which don't do anything else. Go read up.

 

> Never worked with a Telecine before.

 

Then perhaps you shouldn't be commenting on these subjects.

 

Phil

[Tenolian Bell]

Never worked with a Telecine before.

This is what gets you in trouble. You have such broad statments but have never even used the stuff.

 

Which is what makes experience important.

[Dominic Case]

> No matter if you have it scanned to HDCAM or 4:4:4 Uncompressed HDD. You

> still have the 2k resolution.

 

No, you don't.

 

Most HD standards are 1920x1080 pixels or less

Worse than that, Phil, if you scan at HD on a Spirit, you are getting MUCH less than 2K resolution, as the colour is effectively subsampled right at the scanner. Luminance sampling is 1920 pixels wide, but r,g,& b is only 960.