2k super 8 scan

[Chris Burke]

I know that some people consider this overkill, but I am really interested in what sort of results can come out of a 2k scan of really well shot super 8 footage. My questions are:

 

Has anyone done this? If so, how did it go? Do you like what you got? Can I see a dvd reel?

 

 

Who does 2k work with super 8 on the east coast?

 

 

I tried a search of the boards but keep getting an error.

 

 

thanks

[Mitch Gross]

I've seen a test of this (really done more as a lark by a transfer house colorist) at Technicolor Creative Services here in NYC. It was surprisingly sharp and clean but with grain like golfballs. That colorist is no longer at Technicolor but I do know that Cineric also can work with S-8. It gives an extreme look and is certainly not a cost-effective production method, but if it's up your alley then it is certainly possible.

[Daniel Henriquez Ilic]

Hello,

 

My first post here, so hello to everyone...

As far as I know, Kodak Rochester does have a Spirit Data Cine with the super 8 adapter for the 16mm vision gate.

Then you have in London, Condor and VTR which have Millennium and Spirit with super 8 capabilities and data 2k output (DPX files)

Then at the other side of the world, in The Film Unit in Wellington, New Zealand, there is a Spirit with s8 capabilities and data 2K output.

 

If your material is well exposed and well developed, and if it is modern negative film stock it is very natural that you would like to it be scanned at 2K, in case you are considering a final 35mm film distribution. In case of reversal, I would say the same but the issue is that you probably need highier color bit depth to get that dynamic range.

 

Concerning spatial resolution, in therory 35mm is aprox. 6K resolution, so it makes sense that 2K is the digital resolution for super 8mm.

 

Bye Bye

Daniel

Santiago de Chile

[John Pytlak RIP]

Hello,

 

My first post here, so hello to everyone...

As far as I know, Kodak Rochester does have a Spirit Data Cine with the super 8 adapter for the 16mm vision gate.

Bye Bye

Daniel

Santiago de Chile

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

The Spirit datacine in Rochester is used for research and development. I have seen Super-8 2K transfers output to 35mm film done on an experimental basis. I agree, they were surprisingly sharp, but even Kodachrome film's fine grain structure was quite noticeable on a big screen. I recall that Super-8 200T color negative looked slightly more grainy than the Kodachrome film, but was very close.

[Filip Plesha]

I would say the same but the issue is that you probably need highier color bit depth to get that dynamic range.

 

 

Bye Bye

Daniel

Santiago de Chile

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

 

A higher dynamic range of the sensor perhapse, but the file format does not need more bit deph.

In fact, when you compare a 10-bit negative image to 10-bit reversal image scan,

the reversal has more gradations in the film per one stop because, when you view the file from the negative at corrected contrast (projection contrast), you are using like 50% of the whole range. (590 gradations in a 10-bit image), whereas

for the reversal image (that allready has the projection contrast), you are using full 1024 gradations for the image of the projection contrast.

 

So you need higher Dmax in the scanner, but you need less bit deph to achieve

the same number of gradations per one stop compared to a scan of the negative.

[Daniel Henriquez Ilic]

The Spirit datacine in Rochester is used for research and development. I have seen Super-8 2K transfers output to 35mm film done on an experimental basis. I agree, they were surprisingly sharp, but even Kodachrome film's fine grain structure was quite noticeable on a big screen. I recall that Super-8 200T color negative looked slightly more grainy than the Kodachrome film, but was very close.

 

So there is an interesting perspective for the Vision2 series, as the Vision2 200T from Kodak France finishing, the Vision2 100T from Pro8mm finishing, and hopefully from Kodak in super8 cartridge, the new daylight stock Vision2 250D.

Another point to consider is what technology and film stock is used at the digital recording stage. Concerning film stock I understand that 5242 would not increase the grain structure, so that in the final print one would only see the original grain stucture from the super 8 frame.

[Daniel Henriquez Ilic]

A higher dynamic range of the sensor perhapse, but the file format does not need more bit deph.

 

From what I have found in related pdf : the film imaging system from both Cintel Millennium II and dataMill is able to capture a Dynamic Range of up to 3.3 which is done through linear 14 bit RGB quantization.

The Spirit II pdf (at www.thomsongrassvalley.com) does not mention its Dynamic Range.

[xoct]

Cintel has been testing with the DataMill and Grace In A Box for a while now...does any post house in the world own one of these yet? Anyone know? My understanding is that it can scan 2k at 15fps, which is pretty fast, which should make the scan somewhat reasonable.

[Alessandro Machi]

The Spirit datacine in Rochester is used for research and development.  I have seen Super-8 2K transfers output to 35mm film done on an experimental basis. I agree, they were surprisingly sharp, but even Kodachrome film's fine grain structure was quite noticeable on a big screen.  I recall that Super-8 200T color negative looked slightly more grainy than the Kodachrome film, but was very close.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

While I can see Kodak wanting to keep ahead in the R & D department when it comes to knowing the capability of their film formats when transferred to video, Super-8 is a very difficult format to optimize in the video transfer stage.

 

If the film transfer was not wetgated, then the Super-8 may not have been seen in it's optimized form.

 

If the Spirit datacine operation specs were not redone and calibrated specifically for Super-8, the transfer could have been better.

 

If the film processing was done by Dwaynes Lab without a Kodak Chemist being present, then the processed Kodachrome film transfer footage was not in it's optimized form.

 

If the camera used was not one of the Super-8 "elite" cameras, then the selected footage was not in it's optimized form. I wish Kodak would release who, what, where, and when and encourage some type of venue for serious Super-8 users to submit their super-8 footage for evaluation.

 

Years ago I had Super-8 optically bumped to 16mm and the bump up was screened at Foto Kem i their screening room. My Foto Kem rep was surprised at how good the footage looked and it did not have any annoying visible grain.

[Justin Miller]

There was a guy here in San Francisco who did the transfers from Super 8 to 2K. The results were nice, but the grain was very noticable. That doesn't mean I think it's a bad idea. I plan to make a super 8 to 2k transfer system anyway, but it will have a large amount of grain.