Visual EFX transfers in 16mm

Adam Burr · October 19, 2004

I am shooting a 16mm short coming up soon. I will be staying in video so going to print is not an issue. I will be doing some greenscreen compositing and have some questions as the shoot is approaching.

1. Will shooting super 16 be a necessity? I have the option if it is.

2. When transferring the film in telecine, is the keying going to be considerably more difficult if I transfer on a Rank as opposed to a Spirit? I am aware of the resolution differences between the two machines, but will it make a huge difference when I am keying on the computer?

3. I have heard there is a difference in the way and Rank and a Spirit use registration to pull the film through the gate across the scanner. Which would be more recommended to help prevent film jumping in the gate of the telecine? The effect being, if there is more jumping in the gate, the composite shots may not match up correctly.

I realize 16mm is not the preferred medium to do composite shots, but that is all my budget will allow. Does anyone have experience with this or can they make any recommendations as to which telecine to use?

Thanks

Mitch Gross · October 19, 2004

I am shooting a 16mm short coming up soon. I will be staying in video so going to print is not an issue. I will be doing some greenscreen compositing and have some questions as the shoot is approaching.

1. Will shooting super 16 be a necessity? I have the option if it is.

If you're finishing to video then you can shoot anything you want. If you are going for a 4:3 video frame then Super-16 will give you no advantage over regular 16mm, but if you are going for 16:9 or any other wider framing then S-16 will yield a significantly larger negative area which translates into tighter grain which will improve your compositing work.

2. When transferring the film in telecine, is the keying going to be considerably more difficult if I transfer on a Rank as opposed to a Spirit? I am aware of the resolution differences between the two machines, but will it make a huge difference when I am keying on the computer?

A Spirit is better for this, but not really for this reason. See question 3 for that. The Rank is certainly a much noisier machine, with the Spirit yielding far smoother, richer images. Assuming you will be getting a standard definition video transfer, they will both yield a full resolution 720 x 480 image.

3. I have heard there is a difference in the way and Rank and a Spirit use registration to pull the film through the gate across the scanner. Which would be more recommended to help prevent film jumping in the gate of the telecine? The effect being, if there is more jumping in the gate, the composite shots may not match up correctly.

This would be the bigger reason to go to a Spirit as it will provide much better registration in the transfer. Be sure to use a well-maintained modern camera and run a registration test beforehand. You do this by photographing a sheet of graph paper, rewinding the film in the dark and rephotographing the graph paper. When developed you should not see any wiggling between the relative positions of the two grids.

I realize 16mm is not the preferred medium to do composite shots, but that is all my budget will allow. Does anyone have experience with this or can they make any recommendations as to which telecine to use?

A few years ago Sony made a brief venture into the video transfer world with the Vialta. If you can find one of the few that were made and installed, they have excellent registration as the machine uses a ratcheting registration pin system like a camera instead of the tensioning capstan system employed by most transfer machines. The Vialta was supposed to have excellent registration, but I don't think there were many ever installed.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Keith Mottram · October 19, 2004

best case senario, shoot 16mm on a very slow stock. make sure your green screen/ blue screen is perfectly lit- and i mean perfectly, check it both by eye and with a meter and make sure you have no discolouring or hot spots. Shoot as closed down as possible to prevent soft edges. next after doing rough keying in your NLE beg the transfer house to scan your selected shots to 2k. This may sound excessive but if you have a 2k image to start with your matts will so much cleaner that when you place them onto your background plates at SD you will not end up with fluffy popping matts. If you cant get a 2k scan then shoot Digi-Beta, the advantage of the 16mm will be quickly lost if you have a grainy transfer. I'm currently grading a 35mm production with 80% bluescreen and the biggest problem has been crappy matts caused by bad prep on the DPs part and a grubby bluescreen.

Keith

Phil Rhodes · October 19, 2004

Hi,

I'll second the 2K image plea. Spent all day doing hue vector matte trials on alternately 2K and SD-res preview material and the difference is even more than it'd sound like.

Phil

René · November 4, 2004

Also, it depends what software you use to do the keying. Usually, standard keying options in Avid/After Effects etc. might not be what you need for the job. I suggest you try te get a copy of Ultimatte. I've found it to be able to cope with almost impossible situations.

René.

Bryan Jacobson · November 4, 2004

Are you comparing a Spirit, to a C-Reality or to a Ursa? Ursa and Spirit are two different class machines. You should be fine on either a C-Reality or Spirit.

I would suggest S16, it will give you some room for repos. Also, if your feeling gutsy, if you are shooting a verical image, like a person standing, you can drop the camera on it's side and maximize your resolution by shooting vertically.

Matt Pacini · November 9, 2004

".... if you are shooting a verical image, like a person standing, you can drop the camera on it's side and maximize your resolution by shooting vertically.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I'm sorry, but this is ludicrous.

What are you going to do for the sides of the image, just have black bars?

Matt Pacini

Phil Rhodes · November 9, 2004

Hi,

No, that's perfectly valid. If you're shooting a largely portrait subject to be composited into a wider frame, it makes a lot of sense to shoot it portrait and flip it in the compositor, then drop it into the background as appropriate.

Phil

November 9, 2004

Turning the camera on it's side to get the maximum image size is a very practical technique. Why throw away resolution with a vertical object in a horizontal frame.This is something we do when shooting greenscreen elements or objects on a white or black or solid colored background. We simply rotate the image in the composite and also in the xfer. It allows you zoom/Scale in and out on an object and not go "digital".

Shooting a 35mm neg still is also a good way to zoom and move on an item.

I am shooting Furniture Commercials for an national brand tomorrow and will shoot vetically oritented furniture with a verticallly oriented S16 camera. The name of the game is maximizing image size when dealing with composites because you can scale down without consequence but you can't scale up and not pay with the "digitalcrawlies"

Edited November 9, 2004 by Andy Sparaco

Keith Mottram · November 9, 2004

couldn't agree more about shooting vertically, every pixel counts when it comes to blue screen work, but if your matching with shot plates remember to be careful with optical artifacts. dont for example shoot with wide angles vertically if your trying to match w/a shot horizontally (or indeed two different w/a horizontals). it may sound obvious but nothing gives away a photoreal compostite more than mismatched lenses.

David Mullen ASC · November 9, 2004

I turned the HD camera sideways to shoot some greenscreen portraits (head-to-toe) in "D.E.B.S." to gain more pixel resolution. The sides don't matter because it's a composite -- all you are trying to do is fill the frame with the subject to gain resolution, so if it's a vertical subject, turn the camera sideways. The compositor can rotate and reduce it.