Guest Glen Alexander Posted November 19, 2008 Share Posted November 19, 2008 post prices if you have any. thx Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Premium Member John Brawley Posted November 19, 2008 Premium Member Share Posted November 19, 2008 post prices if you have any.thx Where ? LA ? Thailand ? Eastern Europe ? jb Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Glen Alexander Posted November 19, 2008 Share Posted November 19, 2008 Where ? LA ? Thailand ? Eastern Europe ? jb since the number of people who could actually afford to scan at 6k is probably limited, anywhere. i have one number from a lab here in LA $0.75/FRAME@6k, $0.50/FRAME@4k so 20minutes is about 29000 frames, $22,000@6k, $15,000@4k note per FRAME not foot Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Site Sponsor Robert Houllahan Posted November 20, 2008 Site Sponsor Share Posted November 20, 2008 I think some shops are running Arriscan's at around $1K / hour go by the specs for frame rate to calculate cost per frame or foot, roll etc. i.e. at 2k maybe its 4fps and 6k its 0.7 fps. Check my numbers with Arri's website to verify fps. -Rob- Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mike Nichols Posted November 20, 2008 Share Posted November 20, 2008 I THINK Goldcrest has one. Not being up on the technology, it was my understanding that when I had my scan done, they did a 3K>2K scan and the option for 6K>4K was available. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Site Sponsor Robert Houllahan Posted November 20, 2008 Site Sponsor Share Posted November 20, 2008 I THINK Goldcrest has one. Not being up on the technology, it was my understanding that when I had my scan done, they did a 3K>2K scan and the option for 6K>4K was available. Goldcrest does have one as does CO3. -Rob- Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Premium Member Dan Goulder Posted November 20, 2008 Premium Member Share Posted November 20, 2008 I THINK Goldcrest has one. Not being up on the technology, it was my understanding that when I had my scan done, they did a 3K>2K scan and the option for 6K>4K was available. Hey Mike, was your scan used on 2-perf material? If so, I'm curious as to how your selects were pulled. Were you able to read and log edge codes in the 2-perf format, or what? Thanks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mike Nichols Posted November 20, 2008 Share Posted November 20, 2008 Hey Mike, was your scan used on 2-perf material? If so, I'm curious as to how your selects were pulled. Were you able to read and log edge codes in the 2-perf format, or what?Thanks. Yes, Goldcrest scanned my 2 perf neg. Basically, what I did was edit the offline in DVCAM that was done direct to disk from Rob at Cinelab. I spit out a reference movie and handed over the negative, Final Cut Pro EDL and ref movie to goldcrest and the VERY patient scanner Chris did the scan. There were some instances where we struggled with frame accuracy, but with the generous addition of 3 second handles, we more than covered ourselves. Reconforming was actually pretty easy once I figured out what the heck I was doing. I just took my offline edit offline and reconnected each edit with the corresponding DPX stack. Because of the unruly nature of DPX files, I am actually converting all my stacks to 10bit RGB LOG Kona files. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Glen Alexander Posted November 21, 2008 Share Posted November 21, 2008 Cinelab seems very expensive if their 35mm processing is .17/ft, you should be able to get processing for .10 to .14/f. t Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Glen Alexander Posted November 21, 2008 Share Posted November 21, 2008 (edited) Yes, Goldcrest scanned my 2 perf neg. Basically, what I did was edit the offline in DVCAM that was done direct to disk from Rob at Cinelab. I spit out a reference movie and handed over the negative, Final Cut Pro EDL and ref movie to goldcrest and the VERY patient scanner Chris did the scan. There were some instances where we struggled with frame accuracy, but with the generous addition of 3 second handles, we more than covered ourselves. Reconforming was actually pretty easy once I figured out what the heck I was doing. I just took my offline edit offline and reconnected each edit with the corresponding DPX stack. Because of the unruly nature of DPX files, I am actually converting all my stacks to 10bit RGB LOG Kona files. why didn't you go with SR? what was cost? Edited November 21, 2008 by Glen Alexander Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mike Nichols Posted November 22, 2008 Share Posted November 22, 2008 why didn't you go with SR? what was cost? I will most likely end up on SR. I went with scans because, believe it or not, financially, it made more sense! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris Burke Posted November 22, 2008 Share Posted November 22, 2008 Cinelab seems very expensive if their 35mm processing is .17/ft, you should be able to get processing for .10 to .14/f.t where did you get .17 for 35mm from? There website states .14 per foot for 35mm, .12 if the daily is done there, which Mike did have. So it seems to be right on where you said it should be. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Glen Alexander Posted November 22, 2008 Share Posted November 22, 2008 where did you get .17 for 35mm from? There website states .14 per foot for 35mm, .12 if the daily is done there, which Mike did have. So it seems to be right on where you said it should be. http://www.cinelab.com/rates.php today it shows 0.17ft for 16mm Color & B/W, and .14 for 35mm, i am the confident the rates were the same the other day when i looked but i could be mistaken. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris Burke Posted November 22, 2008 Share Posted November 22, 2008 Cinelab seems very expensive if their 35mm processing is .17/ft, you should be able to get processing for .10 to .14/f.t the .17 is for 16mm. You were looking for 35mm, which is .14 per foot, .12 if you do the daily there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Site Sponsor Robert Houllahan Posted November 22, 2008 Site Sponsor Share Posted November 22, 2008 the .17 is for 16mm. You were looking for 35mm, which is .14 per foot, .12 if you do the daily there. Sorry but the website is a little unclear about pricing, we are going to have our web girl change some of that. It is $0.14/ foot for 16mm and that drops to $0.12/foot over 1200' or if you do a daily, this includes video prep. We run 35mm B+W for $0.17 and 35mm Color for $0.12 / foot. which also includes prep for video. We also do not have a minimum for procesing only for print (200 feet) or video transfer ($75 for students/indies) so we think the pricing is on par with what you would get in LA and we also do deals for volume. -Rob- Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now