Millennium Machine versus Spirit

Pritesh Chheda · November 22, 2004

Hello:

We plan to telecine our S16mm to HD D5. One of the vendors I has the following equipments:

- Millennium Machine with resolutions up to 4K and the capability to handle film formats from 8mm to 70mm, DaVinci 2K Plus Color Correction

- Spirit DataCine, Pandora Pogle Color Correction with HD/SD Pixi, Philips VS4 Noise Reduction System

- Cintel URSA Y-Front 4:4:4 Component Digital Telecine with TWiGi and SCAN'dAL, DaVinci Renaissance Color Corrector and Meta-Speed digital servo system

The sales person prefers Millennium over Spirit. Does anyone know the difference and preferences? Why?

Pritesh

David Mullen ASC · November 23, 2004

Bill Bennett ASC swears by the Millenium TK -- he feels that any CCD device ends up making the image look more video-ish. However, the Spirit does seem to reduce the graininess of Super-16 (plus scratches) because of the soft light source. On the other hand, you could say that the Spirit is removing information...

Jeff Tanner · November 29, 2004

- Millennium Machine with resolutions up to 4K and the capability to handle film formats from 8mm to 70mm, DaVinci 2K Plus Color Correction

- Spirit DataCine, Pandora Pogle Color Correction with HD/SD Pixi, Philips VS4 Noise Reduction System

- Cintel URSA Y-Front 4:4:4 Component Digital Telecine with TWiGi and SCAN'dAL, DaVinci Renaissance Color Corrector and Meta-Speed digital servo system

Transferring in Dallas, eh?

I've done work on all three of these machines. The Millenium does have a "warmer, softer feel". David put it well...the Spirit and it's chip technology looks more "video-ish" to me. I've been very happy with the results on the Millenium and DaVinci 2K.

I personally would stay away from the Y-Front. It was a great machine back in it's day but there is no comparison to the Millenium or the Spirit. Especially in 16mm. Spend the extra money in transfer...you'll be glad that you did.

Jeff

J. Lamar King IMPOSTOR · November 29, 2004

Transferring in Dallas, eh?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

That's the first thing I thought, too. If it is VP&T, they do great work on all their machines. It might be that it will be easier or cheaper for you to get on the Mellenium do to the schedule and I'm not sure if all their colorists even work on the Spirit. Peggy Clark-Holden is a great colorist there, she rules! I would personally opt for the Spirit first and Mellenium second.

Pritesh Chheda · November 30, 2004

Yeah. It is Video Post in Dallas. Bill Bennett emailed me the reasons for his preferences. I am sure he would not mind if I posted his reply for educational purposes. Below is his response:

"I very much prefer the "look" of the Millennium telecine to the Spirit

DataCine. The reason is the Millennium uses a flying spot scanner

image sensor, and the Spirit uses a CCD array image sensor. Simply

put, using the Spirit is like pointing a digital video camera at your

film, where the image tends to look very digital..... yes it has the

dynamic range of film, but has the "look", in terms of sharpness and

smoothness, of a digital video camera.

The Millennium, on the other hand, retains the smooth and subtle

"contours" of the film image. AND it it able to extract more of the

dynamic range of the film, in both the highlights and the shadows. I

have seen this with my very own eyes, using the same piece of negative,

and walking it from one machine to the other at the same facility on

the same day.

The DaVinci 2K Plus Color corrector that is tied to that Millennium is

very good, in the hands of a competent colorist, of course."

Adam Frisch FSF · November 30, 2004

For sheer sharpness, I'd say the Spirit beats anything in 16mm. But sometimes sharpness isn't everything. I've seen some stunning S16 images on the Millenium too and it definitely has the upper hand in 35mm.