NICK BRAMPTON Posted June 22, 2009 Share Posted June 22, 2009 I would like to transfer S16 film to my Mac Pro so that I can edit it in Final Cut. My Mac has a 4TB RAID 5, most of which is available for file storage. Soho Film Labs have told me that they can provide telecine data on miniDV or digibeta (or presumably HDCAM SR) tape, but can't provide the data on a hard drive. This is problematic, as I do not own a miniDV, digibeta or HDCAM SR player. I live midway between Exeter and Plymouth. Can anyone recommend a lab that can record the telecine data on a hard drive or a DVD that I can read and save from? (I don't mind going up to London for this.) Alternatively, can anyone recommend a location in Exeter or Plymouth where I can rent the necessary equipment to play back the data so that I can firewire it to my Mac? Or thirdly, can anyone recommend a basic miniDV, digibeta or HDCAM SR player that is not going to cost me an arm and a leg? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Rakoczy Posted June 22, 2009 Share Posted June 22, 2009 Fotokem (818) 846-3102.... ooops you are in the UK... never mind :rolleyes:... surely there is someone who can get your HDCamSR to ApplePorRes HQ and onto a Hard Drive... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Monceaux Posted June 22, 2009 Share Posted June 22, 2009 I would like to transfer S16 film to my Mac Pro so that I can edit it in Final Cut. My Mac has a 4TB RAID 5, most of which is available for file storage. Soho Film Labs have told me that they can provide telecine data on miniDV or digibeta (or presumably HDCAM SR) tape, but can't provide the data on a hard drive. This is problematic, as I do not own a miniDV, digibeta or HDCAM SR player. I live midway between Exeter and Plymouth. Can anyone recommend a lab that can record the telecine data on a hard drive or a DVD that I can read and save from? (I don't mind going up to London for this.) Alternatively, can anyone recommend a location in Exeter or Plymouth where I can rent the necessary equipment to play back the data so that I can firewire it to my Mac? Or thirdly, can anyone recommend a basic miniDV, digibeta or HDCAM SR player that is not going to cost me an arm and a leg? Hello, I own and maintain a post production company in Hollywood California. It would be easy for me to transfer this to which ever format you ask for. and deliver on a hard drive. we have high speed film scanners and film recorders. check out my site. http://www.opticalcameraservice.com best regards, john monceaux Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Rakoczy Posted June 22, 2009 Share Posted June 22, 2009 John... he is in the UK. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Monceaux Posted June 22, 2009 Share Posted June 22, 2009 John... he is in the UK. no matter. I have clients all over the world. we do this all day long Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NICK BRAMPTON Posted June 23, 2009 Author Share Posted June 23, 2009 (edited) Many thanks for the responses. Unfortunately, because I can't afford to have the film (which is of a wedding) lost by a courier (as unlikey as that may be), sending the film to the USA is not an option. I need somewhere in the UK (preferably London or the SW) where I can personally drop off and pick up the film. Edited June 23, 2009 by NICK BRAMPTON Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Premium Member Adrian Sierkowski Posted June 23, 2009 Premium Member Share Posted June 23, 2009 If you get your film transferred to HDCam, then it's only an issue of finding a post facility that has an HDCam deck running into something! (normally FCP from what I've seen). The same goes for DigitBeta. Or, you can try to get it transferred t DVCProHD tape and then rent a deck (DVCProHD decks have firewire) for a day and import it all. Technicolor I know has a facility in London, as does Deluxe, I think, but I'm certain there are tons of facilities 'round there. surely, too, there must be some form of "film office" in London which has a list of all companies in the area? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Rakoczy Posted June 23, 2009 Share Posted June 23, 2009 btw... use HDCam SR instead of HDCam... ;) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Premium Member Adrian Sierkowski Posted June 23, 2009 Premium Member Share Posted June 23, 2009 Jumpin' on me for being morning early-lazy ;) and not typing the SR eh David! Certainly do go HDCamSR if possible, as mentioned, it really is a great invention in terms of quality tape! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Premium Member Vincent Sweeney Posted June 23, 2009 Premium Member Share Posted June 23, 2009 Do not go to tape for this. Make sure the lab can provide you a ProRes HQ file (any decent lab can now). This will give you all the quality you will need without the huge costs of tape. ProRes, like CineForm and Avid's DNxHD, will actually give you more to work with than HDCAM or DVCPro tapes can (Neither are even 1920). You can take your edited version from your Mac and output it anyway you want. The need for Tele or Data-cine to tape for editing is dying quickly, and should. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Premium Member Adrian Sierkowski Posted June 23, 2009 Premium Member Share Posted June 23, 2009 HDCam SR is MUCH higher quality than ProRes HQ. the Sr is full 1920x1080, 4:4:4 at up to 880Mbps, ProResHQ is 4:2:2 1920x1080, 220 (i think max) Mbps. Plus, you then have a tape MASTER which can be downconverted to any format just going deck to deck. I highly recommend getting yourself a tape, HDCam SR if only for the archival qualities of it... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Rakoczy Posted June 23, 2009 Share Posted June 23, 2009 Exactly. ;) I transfer my S16 neg to HDCam SR for archiving/ vaulting.. then... transfer that Tape in Apple ProRes HQ to a Hard Drive. This way you have a safe 'back up' that never leaves the Post House. We delivery to Stations on DVCProHD 720/60... but it is always good to have that High End Master Transfer (SR) Tape. I then email the time code #s of the selected takes and those shots alone are Tape to Tape Color Corrected (HDCam SR to HDCam SR)... then those Corrected Selects get sent back as Apple ProRes HQ on a Hard Drive or pulled off a Server. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris Burke Posted June 23, 2009 Share Posted June 23, 2009 HDCam SR is MUCH higher quality than ProRes HQ. the Sr is full 1920x1080, 4:4:4 at up to 880Mbps, ProResHQ is 4:2:2 1920x1080, 220 (i think max) Mbps. Plus, you then have a tape MASTER which can be downconverted to any format just going deck to deck. I highly recommend getting yourself a tape, HDCam SR if only for the archival qualities of it... The numbers are much higher, but really, unless you are pulling keys for green screen work, are you really going to see the difference. ProRes HQ is 10 bit 4:2:2. Not all labs deliver SR in 4:4:4,infact most give you 4:2:2 if they do, you are locked into a very expensive deck rental fee. If the lab you choose (sorry I can not recommend one, I'm in the US) can scan to an uncomressed Quick time or Cineform 4:4:4, or dpx, then your wallet will be a lot fuller at the end of the day. SR is a great format at a very dear price. If this is a short then go to drive, if for a feature then tape may be a better option. Any way you cut it, SR is very expensive. There is no "player only" SR deck that I know of and the cost of a one day rental around here is about $1500 per day, plus you need a 4:4:4 capable card to capture it. With careful back up and drive maintenance, tapeless is the way to go. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Rakoczy Posted June 23, 2009 Share Posted June 23, 2009 The numbers are much higher, but really, unless you are pulling keys for green screen work, are you really going to see the difference. ... but if you expect your spot to go Regional or National.... SR is the only way to go and what a cheap assurance it is to transfer your footage from the start to HDCamSR... so you have it... for whatever you want... ...makes sense to me.. I do it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Premium Member Vincent Sweeney Posted June 23, 2009 Premium Member Share Posted June 23, 2009 Think about the application here. Tape is a bad idea, as it is in general these days. Sometimes you have to think like a producer when addressing someone else's concern. If you are setting up a longer term workflow pipeline, CineForm beats any tape format. ProRes is more than enough for this and most projects. Go to tape at the end and/or to deliver. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Rakoczy Posted June 23, 2009 Share Posted June 23, 2009 I could not disagree more Vincent... see, to me.. anything worth shooting on Film is worth transferring to HDCam SR... but that is just me.... I like the idea that... hey, you spent this much... for a few dollars more you can have a permanent 4.4.4 or 4.2.2 record (without having to go back to the neg and retransferring)... so, from here out, you are dealing with Selected Takes only... Sign me up!!!!! :wub: But I am a HUGE fan (like you) of Apple ProRes HQ... Fantastic! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Premium Member Adrian Sierkowski Posted June 23, 2009 Premium Member Share Posted June 23, 2009 If you are color correcting while you are transferring to digital file then perhaps you are right. If you are not, then you're going to need the color space and data the SR can offer you. It is not that much more expensive for the tape, let alone the deck time in the post house to later just digitize it. What would be wisest would be to make an HDCamSR master and DVCam at the same time, you then edit off of the DVCam then go back and just color correct you selects off of the SR into a finished spot before making all your down conversions therefrom. At the same time, this workflow may be well out of budget, in which case you're stuck with what you can get, you know. ProResHQ is a nice format and it's something most of my S16 stuff winds up getting edited on as well as what most of the DVDs get created from (ProresHQ-->uncompressed 10bit SD--->DVD). Again, though, I would only recommend going to ProRes if you get yourself a supervised transfer and can sit there and make sure everything is as you wish it to be. Again, that's just me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Rakoczy Posted June 23, 2009 Share Posted June 23, 2009 I agree Adrain.. except for the DVCam part.... go neg to HDCam SR.... from that Sr to Hard Drive via Apple ProRes HQ... Best of both worlds... best bang for you buck! ;) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Premium Member Adrian Sierkowski Posted June 23, 2009 Premium Member Share Posted June 23, 2009 Yeah, I mean I'd only go to DVCam if It was a best light or one light and I knew i'd be going back to the HDCamSR for a supervised, save me the need to go to ProRes with ALL the footage and I can just get a deck for a day and digitize the DVCam tapes, Edit, EDL, Conform to HDCamSR, Tape to Tape Color Correct, Downconversions. 99% of the time when i'm working on S16mm (shorts) it's just all to HDCamSR, supervised, and then into prores and edited. It's a lot less footage than normal and we get through the color correction with my own colorist in 'round 6 hrs, so that makes economic sense for those type projects. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Premium Member Paul Korver Posted June 29, 2009 Premium Member Share Posted June 29, 2009 I love this post & all the solutions offered here. Screw $100,000 SR decks. At Cinelicious we've invested in LTO-4 and all our workflows are tapeless until the very end. Our LTO investment was about $20K for small library and with our "2K Data Spots" workflow we've been delivering 10-bit LOG DPX sequences to clients on LTO4 (in addition to 422 2K ProRes and 444 2K Cineform versions on hard drive). On the receiving end our clients can access those native data files with a $5K investment in a single LTO4 drive which is an open format and therefore can be used to back up/access not only film master DPX files, but R3D RED camera data or any other data with no compression loss at all. Another benefit is that LTO-4 has a 30 year shelf life and instead of a hard drive which is less than 5. And you can archive all digital assets that relate to a particular project (Final Cut / Avid Project file, VFX project files, DVD builds, etc etc) all in the same place... as opposed to having an SR master and then project files on drive or DVD elsewhere. Wether we're scanning at 2K in realtime from a Spirit 4K or our far less expensive Diamond Clear HD direct-to-drive I'm loving that people are catching on to the benefits of avoiding video tape. However, you won't see that workflow pushed by any any post house invested in video because they want to keep charging for the expensive decks they're paying off. My 2 cents. -Paul Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Rakoczy Posted June 29, 2009 Share Posted June 29, 2009 And you can archive all digital assets that relate to a particular project (Final Cut / Avid Project file, VFX project files, DVD builds, etc etc) all in the same place... as opposed to having an SR master and then project files on drive or DVD elsewhere. -Paul Why would this matter? To me, the safest thing is to do the original Master Transfer to SR... then dump to Hard Drive.. and back up that Hard Drive... at the same place... or stored separately. I don't see why that is a selling point. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Premium Member Paul Korver Posted June 29, 2009 Premium Member Share Posted June 29, 2009 Why would this matter? To me, the safest thing is to do the original Master Transfer to SR... then dump to Hard Drive.. and back up that Hard Drive... at the same place... or stored separately. I don't see why that is a selling point. Hi David, I view the ability to put project files in the same LTO archive as the original media as more of a side benefit than a a major selling point. Mainly because over the long term it's less hassle to keep track of drives... and keep changing those drives every few years for archival safety. I mean once it's been a year or two since you've accessed a project do you really want those files on tape-labeled hard drives stacking up on shelves? I guess it depends how many projects you do but if it's a lot that can become a pretty unruly way of long term storage. What about in 5 years? Plug in the drive and hope is spins up? Remind yourself to get new drives at 4 years and transfer data? Again... you may view this as trivial if you don't have a lot of media going though your system but a lot of production companies I've been speaking with lately are loving the piece of mind option of having everything in one place, and knowing it's fine for 30 years. For filmmakers main benefit is cost savings and access to the original uncompressed source media (SR as you know is compressed) like DPX or R3D or whatever was shot/scanned. If you ever need to re-online/digitize that single project you've got to get on an SR deck. If you own one then great. But most filmmakers don't so they either have to rent one for around $1000/day or pay a post house to get on the deck for a few hours and transfer the files to the post house's SAN (Fee #1) then those files need to be transferred from the SAN to your hard drive (Fee# 2). With the cost of purchasing your own LTO4 drive & software being around $4000 and falling, which would give a filmmaker the ability to offline and reonline at better than SR resolution (4K is no problem) at will and for FREE, and also be much more future proof than an video format like SR since you're writing to opensource bits and bytes not a Sony codec, I think that LTO is an extremely compelling technology. Especially now that you can get about 1TB per tape. Best, Paul Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Premium Member Paul Korver Posted June 29, 2009 Premium Member Share Posted June 29, 2009 Why would this matter? To me, the safest thing is to do the original Master Transfer to SR... then dump to Hard Drive.. and back up that Hard Drive... at the same place... or stored separately. I don't see why that is a selling point. Hi David, I view the ability to put project files in the same LTO archive as the original media as more of a side benefit than a a major selling point. Mainly because over the long term it's less hassle to keep track of drives... and keep changing those drives every few years for archival safety. I mean once it's been a year or two since you've accessed a project do you really want those files on tape-labeled hard drives stacking up on shelves? I guess it depends how many projects you do but if it's a lot that can become a pretty unruly way of long term storage. What about in 5 years? Plug in the drive and hope is spins up? Remind yourself to get new drives at 4 years and transfer data? Again... you may view this as trivial if you don't have a lot of media going though your system but a lot of production companies I've been speaking with lately are loving the piece of mind option of having everything in one place, and knowing it's fine for 30 years. The main benefit for filmmakers is cost savings and access to the original uncompressed source media (SR as you know is compressed) like DPX or R3D or whatever was shot/scanned. If you ever need to re-online/digitize that single project you've got to get on an SR deck. If you own one then great. But most filmmakers don't so they either have to rent one for around $1000/day or pay a post house to get on the deck for a few hours and transfer the files to the post house's SAN (Fee #1) then those files need to be transferred from the SAN to your hard drive (Fee# 2). With the cost of purchasing your own LTO4 drive & software being around $4000 and falling, which would give a filmmaker the ability to offline and reonline at better than SR resolution (4K is no problem) at will and for FREE, and also be much more future proof than an video format like SR since you're writing to opensource bits and bytes not a Sony codec, I think that LTO is an extremely compelling technology. Especially now that you can get about 1TB per tape. Best, Paul Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Most Posted June 30, 2009 Share Posted June 30, 2009 However, you won't see that workflow pushed by any any post house invested in video because they want to keep charging for the expensive decks they're paying off. While that's partially true, there are a lot of advantages to SR tape, even in 2009. Compared to your method, material on SR tape can be played immediately, in real time, on any SR deck (and there are an awful lot of them), in different formats (almost all SR decks have format converter cards). LTO4 may be a fine physical tape data streaming format, however, there is no standard for how files are written to it, and it is nowhere near real time (i.e., 24 fps) when either writing or reading. The format that is used must be available to both the supplier and the user, so whatever backup system is used must be used by both. In many cases, this is not optimal because many of the more efficient backup systems create a local database for file restoration. While it is true that you can use standard TAR files, these are slower to retrieve. Post houses continue to use videotape in part because they're well set up for it. But they also continue to use it because there's nothing in the data world that can match its combination of real time performance, high quality, robust error checking, and common worldwide interchange without conversion. Having a transfer facility deliver both an SR videotape and digitized files (in uncompressed form, ProRes HQ, DNxHD 175x, or whatever other "low loss" format one wants and can use) gives you the best of both worlds. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Rakoczy Posted June 30, 2009 Share Posted June 30, 2009 Especially now that you can get about 1TB per tape. ... am I the only one who sees the irony of LTO described as a 'tapeless' format? 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