stupid telecine question

J.M. O'Malley · February 27, 2005

If I am having film transferred to DV using keycode, when I look at the DV will the code be in the frame? Say I want to use that DV footage to put a clip on the web. Will there be time code on that clip?

Kevin Zanit · February 27, 2005

It depends on if you ask for it to be "burnt in" to the footage. If you do, then yes it will be there. If not, then it won?t.

You can choose to show time code or key code (they are not the same thing by the way) or not to.

Kevin Zanit

J.M. O'Malley · February 27, 2005

So if I don't want it to appear, I ask for it not to be "burnt in" to the footage? Should I ask it to be put somewhere else instead? Or is it just like a file (time code?) that is there? Also, will this difference affect the person editing this?

Thanks.

Phil Rhodes · February 27, 2005

Hi,

Timecode is, by default, a signal that's put onto the tape with the video image but doesn't appear in frame. Traditionally there was an extra track on the edge of the tape - just like film edge numbering - for timecode, or it could actually be put on a spare audio track. With digital formats it's generally just embedded somewhere in the data stream and separated out when the pictures are read off tape, but the effect is the same - you can read it, but you don't necessarily have to see it.

Yes, this will very much affect your editor, as there's no very reliable way to read burnt-in timecode into the edit software. Numbers appearing in frame are just a visual reference; they might have nothing to do with the timecode that's actually on the tape.

If you're talking about something like miniDV or DVCAM, the timecode situation is very simple as most VTRs will send the timecode out down the firewire stream with the video, and basic applications such as Final Cut and Adobe Premiere will read it when they capture the video. Other formats may require you to hook up an extra cable from TC OUT on the VTR to TC IN on the computer's video capture board.

Phil

J.M. O'Malley · February 27, 2005

So if I don't specify anything to the telecine house, the keycode will be there but I won't see it, and I'll be able to use the DV footage for other things besides editing? I've asked for something called "flex files" to be included, since I am not sure if they are needed. Isn't that what matches up the negative and the time code on the tape? Also, several quotes I got from telecine houses were suspiciously low. When I inquired, they said they weren't able to do keycode. What is this about? Is there some other way of editing they use? I haven't asked the editor for help with this because he has never worked with film, only video, so he does not know.

Phil Rhodes · February 27, 2005

Hi,

> So if I don't specify anything to the telecine house, the keycode will be there but I

> won't see it

No. Timecode goes on the tape. It's an eight digit field in the format hours:minutes:seconds:frames (although the "hours" field is often used to represent roll number) and is purely a video thing. A complete Keykode looks something like KX 12 3456 7890, which includes various information about the film, date of manufacture, batch number, and a footage counter. Keykode is exposed onto the edge of the film at manufacture and can be read (as a barcode) when the film is transferred. It's possible to get burnt-in keykode just as a visual check and have the numbers in vision, but that's only for confirmation.

The purpose of all this is to allow you to edit your film production on a computer, then reconform the negative based on those edit decisions. If you're never going to cut the negative, forget about keykode (and if you're never going to cut anything other than DV, forget timecode as well and just use the pictures you want.) There's two main ways of tying together your computer edit and the film cut: there's a hole punched in the head of each lab reel (several processed camera rolls) which represents zero timecode for that reel, or you can have flex files, which are a table of information designed to connect any given timecode to the keykode it represents. The latter method is considered more secure, because there is a keykode every few inches along the film, whereas the timecode is based solely on that one punched frame at the head of the reel. Clearly if there's any damage to the film or mismanagement of timecode you can then end up with the whole reel being out of sync with what you think it is, whereas keykode will detect that happening. On the other hand, keykode has its own difficulties, such as around the end of rolls where the film was fogged during loading.

> they said they weren't able to do keycode. What is this about?

They probably just don't have a keykode reader (which is basically just a laser barcode reader) for their telecine.

> Is there some other way of editing they use?

You could still cut based on punch-hole timecode.

Phil

Phil Rhodes · February 27, 2005

Hi,

Oh, and by the way: if you're getting transfers to DV, and you're sure you actually need timecode and/or flex files for keykode, make sure that they do actually put the timecode on the DV. miniDV is considered an "amateur" format by many places and they may assume you do not need or would not know what to do with correct timcode, and just may not bother connecting the appropriate cables. This is preposterous, as miniDV looks almost as good as or better than BetaSP, which would unquestionably get timecode, and is a great offline format.

Some places may even try to tell you that miniDV can't take timecode; they're wrong.

Phil

Theo Lipfert · February 27, 2005

Also, several quotes I got from telecine houses were suspiciously low. When I inquired, they said they weren't able to do keycode. What is this about?
<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Personally, I wouldn't use them, regaredless of whether I needed keycode or not. I have had students pick the low bidder for transfer work and get back miniDV tapes that were clearly shot with a camera pointed at a screen, their film just projected and shot. They re-transfered at a reputable place, and we compared the difference. On the cheap transfer, you could literally see the dv camera's auto iris kick in (with slight delay) as scenes changed from dark to light. That place was called A1 or something like that.

If you are a student, most good transfer places will give a discount. If not, it is still worth using a place that comes recommended. You can search on this forum for places in NYC (like DuArt) or you can send out of town -- check out www.posthouse.com in atlanta, or www.filmfx.com in Santa Monica, or Colorlab -- which has an NYC office but does their work in Maryland. You can also ask for a discount, worse case they say no.

If the cost is less that $175 per hour (with a discount) I would be very suspicious.

Theo

Bozeman, MT

March 1, 2005

If you are a student, most good transfer places will give a discount. If not, it is still worth using a place that comes recommended. You can search on this forum for places in NYC (like DuArt) or you can send out of town -- check out www.posthouse.com in atlanta, or www.filmfx.com in Santa Monica, or Colorlab -- which has an NYC office but does their work in Maryland. You can also ask for a discount, worse case they say no.

If the cost is less that $175 per hour (with a discount) I would be very suspicious.

Theo

Bozeman, MT

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I just had my film done at posthouse.com (Cinepost). They did a good job (but I have no other telecine to compare it to). Although the bill claimed they did "best light" I can only recall one adjustment to lighting when there were many spots that I thought could have used it.

One of my concerns was price. Myron quoted $50 per hour for prep and $135 per hour for telecine. I estimated 2800 feet of reg8 and super8 film and they estimated 1 hour of prep and that he could telecine at 600 feet per hour. He estimated I would have 3:30 of run time and the estimate came out to $710. He assured me that they keep notes during processing and I would receive a detailed bill on work done.

My father had counted an empty reel so we actually sent them 2400 feet of film and the run time turned out to be 2:52, 18% less than estimated. But the bill turned out to be $990, 38% higher than estimated. That is 68% higher per unit of run time than the quote. The bill only said that they took 2.5 hours of prep (11 reels needed to be spliced together to make three 800 foot reels) and instead of the 4 hours to telecine 3 hours of film (optimistic based on what I read here) it was 6 hours of telecine time. No other explanation could be found on the bill.

When I told them that I wanted to understand the bill Myron said that the quote was best case. I said they should quote typical case. John said that there was shrinkage and brittle film. I told them I thought the film seemed to be in good condition except possibly for two 50' or so sections which I saw image problems with. One they identified as a misthreaded film in the camera that caused vertical double images and the other they identified as water damage. When John, the processing person saw the images I emailed to him he said he had been confusing my project with another one. So it became clear to me that they were not going off any written record of my project from a couple weeks prior and it would be unlikely that I would get anything other than an after the fact rationalization. When I told them I didn't want to renegotiate price and that I was fine with this if this is the time it took to do the job right, I just wanted to get a sense that I was not a victim of lowballing they were unsympathetic.

I also wanted to be reassured that the water damage had all the mold destroyed, that the 50' of water damaged film would not jeopardize the rest of the 800' reel that they had consolidated it onto, and that it had been thoroughly cleaned so that I got all the image I could. I have little knowledge or experience in film, but they did little to reassure me with their short replies.

Alex

Nathan D. Lee · March 1, 2005

I just recently finnished my first film and did somewhat of the same situation. I did a clean pass onto MiniDV and then had them do a second pass witht he same color adjustment marks with the key code. It was only 400ft and i was able to keep under my half hour minimum. But just tell the house you are working with that yo are new and ask tons of questions.

Bottom line, if you are never going back to film do not worry about it. If you are, talk a lot to the your post house. Good luck!

March 1, 2005

I just recently finnished my first film and did somewhat of the same situation. I did a clean pass onto MiniDV and then had them do a second pass witht he same color adjustment marks with the key code. It was only 400ft and i was able to keep under my half hour minimum. But just tell the house you are working with that yo are new and ask tons of questions.
Bottom line, if you are never going back to film do not worry about it. If you are, talk a lot to the your post house. Good luck!

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Well although the transfer to miniDV looks good and I think got most of the information on the film, I think I will stick the film in a closet for a decade and consider doing a rescan then to squeeze out the last bit of detail from the film at the format of that time. We will probably be able to do at least 1K scan, 4:4:4 and much lower compression given the available bandwidth and storage technology then.

I did a lot of research beforehand. I am an electrical engineer so very technical minded. I was very respectful of their time. But I think these posthouses know that their typical home transfer person is a one time customer so I would imagine that that affects the way some of those telecine vendors treat them.

Alex

J.M. O'Malley · March 4, 2005

Aah. This is good to know about posthouse, because I had been considering using them. They offered me the lowest quote and still sounded reasonably knowledgeable. Now I will use someplace local, so that if there is trouble at least I can go back and talk to the person. I certainly wouldn't want to be charged more than what I was quoted. I got a quote from posthouse for $185 per hour, and haven't really been able to get any specifics on what the charge is for prep or anything like that.

Anybody know about Magno Sound in NYC?

Josh Hill · March 7, 2005

www.movielab.com has Rank Cintel III transfers for 75 an hour. I haven't used them yet, but they are apparently reputable (they're next door to Colorlab) and all the research I've done has said good things.

March 9, 2005

www.movielab.com has Rank Cintel III transfers for 75 an hour. I haven't used them yet, but they are apparently reputable (they're next door to Colorlab) and all the research I've done has said good things.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

But they don't mention wetgate on the site? Is that implied by the equipment?

Alex