Dan Baxter Posted October 16, 2022 Share Posted October 16, 2022 3 hours ago, Tyler Purcell said: Honestly, straight to pro res doesn't do me any favors anyway. We always need to do cleanup work with one light scans anyway. We rarely deliver "straight off scanner", most 1200ft rolls (3x400) from the lab of original camera negative, will need to be broken up by rolls into separate clips and slight grading done due to stock differences. Sure, but if we're talking about versatility if the scanner goes to a delivery format you can also do in-person scanning sessions for clients and they can take their scans with them right away. 3 hours ago, Tyler Purcell said: The dirt is so baked into the negative, even running it through the cleaner 4 times, has made little to no difference. The only way to get it out is to rewash the film, but you want a lab that really knows what they're doing (generally they create their own systems out of film processors because there are no suitable machines designed for rewashing that are actually safe for archival handling of film). You can see the difference in a scan quite easily for embedded vs on-the-surface dirt as the embedded dirt won't be as solid black. 3 hours ago, Tyler Purcell said: I have used the Cintel II quite a bit, it shows the same scratches our FF can conceal no problem with the wet gate. What I mean is with diffusion alone. The Cintels currently have an integrating sphere although they will be moving to a new light that is more similar to the ScanStation cube starting with the next model by the sound of it on their website. For scratch concealment the integrating spheres are the best, but they scatter light 180 degrees whereas the integrating cube scatters it less and directs more light from the light source to the gate. In practical terms that means a shorter exposure for the same amount of light and therefore less motion-blur at faster speeds. 3 hours ago, Tyler Purcell said: Remember, every minute you spend developing your own wet gate, is a minute you aren't billing clients. Where the FF didn't work well out of the box, the solution to make it work, has been very easy. They already had the solution, but they didn't know how to make it work properly, it's weird. Almost like they didn't understand it was a problem to begin with. You have to run the HDS+ at a slower speed to use it don't you? It's got a capstan right after the gate is that correct? That's the design flaw for wet-gate scanning, the capstan should be further away to allow time for your fluid to dry. If you look at the Pictor/Pictor Pro you can see the capstan is located before the gate and before the wetgate sponges. You'd also normally use air knives to assist drying (if you look at the table above Perc has a low evaporation rate whereas Isopropanol has a high evaporation rate). Even if you had a wet lab wetgate scanning with Perc (or the organic equivalent) requires serious engineering, that's another reason why the simpler solutions have their place. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.