Robert Houllahan

Cintel dominated the market for decades and then the Spirit arrived... trends change and many shops have both a Spirit and a DSX or similar. I do not know about the figures exactly but I think Cintel is making a bit of a comeback. I personally feel the Spirit gives a bit of a hard look with color that is not entirely real. Many hi end shops are using telecine for dailies now and doing finish for TV spots on an Arriscan.. I do believe the CCD in the Arriscan is the same or similar to the D20 but without the bayer color mask, and it is on a motorized stage to allow it to scan up to 6K. Color in the scanner is constructed from a three to six pass individual R,G,B flash. I like the spirit but it is not the ultimate scanner and I feel it has been overtaken by other machines... that said I would not mind having one but they are very expensive , even on the used market. -Rob-

It could have something to do with how Kodachrom works, it is essentially three B+W color filtered emulsions which have color dyes added in processing, much like three strip technicolor compacted into one piece of film... -Rob-

The Spirit is a line array CCD machine, it has 4 lines, a B+W luminance, and three color lines... The Vialta is essentially a 3CCD camera with a beam splitter. I believe the Arriscan is probably the first full area CCD scanner it uses a full frame B+W CCD array with a set of R,G,B Led's that are flashed in sequence. The tube heater voltage only really matters if it is way off, mostly putting it under regulated computer control has a factor in extending it's life not in picture quality. -Rob-

We have Dave Walker's (DAV now Nova) Digital Deflection systems in our MK3's have all tube parameters under complete automated computer control including heater voltage. I believe later URSA's and all new CRT machines are likewise equipped. The MK3 can actually be a lower noise machine that a ursa because allot of the systems used did not introduce as much digital switching noise into the telecine. -Rob-

A good CRT scanner like a Millenium or DSX/C-Reality (they share the same basic chassis) or a Nova (I have not seen/used a Nova Personally) is no more or less a hi-end niche product than a Spirit HD/2K/4K or an Arriscan. I have had film I have shot on a Spirit and a DSX in the same facility and there really is not much difference in terms of sharpness or picture quality, they are different but basically equal machines. There are pin registered gate options for the field of modern CRT scanners. I have two Cintel MK3's and have retrofitted them with every possible aftermarket option I could get (from DAV, Metaspeed, etc) and with all the modern bits they are very reliable. A new HD/2K/4K machine will be as reliable as a CCD machine and total cost of ownership is within a few dollars annually. As to a bayer mask film scanner, I feel it is a good option for an inexpensive telecine replacement but probably cannot match the kind of picture quality a machine like a Arriscan or Millenium can make as they are full bandwidth RGB scanners that extract all of the potential from a film negative. -Rob-

I worked on an archival project last year for the state of Massachusetts which included something like 30K/ft. of kodachrome from what must have been it's first years (1936?-45) all 16mm shot by the water department detailing the construction of the reserviors and water supply to the city of Boston. All the Kodachrome looked like it was shot yesterday, practically no degradation, I would suspect that the 100yr. estimated life for K40 is a big underestimate if stored correctly. And it was all beautiful too BTW, the 1930's-40' in better than HD! As other have stated Dwaines is still running it... -Rob-

I have been using 5205 quite a bit for nighttime timelapse shots with my Eyemo and Revolution motor, much of what I have been doing has been capturing celestial movement at night, stars going by with earthly objects like cities and houses, trees, etc in frame. I also did a music video for a marching band a while ago which was all 7205 much of it shot at Coney Island during the day and night. I have been using 05 under mixed lighting without filters and have been very happy with it's mixed lighting quality with tungsten and Sodium, etc. sources rendering pleasantly and easily bent back in telecine. I do not know if I would select it as a primary stock in a all tungsten job but it does do well under mixed light and is a great stock.. -Rob-

I probably have a slight advantage because I handle film all the time working at the lab here, however I cut the short on my friends broke down steenbeck (even though we have a nice S16 8 plate at Cinelab) and all it takes to cut negative is a Maier&Hancock hot splicer, a clean setup and mucho patience. As much as I like beer, I do not recommend mixing it and negative cutting. -Rob-

I think some of the D-Slr's have frame to frame exposure/color issues, this has been mentioned by a number of long term timelapse shooters, you may need to use manual lenses for this. Should work but slow and painful.. -Rob-

I have a short i just (finally??) finished cutting from workprint on a steenbeck, mostly 7222, some 7231 and Hi-Con and 7266 X-Processed to neg (for one 370fps shot) I am actually stupid enough to be cutting my own negative right now. Soundtracks 50% done and 16mm prints to follow..no really.. I guess it's more than a crush..? -Rob-

We have a San-Labs Spectraclean film cleaner which uses isopropanol as a cleaning agent, it has a special sealed chamber with a set of wetted rotary buffers that wet and clean the film, then there is a stack of four dry rotary buffers that buff the film while the alcohol dries. The film is then taken up over four ptr's and tight wound on a reel. The only real issue with alcohol cleaning is making sure the alcohol dries without leaving spots or streaks, if it does leave spots they can be hard to get out. -Rob-

That is the question, does the dolby digital bitstream which is a block of pixels in between the perfs use color as an encoding component or will the block work as density on a B-W print? I don't know, probably have to contact dolby.. -Rob-

The optical stereo is not ultra-spec new sound but it has a nice analog midrange, dialog is clear but block bumping bass you don't get. Are you blowing anything up in the film? I love 22 and 31, 22 is always surprising to me when and 31 is so smooth. 31 and hard light cuts, get all the B+W while you can before you have to start buying it on the street... -Rob-

Cellulose Triacetate is made from wood pulp or cotton, then solvent cast, polyester is a petrochemical derived product. My point is film can be made from organic renewable resources where many computer products cannot. I think chemical remediation will be a very big business in the coming years and we will have to find new ways of dealing with these chemical byproducts and using different solvents to do the job. -Rob-

Actually most film base (acetate) is organic plastic, Kodak from Bone and Fuji from seaweed... All Organic chemistry... -Rob-

I know but it's easier than building a wafer fabrication plant and we have those too here in Massachusetts, Our C-n-C shop builds parts for the Space Station, plus I have a Perforator sitting here from the past, this lab's been around in one way or another since the 40's If I only had all that stuff they threw out over the years! -Rob-

What? you can't see the future? Damn, we can all see the future on the planet I'm from, too bad. :lol: Hula

You got a yacht? Damnnn.... Life's good in Jersey, go devils! Hula

Many hi end still photos are made with film, the low end news market is of course all digital but real film is still widely used in many forms of advertising and artistic imagery. As far as digital replacing everything in human life I would say you should look at just how wasteful digital technology really is, both in terms of raw energy wasted running computers and huge server farms, i.e. the new Google server farm which burns up 108Mw in Oregon, most electricity in the US is made by burning coal. I had a Baselight-4 here at the lab on eval for two months and it took as much electricity to run as five continuous motion picture processors... Computer technology is also made from highly exotic and toxic materials, many petrochemical products and things like berrillyum and arsenic and mercury are in computers, these devices have very short life cycles and the whole computer business model is based on consumptive waste, considering energy costs have more than doubled in the US last year I cannot see how this is sustainable at all... Not that film does not have it's environmental problems but it is all organic chemistry and materials (for the most part) and when properly dealt with it leaves no persistent carcinogens in the environment, takes less energy and has a extremely long life cycle, in terms of equipment and material.. I like the Red and Jim's follow through of Jeff Kreines idea, it was bound to happen but I feel sustainability and energy issues are going to intrude on the computer business model far sooner than people realize. -Rob-

Welcome to the wonderful and less complex world of filmmaking, try pressing the trigger a few times while smacking the side of the camera, if the movement does not knock loose then you might want to pop the door off and start messing withe the film in the movement, perhaps your loop is too short? the cameras are simple, thinking simple is part of the appeal of making moving pictures with film... -Rob-

Well Bob Hum who works at Cinelab was working for Super-8 sound in Cambridge Mass when it was founded, and he runs the Color department at Cinelab, Vigent has made a business specializing in 8mm film and there is no denying it, I think the Millenium machine is just about the best Telecine ever made so if you can buy the ticket then the ride is good. We will be the last lab in the western world to have a Scan/HD capability and that is fine with me, I just bought the best optical printer ever made...call me a traditionalist.... Plus I am cutting my first directorial picture (a short) on a steenbeck for a 16mil B+W print no DI involved, and some Oscar contenders agree that DI is lower quality for more money.... -Rob-

I thought both Spectra and Pro-8 did am I wrong? I would like to setup S8 cartridge stuffing but don't have the staff right now... -Rob-

Times change and labs have to change with the times, plus look at Bear Sterns a supposedly rock of financial stability that is a train-wreck now, you can run any business into the ground, even a lab :blink: One thing has remained constant and that is people want to shoot on film, and continue to do so, furthermore film is the best format overall for many situations. I love film, I have made it so my life is full of film, I certainly do not work at Cinelab for great financial rewards, I did a HD shoot at harvard a few weeks ago that paid a considerable percentage of my annual lab income, but... I am shooting a feature in NY/NJ and have run through almost 400 rolls of 16mm for it and I am timing all of the dailies and possibly will grade the final 2K scan, would I do that all again on the next picture? maybe not my head is almost melting but I have a very complete idea of the whole process. I am working to make our lab into the lab I would want which includes a very keen eye towards a completely green organization, film is all organic chemistry and I believe it can be made not only textbook green but fully sustainable as well which includes biomass remediation of chemistry. Making computers and their systems (including d-cine cams) requires exotic plastics, metals and many persistent carcinogens and those systems are obsolete quickly and consume allot of power. As energy and environmental concerns become more pressing I think film will be seen as more valuable. As long as someone makes film somewhere, be it 35mm, etc we can slit it and perf it and make 16mm or 8mm out of it, and thus film, and film labs, will persist for a long time.. -Rob-

I hardly think any labs have been killed off by transfer houses, in fact as a lab co-owner I wonder how all those small transfer places keep afloat! I think most labs have a split on profitability between process and transfer... and most labs do upgrade their gear and offer as good, or better services than lower end transfer joints. I know that most of the film we process gets transfered here too, sometimes just for dailies that will then go on to a scan, i.e. we are doing a 2-perf feature with SD disk dailies right now and that will go on to a scan elsewhere. There is trillions and trillions of feet of 8mm and 16mm home movies, etc. out there that i think the smaller stand alone transfer company lives on and then there is billions of feet of new film shot every year and much of the new stuff needs work that a little transfer house cannot do, like keycode reading and flex file generation. Plus a lab will have both Alcohol/Prista and ultrasonic cleaning, etc. so there are many advantages to using a lab for a complete package.. The road diverges at the Hi-end - lo-End and most labs can feed both as a "Front End" I know that there is film we process and do best light dailies for that ends up going on to a Spirit or Arriscan, etc and the costs of process and dailies is insignificant in this realm..but we do well on it. Then there is the guy with a super-8 camera and a few rolls of tri-x that we would process and maybe transfer or maybe he shoots it off the wall or sends it to a guy with a sniper, etc... the machines used are allot cheaper than a Cintel (in fact you could buy 4 or 5 snipers for the cost of the tube I just bought) but the Cintel machine is all 10bit, not CCD but flying spot and has a all real time color corrector (we have a Copernicus 8X8 and a DaVinci 888) which processed color at 16bits in real time with secondaries and power windows, etc. I could not imagine getting all the film out we do if I had to mess around with a mouse and a pc color corrector tied to a slow projector... I think labs are doing fine, the few that have gone out recently (like Magno or A1) had real estate issues not lack of business problems..and if anything feeding hi end post shops, etc or doing dailies for indie features is good money for a lab. No wet lab is going to be a get rich quick scheme or millionaire maker but you can do ok working in this realm.. -Rob-

$12K per lens is cheap..... -Rob-