Tyler Purcell

10 hours ago, Tim Gillett said:

Hi Tyler, it's  Celemony Capstan. It's been around for some years. Note it only works on some sources. Speech isnt one of them.  It's not cheap to purchase but can be rented.

Ahh yea, I did look at that, doesn't run on Apple silicon or our new PC Ryzen PC lol 

So we can't even run it on any system we have according to their documentation. Have you tried it on Apple Silicon or AMD CPU's with Windows 11? If it works, I will for sure start using it because it appears to be a good tool. 

22 hours ago, Tim Gillett said:

I'm into audio, let's say. Assuming the audio wow problem in the above soundtrack music is "printed in" can it be fixed? Have a listen to the files. This is the short outro music only.

What software did you use to fix this? 

Me too! I really enjoyed it. Not the biggest fan of the vignette concept, I felt it was distracting. Robbie Ryan is a brilliant person tho and his work stands up on every film, Poor Things is no different. The Petzval lens was such a cool idea, I really absolutely love the look and how it drew attention to the subjects. I felt the use of Ektachrome was a shift that worked well and the shifting to black and white, to keep the audience ever slightly on edge, worked too. I also thought it was cool they pulled out a vista vision camera for the scene where they first breathed life into her.

Plot wise, you have to be dedicated for the first hour. I think it takes a while to warm up. Once it's going, on the ship and such, it starts to make sense and the film's trajectory falls more in line with audience expectation. The emotional impact at the end, was something I didn't expect, as the film starts with heavily flawed characters, doing outrages things, but in the end, becomes more of a serious dive into what makes us who we are. It was a clever, round about way to portray such a wildly discussed subject, but it worked nicely, almost with a bowtie at the end. To me, it's his best movie, even though "The Favorite" and "The Lobster" were so damn good. It's heartbreaking picking one of them, I love them so much. 

I still think "The Favorite" is the most re-watchable and most accessible the masses tho. "Poor Things" has similar issues to "Killing of a "Sacred Deer" in that, you have to be willing to take the emotional hit. Some people, are already on edge too much and they just don't have the energy to deal with it. These are pieces of art for the thinking person, not really entertainment. I just can't wait for his next one "Kinds of Kindness", seems like the same damn cast too! hahah 😛

On 4/8/2024 at 8:34 AM, Daniel D. Teoli Jr. said:

Very little of my 8mm is warped, so a warped film gate is not a big deal with the Pictor Pro. But FF should work on making a warped film gate for their HDS+ It is a must! I've got many, many hundred warped 16mm reels. 

Our warped gate for the FF kinda works. Not in love with it, but we're getting somewhere. I think our next iteration should be flawless. Just need another super 8 job with warped film to come in so we can test. 

It's much easier to fix warped 16mm I've found. 

6 hours ago, Jefta Varwijk said:

I was actually quite curious if by now, about 18ish months since last post in this thread, there have been more developments concerning the FF HDS+ scanner. Has it become steady?

FF are working on a new scanner, they aren't really developing new parts for the old one. 

We do have some parts we've made which help, but they're all prototype. Im always willing to share if you have a scanner. 

17 hours ago, Aapo Lettinen said:

yes the emulsion color will differ and different films often have different smell as well, sometimes one can pick up the difference from the smell alone in the darkroom without looking at all

Yea smell for sure!

7 hours ago, Asher Groh said:

Hey everyone – any updates here? Running into this exact issue on footage from a 16SRII. My best guess is that it's the scan, but quite bizarre to see it replicated exactly.

SR's are an entirely different beast. Do you have footage you can post? 

Yea, you can sometimes get close to telling. 

What I do if I have random cans, is to cut 5203, 5207, 5213 and 5219 pieces in the dark. Then I cut a section of the mystery can. I will tape the 4 known good pieces flat. Then I quickly turn the light on and compare the emulsion color. They all have a unique look and even the older vision stocks, look very similar. So you can usually tell right away what it is. Fuji has an entirely different look. You can't run the lights for more than a few seconds tho, the film fades FAST in direct light. So you gotta turn the light on, look very fast, match it and turn the light off. 

On 4/4/2024 at 10:11 PM, Aapo Lettinen said:

Yes movies always 24fps with 172.8 degree shutter and tv stuff 25fps at 180 degree shutter

Thats what I thought. Thanks for clarifying. 

Aren't movies in Europe shot with 24fps? I'm confused on why nobody has ever had an issue with this in the past. 

3 hours ago, Robert Houllahan said:

This method allows for the info to be processed for temporal variations in film velocity in a very high resolution and not just spit out to a framestore.

Very interesting. This is kind of an unusual feature. I assume it's a similar engine to the frame stabilization tricks they use. 

Thanks for the detailed explanation. 

3 hours ago, Robert Houllahan said:

I have not really had any pitch issues on any of the 8mm 16mm or 35mm films with sound we have scanned from either the Scan Station or Xena scanners.

I haven't had any either and I certainly haven't had any issues with AEO outside of seriously warped film. That's why I'm completely confused and perplexed why Perry said he always has issues. 

On 3/29/2024 at 9:35 PM, Robert Houllahan said:

So there is really no actual technical way for wow or flutter to be introduced on these new scanners because the physical scanning speed is irrelevant to the resulting playback speed of the sound or picture.

But like a line scanner on a Spirit for instance, warped film leaves a "wavy" appearance as it's being scanned. So if you're line scanning optical sound track, that effect would also be a problem. Sometimes you get this with AEO as well, but it actually turns into a 24 per second pulse noise, because the frames don't quite align with one another. You don't get wow and flutter, but you do get other symptoms of warped film. 

Nobody has yet to explain HOW a line scanner, which clearly has issues with warped film with image, won't have any issues with warped film on a soundtrack. 

Also, I have never once heard via projector, the issue that Perry has said happens constantly for him. Heck, AEO doesn't appear to have it either. Have you heard it? You've got optical readers in a rack somewhere, have had a bad soundtrack and tried to play it back on another device to see if it's the scanner? 

17 hours ago, Frank Wylie said:

So, unless you take super critical care in editing your mag fullcoat, any other track that has a poorly made splice can send a ripple back through the system and cause speed distortions on other dubbers.

So every soundtrack should be bad then, because nobody ever actually cared about the full coat splices. Most people would yank them off the flatbed and throw them right onto the dubber for low budget productions. 

Again, explain to us "layman" (I've used plenty of dubbers) how a locked dubbing system, can change speed (slip) due to splices. These are sprocketed machines, that run in an interlocked mode. If you stopped the roll of film on the supply, it would snap immediately due to the sprocket drive. So you're talking about the little tiny slop allowed by the tensioners before and after the heads? A bad splice can get caught on a head and for a brief moment, cause that system to sway slightly, but it goes away almost immediately. In fact, some dubbers (I don't know the ones you mentioned) don't even have that system at all. They are hard rollers across the entire pickup path. 

I'd just like to know. I've worked in plenty of dubbing rooms, I've never once had anyone explain or demonstrate what you're discussing. 

First off, I'm not saying you're wrong. I'm saying, there is no evidence you're right. The only evidence I've seen is from something we experience; shrunken film. It's something most projectors DO NOT care about. So for me, I can go down stairs with the print post scan and throw it on a projector to figure out if the print is bad or not. I have yet to find a print, in my entire life, that was bad when projected on a good projector. 

9 hours ago, Perry Paolantonio said:

But I'm sure this is falling on deaf ears. 

Second, I am listening. 

I've scanned thousands of educational films, as I use to work for an archive. 

The only scientific way to test a soundtrack is to play it back on a tuned/tested Magnasync. That's the only method that works. Until you do that, there is no discussion that can be had. 

Frank's example is not scientific, it's just some antidotal information based on some old unserviced high school and university gear. Doubt any of it was properly taken care of. None of the tachometers on the flatbeds at Emerson worked, so the motors free-for-all'd and the soundtracks blew. That's just one example. 

The other assumption that older record players and magnetic tape machines were bad, is also pretty ridiculous. I have a 1958 16mm mag recorder, it's all tubes and the damn thing runs at a perfect 24fps. I also have worked on turntables from that era and they also run perfectly, locked to the 60 cycles of the AC power. These issues aren't either of those. 

You claim that this happens all the time, but why aren't you buying a fully restored projector and testing the prints huh? Why are you defending LG, giving us spec sheets on how it can never be wrong, without even verifying! I'm flabbergasted from someone who preaches perfection on a daily basis and puts up arguments everywhere on the internet daily about how everyone else is shit, you haven't even bothered to do a true scientific test. 

I have done those tests, which is why I back up my "opinion" on the matter. 

16mm is impossible these days. 

I have 35mm if you want some, but only selling in bulk. 

5213

5219

5207

21 hours ago, Perry Paolantonio said:

You claim that AEO Light doesn't introduce wow and flutter

Never once were those words stated. 

21 hours ago, Perry Paolantonio said:

This is incredibly common and we see it all the time

Have you tried listening to the soundtrack with an optical reader? We have. Prints with zero issues on a 60hz Magnasync, are problematic on AEO. 

Film shrinks unevenly, especially at the head. 

The reason why digital tools struggle with some soundtracks, is simply due to micro shrinkage. You don't see it as much in the picture, but it's there in the soundtrack. 

21 hours ago, Perry Paolantonio said:

Or maybe listen to more than just the beginning of the film, because there is no wow in the later portions of the film, indicating the problem is not with the scanner. 

Your defending of Lasergraphics is kinda crazy. You act as if it's impervious to any issues. Everyone and everything is wrong besides the scanner. 

4 hours ago, Mark Dunn said:

As I said, to my ear the narration is unaffected, only the music has the wow. So it's a problem with the source that's built in to the sound mix.

That's what wow and flutter sounds like when the machine is only a few tenths of a FPS off. I know, our scanner does that as well. One could capture at a slower speed for sure, it may help, but I haven't tried that methodology yet since AEO-LITE works so perfectly. It does take more time, but we batch it overnight. 

23 hours ago, Perry Paolantonio said:

It has absolutely nothing to do with the scanner. 

What are you talking about? 

Are you instantly defending LaserGraphics instead of listening to the damn audio and hearing the wow and flutter? That effect is caused by inconsistent speed, period. 

So yes, it would be the device that scanned the audio, which would cause the inconsistent speed. 

PERIOD. 

9 hours ago, Daniel D. Teoli Jr. said:

Is this what the sound is like with a FilmFabriek scanner that Tyler talked about?

It's not distortion, it's the speed of the scanner fluctuating very slightly. Yes, this is what it sounds like and why I use AEO-Lite. 

On 3/18/2024 at 5:57 AM, Alasdair A Doyle said:

Secondly, I have a strange problem with the camera, which I believe is connected to the batteries. Occasionally, when I shoot with the camera, it'll continue to shoot, even when I have released the record button. The only way to stop it, is to remove the battery. Does anyone know what could be the cause of this?

I've seen everything from bad boards to bad connections/switches cause this issue. 

It'll need to see a tech. 

14 hours ago, Gerard Dalton said:

Turns out it was an easy fix. One of the techs basically tested my LTR, saw the problem , took it apart and put it back together in like 30 minutes in front of me and explained all the mechanics. 

What did they say the problem was? If it only took 30 min, musta been something pretty simple like a loose cable or something. 

6 hours ago, Gautam Valluri said:

Once you have a sample of only the camera noise, you can feed it as a noise 'profile' in software like Adobe Audition. It's usually under the "noise reduction" menu. Once the software has the profile, you can remove it from the entire sound recording by doing "Apply profile to entire file" option.

Yea resolve has that tool built in, it can be done on a track basis AND on a clip basis, called voice isolation. It works really great and has been a life saver. I had some clips with train engine noise behind the dialog and it removed it entirely. With bit of tweaking, it actually can sound pretty good, then I'll just add the engine sound back in on the mix in stereo, with a mono dialog track. It's all in real time as you're playing the file back in the timeline. 

So what I'd do is wireless mic him and have him doing the work first on camera, forget sync. 

Then sit him down and go through the process in an interview. 

Like this: 
 

We deal with a lot of warped film. Where I'm a bit embarrassed to show our prototype gates, I will happily make a thread and discuss our final variants when we're done. The good news is that our design works. It doesn't scratch and it's very easy to manufacture. The bad news is that it's very labor intensive to keep running due to running it as a wet gate rather than just old dirty dry film being pulled through a chrome gate, which doesn't sound pleasant. None of the stuff we run through our warped gate, could survive a cleaner, most of it falls apart during the initial inspection, let alone during the scan. We're damn lucky to get anything on most of it. However, we know how to deal with the issues that come up. The biggest issue of course, is what to do with finished results. Every second of most films, varies in issues. So full restoration isn't just about scanning it flat, it's also about stabilizing it since the perfs will be a mess and any automated tools won't work well. So you're doing frame stabilization in Phoenix which is time consuming and takes a lot of effort. The scan is the key tho, the best images get the best results.