steve hyde

my 64t is not going to Flying Spot. I'm sending it to Cinelab in Boston for a rank (workprint). I will take my selects into FSFT for supervised color correction, image stabilization, grain reduction, power window work etc. etc. FSFT is a great for finishing, but too expensive for workprints. Steve

I use Forde Labs here in Seattle. This telecine was done by FSFT Flying Spot Film Transfer - also in Seattle. If you want to work with telecined footage rather than projecting the camera original, I think you will find color negatives to be the easiest and will yeild the most consistantly useable images. 64T is a film that is designed for making photographic copies of visual works of art. The film has an amazing capacity to accurately render colors without oversaturating them. It will be a great film for Super 8 projection, but will require a lot of light to make good images. The 64T emulsion is not really designed for contemporary motion picture workflows. It's a still camera film. I will use it mostly for projection not telecine. Steve

Hi Brant, David is offering some great insights here that are in check with my own, albeit limited, experiences with these stocks. My first test rolls of 7280 (64T) are just off to telecine this week so I can't make informed comparisons of the stocks. I do agree with David that graininess can be reduced by creating contrast through lighting. Here is an example a couple of shots I made with a Nikon R 10 camera on 7218 (500T) The first shot the lens was open to 1.8 and I asked the lab to push the film one stop. The second shot is a macro made on 7217 (200T) and processed normal. The last shot is from the 7218 roll that was pushed +1. All three shots were filmed at 54fps in a low light space. http://steve-hyde.com/colorneg_results.mov This particular example was transfered on a Shadow Telecine that is equiped with a *real* super 8 gate. (many rank machines use modified gates for super 8) The example is highly compressed, but it is what I have on line at the moment for reference. When I get my 7280 tests back I will post some results. hope this is useful, Steve

...I agree - the myth died with the old reversal stocks. Nice looking stills. Steve

..This is how I see it too. A cheap kit might look like 3 Beaulieu 4008 camera bodies and a run of c-mount lenses at a cost of just a few thousand dollars and no insurance policy.

FSFT does offer this service. They are using a Kona 2 SDI card. Call Eric and ask him about it. This service is not referenced on the website. Steve

...good point on Vision 2 because if you shoot by the unofficial one stop over rule for Vision 2, 7217 with an 85 on the lens should be rated at EI 50 Steve

...yes the same thing is said about the color negative stocks. It can and does look sixteenish when care is taken to fatten the negative and when care is taken to make a good transfer and care is taken to compress the 4:2:2 betacam to DVD. Kodak 50D would be a very useful addition to the already available negatives. I have never shot this stock -just the 7212, which is a T film. If it were available at Kodak student discount prices, I'm sure I would shoot loads of 50D on S8. Steve

...apparently the important point I made a few posts back was missed. The SDI direct to hard drive at CineLab does not cost extra. This is what makes it so appealing. They send their hard drive along with your tapes at no added charge. If you don't send the hard drive back they charge your credit card for it. Simul records to BetaSP and DVCAM are done at the cost of tape stock if you ask for them. Other post houses charge extra for the SDI to hard drive. CineLab told me they do not. Steve

It can be larger. It can be smaller. It depends on which size DVCAM shell you buy. Steve

I think the difference is the structure of the tape itself. DVCAM has metal qualities that make it more robust. (I'm not a tape expert) The DVCAM tapes I use are cased in mini-dv shells therefore the tape is the same size. Keep in mind HDcam tapes are now cased in mini-dv shells too. Running time on these little bugs is about a dollar a minute. Steve

I am in agreement with the skeptics, but keep in mind the fact that a direct to hard drive SDI does not have to come at an added expense. A simul record at Cinelab in Boston via BetaSP, DVCAM and direct to SDI is the hourly plus tape. The only extra cost is sending the hard drive back to Boston. I will have DVCAM and SDI uncompressed files to compare sometime in the next couple weeks. Steve

Thanks for the complementary words on my website. I have included a link to it in my signature under "work in progress" for anyone interested. I have not had time make the updates badly needed, but want to show what I do have, which at this point is one little kodachrome composition and one roll of handprocessed 7265 that has been intentionally distressed. I'm sending 800ft of super 8 to CineLab in Boston for a 10bit SDI to hard drive either Friday or Monday. The reels are a mix of all sorts of material: everything from handprocessed b&w negatives to found Kodachromes to cross processed 7280. I will plan to get some results posted for review when I get it back. Steve

...Hi Sean, here is a music video that one of my collaborators shot for "The Makers". http://www.worldfamousedit.com/pages/movie...cvid/makers.htm The film stock is 7217 desaturated in post and transfered via Shadow Datacine at FSFT. The formats are sort of "ramped" in this picture. The first images are super 8, the middle and end are S16 and 35. All tracking shots are 35. I had nothing to do with the production of this video, but got the low-down from one of the cinematographers. hope this is useful for your research, EDIT: here is a link to a discussion about it: http://filmshooting.com/scripts/forum/view...681ee851b37af25

...Well, Santo makes a strong case for squeezing every drop of juice out of super 8. It is nice that the 10 bit transfers make it far more cost effective to do this as he illustrated above - by bypassing expensive DigiBeta online costs. Let's also keep in mind this workflow can be applied to all film formats - as he also stated above. The beauty of super 8 is the beauty of film grain. To get beautiful film grain the pixels need to reside behind the grain. This is what Santo's comparison of DV and 10 bit at the top shows. For feature productions this workflow won't catch on very soon because there is way too much disk space required, but for short-form films, this opens a lot of possibilites for finishing a film on broadcast quality tape much more economically. For me the aesthetic of super 8 goes beyond just how it looks. There is also an ethos characterized by making the most from least. It's a lo-fi thing. And I always feel a bit disapointed when I see artists taking hi-fi and trying to make it look or sound lo-fi. You know: adding feedback to a recording in post or putting stupid scratch filters on video. Instead take care to spend a a few hundred dollars to have a Beaulieu, Nizo or Leicina serviced and then spend a few thousand dollars on film stock and transfers. Save thousands on rental fees and put that money to creative use. Make a super 8 film that uses grain-crawl in its visual design and takes advantage of super8's photogenia. Put the pixels behind the grain and refresh film festival audiences that are growing tired of looking at the harsh reality-TV photogenia of HD and video. This said, if you have an Aaton XTR laying around....by all means.. Steve

Not entirely tapeless. Tapes make nice back ups and they are great for off line editing. It is becoming clear however, that making xfers direct to hard drives is the wave of the future - Especially for people like me working in short-form films. (The cost of disk space is the issue) Since this is a new development, I do not know many people who have adopted a work flow built around master files on a hard drive. I'm planning to make my next xfer a simul record to DVCAM and SDI direct uncompressed 10bit to hard drive. I want to make my offline edits from the DVCAM and then conform the edits to the uncomressed files on the external hard drive before taking the final cut back to the posthouse to finish on DigiBeta. Is it realistic to think that I can conform my EDL to the uncomressed files on the external hard drive using a G5 dual proc (3.5GB) or do I need special hardware? Please share your experiences. Thanks in advance. The links below are in reference to the technology being used by the posthouses I work with. http://www.blackmagic-design.com/ http://www.aja.com/products_kona.html

.....So those of you that are using this 10 bit uncompressed SDI to hard drive work flow - how are you doing it? I don't understand why conforming an EDL to the uncompressed files would require a special hard drive (??) I do understand that finishing will require a Black Magic or Kona card and Digibeta or whatever tape deck. So if I'm finishing at posthouse, do I really need a RAID or SCSI or SATA II? The files will just be sitting on a drive - no rendering or anything.... I'm confused. :blink: Is it unrealistic to think that I can conform my EDL to the uncompressed files via firewire to an external? If I buy an external drive to commit to this task, which external type drives are most appropriate? Thanks in advance, Steve

...thanks, I'll have to look into what these drives are all about. I use a university-owned editing suite so I may be able to request that the computer be upgraded. I'll ask the guys that run the lab if there are any computers that can handle the conform. We have an HVX-200 camera on order so I think we are getting ramped-up for HD. Steve

I'm planning to ask for the direct to hard drive uncompressed files on my next xfer, which will happen in the next week or two, but I'm still a bit unclear about working with the files. Thinking out loud here (please chime in with suggestions if I'm off base) I will be asking for a simul record to DVCAM and SDI hard drive so I don't think I will need to generate proxy files from the uncompressed. I will capture the DVCAM into the NLE with plans to conform the EDL to the uncompressed later in the online. So my question is on conforming edits in the online: Will I be able to conform my edits to the uncompressed before taking my drive back to the posthouse for finishing? I will be using a dual proc G5 3.5 gb ram. Do I need special hardware? It would be nice to walk in dump all the cuts out to HD or DigiBeta without having to spend 300.00hr shuttling around with tapes. Thanks in advance for insights and or tips, Steve

....a very timely post Santo. Let me offer a couple of corrections since I may be responsible for spreading some misinformation on the other board. Flying Spot Film Transfer in Seattle is running a AJA Kona 2 card. here is the propaganda about it: SDI, HD-SDI, Dual Link HD-SDI 4:4:4 PCI-X Bus Interface DVCProHD hardware acceleration HDV hardware acceleration Dynamic RT Extreme hardware acceleration Broadcast Quality hardware 10-bit Up-convert Broadcast Quality hardware 10-bit Down-convert 12 bit HD component and SD component/composite analog output 8-Channel 24-bit AES and Embedded Audio AJA QuickTime? Drivers Support for Apple Final Cut Pro? Support for Adobe AfterEffects, PhotoShop...and Much More! RS-422 Machine Control Cables Standard?K3-Box Breakout Optional 3-year Warranty source: http://www.aja.com/products_kona.html CinePost in Atlanta is using a Black Magic card (I think - not sure which one) http://www.blackmagic-design.com/products/hd/ So to clarify, these are not tape dumps this is full uncompressed 10 bit at both posthouses.

I recommend reading this book for comprehensive explanations on how film technology in post production works: Film Technology in Post Production You can only learn so much from asking questions in web forums. What you need is a comprehensive understanding of your options. You are looking for some kind of consensus regarding a best work flow scenario, but you need to evaluate all of your options by learning what they are - then you can ask well-informed questions with your post house and they will gladly educate you further regarding your options and the changing technologies. Good luck, Steve

...and keep in mind, by the time you are done shooting it is possible the technology will have changed again. Kodak is selling this as a post production time saver that negates the need to conform your edits back to your film reels: http://www.kodak.com/US/en/motion/support/tcs/index2.shtml I haven't used it.

We will never all agree because it depends on what you are doing and what you need. If you are shooting a 30:1 feature film, the workflow you suggest might save you a lot of money. If you are shooting a 2:1 ten minute short you are probably better off getting a fully graded simul record to DigiBeta and DVcam or getting all of your footage dumped onto a hard drive. It sounds like you need to get on the phone and talk to a few different post houses to find out what workflow fits your specific needs. Then report back and tell us what they say.... Steve

This image looks underexposed. I suggest shooting your 500 at 250. This image is a victim of flat light. the noise above looks like lens flare to me. I like this image. The hotspot might have been corrected in telecine in a fully graded session Looks underexposed and ungraded to me. again, this looks like flat light = flat image... I suggest shooting your 7217 at E.I 100 and your 7218 at E.I. 250. Then ask for a best light transfer. One light transfers are not usually suitable for presentation, just offline editing.

Has anyone around here seen Leconte's "Man on the Train"? I recommend it. Much of the film is blue in hue. It looks like they shot Tungsten film unfiltered in early morning light. I noticed headlights and and storefronts on the street were illuminated in white light rather than yellow in the blue shots. This is my guess.....any ideas how they pulled off this blue effect? http://imdb.com/title/tt0301414/