Jump to content

David Cunningham

Basic Member
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    1,088

  • Joined

  • Last visited

 Content Type 

Everything posted by David Cunningham

  1. David Cunningham
    The initial "issue" is most definitely occurring in camera because the registration is pin-based and following a flawed sprocket hole pattern. This IS gate weave. The film is moving side to side in the gate. The scanner is trying but not yet perfectly able to follow the same weave pattern necessary to keep the frames stable relative to each other. This is not really a "fault" of anyone but merely an unexpected side effect of using proper pin registration with a film format never designed for it. Super 8 is truly a low end film format with high levels of fault tolerance built into it. It's just the way super 8 is. Eventually the scanner will be able to compensate for it. Btw... If you were to print this negative or shoot something with a logmar on reversal and then project it using a high end projector like the Elmo 1200 series you WOULD see this weave in the projection because the projectors are not pin registered but edge guided. The edge of the film would stay stable and thus the frame would weave back and forth.
  2. David Cunningham
    I was not offended. Just disagreeing. Especially when talking about 16 and 8mm grain is part of the image and I would never de-noise or de grain it in post other than for web-based streaming where it would be mucked up anyhow. For me, the grain is not noise, it's part of the look that I am going for when I shoot these formats. Plus, if I were going to remove the grain I would want to control that removal, not leave it to a limitation of my scan to do it for me in a way that softens the image.
  3. David Cunningham
    I have to disagree that 4K is not necessary for super16 and definitely disagree that it "adds noise". What you are seeing is properly resolved grain as opposed to a softened image that didn't resolve the grain. Believe it or not, this becomes more important the smaller the gauge because the grain is more prevalent to begin with. You can get away with it better with modern 35mm because the grain is so fine anyhow that it's not a major contributor to the image. I scan super 8 at 5K and master in 2K for HD output. The image just appears "sharper" because there is 5K worth of relevant information... That information being grain. Even though the photographic information is not 5K it does take that level to not mess up the grain.
  4. David Cunningham
    Looks great. Damn Kodak weave is a pisser and they are not going to even try to fix it, which is sad. But oh well.
  5. David Cunningham
    An external light meter is the best for sure. But remember to take into account the 2/3 stop light loss for the prism in the viewfinder.
  6. David Cunningham
    Another reason they look more digital is the di process. Nothing compares to a raw timed work print. Beautiful!
  7. David Cunningham
    My workflow these days is 100% gamma ray digital 5K scan with 2K output. Rates are better than anyone else's HD and results are not even a question. Far superior to anyone else (except the others that also have a scan station). I go back and forth between Cinelab and spectra for super 8 processing. I have been 100% happy with both. I have to used their system, but Cinelab does have an in house Xena system that is similar to the ScanStation of you want to process and scan at one place.
  8. David Cunningham
    Ditto perry
  9. David Cunningham
    Ditto. Definitely sounds like a film test. Maybe contact CineStill to actually use your intended stocks in a still camera.
  10. David Cunningham
    I have no examples but I do believe this has been done.
  11. David Cunningham
    I could be doing it wrong... so wait for other comments... but... When shooting anything within the golden hour and after I use tungsten balanced film anyhow. Your light at sunset and sunrise is very yellow/orange and is not as bright white as daytime. Daylight films are balanced for broad daylight. Your sunset light will be very close to tungsten. In your scenario, I would likely shoot 500T at around F4 depending on light meter readings or maybe 200T wide open. Assuming you are doing a DI, all of these things can be corrected for in post. You can even shoot 500T wide open for thirty minutes before and 30 minutes after sunset and get very good results with some post adjustment. I also enjoy using 500T for bonfires/campfires without additional light.
  12. David Cunningham
    Hello, I need Eclair ACL 400FT Super16 French Magazines. Please contact me with your offers. Dave
  13. David Cunningham
    Amazing! Try getting away with that in the digital world!
  14. David Cunningham
    Here is a great pro8mm example of processing em26 as e6 and as ecn2. http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=J1JsQAr3bsU
  15. David Cunningham
    Hey jack! Martin Baumgarten's Plattsburgh photo can do the em26 as color reversal, but like has been mentioned, it's hit or miss depending on the condition of the film. If it has been in a freezer for its existence and was then thawed and shot last week it would probably come out pretty good. But, if it's been sitting in a desk draw or something like that for 20-30 years it's going to be very foggy and color shifted if there is an image at all. If this were a case of someone got a large supply of this stock I would do a test shoot of one cart and go from there. If this is old film with old images so the primary concern is the best image possible I would do b&w negative. That's the safest. That film can even be processed as ecn-2 with color shift and grain bump. The VNF done at spectra is great but all the same as above apply. I can promise a color shift (likely pink or purple) no matter what just due to the low quality of all the VNF films in the first place. They were definitely not meant to last long.
  16. David Cunningham
    Ahh. That's too bad. That could be a take up torque issue on the camera. As you know, that lack of pressure plate means the film plane can move quite a bit and the effects of this will be more significant at longer focal lengths and wider appetites. Based in your footage I don't think there is anything "wrong" with your 1014. It might be tweak able to make it better but I bet if you are stopped down to 8 or more and keep it as wide as possible you won't get that softness.
  17. David Cunningham
    He does his own color work. He has mastered the art of the flat scan with premiere pro rgb curves. Closed down to 8 the 1014 is ok. Once you get inside of 5.6 or get wide open its crazy soft. Did you have your pressure plate in the cart used in the 1014? If so, your camera may once have been collimated for film expected to be flat against the cart pressure pad rather then flush against the gate. This would exaggerate this problem. If you didn't have your pressure plate in. Use it next time. That may fix it.
  18. David Cunningham
    The 1014 XL-S is notoriously soft when opened up. Were you wide open or nearly wide open? Even the 814 (both auto zoom and xl-s) are sharper. I'm sure you had your Schneider stopped down quite a bit outdoors in direct sunlight with 200 Asa reversal. So that will make it look sharper than the nearly wide open 1014 indoors.
  19. David Cunningham
    It's probably argus. I had one of those.
  20. David Cunningham
    Those original technicolor prints are amazing. I have some very old 16mm technicolor prints that are pristine in both color and contrast. Beautiful. I also have prints from the 70s that are so red/pink you almost cannot see any other color. So sad!
  21. David Cunningham
    I pretty much make up all the reasons already listed for my own projects AND home movies. 1.) Archival quality, especially 16mm contact prints on polyester base. 2.) "The Look"... why would you want to emulate when you can do the real thing 3.) I cannot afford to buy or rent a Digital Video or Still camera that can surpass my Super16 movie or Medium Format/4x5 film still cameras. 4.) The "feeling". This is compromised of nostalgia, the thrill of hearing the advancing film, the smell of a freshly opened film can, the forced selectivity and precision so as not to "waste" film. All those will keep me shooting film until I cannot get it processed anywhere anymore.
  22. David Cunningham
    I understand why Dr5 for still film. But, why for cinefilm? They are charging nearly triple the same cost of regular b&w reversal processing at Cinelab or pro8mm. What would be the advantage?
  23. David Cunningham
    Welcome back Matt! I've always had fantastic results with super 8 negative processing at both Cinelab in New Bedford,MA and Spectra Film And Video (around the corner from pro8mm in Burbank).
  24. David Cunningham
    Although I've never used ANDEC, I've been impressed by everything I've seen come out of there.
  25. David Cunningham
    The spirits are still pretty good machines, but they look just too "video like". They do not work well if Super 8 at all due to the frame jitter/registration issues. The design of the Spirit cannot handle the frame movement. It gets confused and the result is warped frames. Spirits are still pretty good for 16mm and 35mm, but units like the ScanStation and Director from LaserGraphics blow it out of the water. Although no one can afford to use it, the Scanity at Cinelicious is much better than the Spirit too. Also, there are different "Spirits". The Spirit 4K Datacine is a far superior machine to the old Spirits (from even before the Spirit HD). A Spirit is generally used as telecine system and not a scanner. For example, the Northlight is also an older machine like the Spirit. But, it's a far superior ( and slower ) scanner, not telecine.
×
×
  • Create New...