Daniel D. Teoli Jr.

Thanks for the rundown Todd. I guess I mixed you up with Tyler. Great for you! Glad you did good with your stocks. I got AEO Light, but I would prefer to use an optical reader if possible. There seems to be 2 ways to use AEO Light. You overscan with the optical tract and crop the image later to get rid of the tract. Or you scan the audio only, extract the audio and then marry the audio to the 2nd scan of just the image. Does your optical reader have issues with all films you have tried or just a few? I had heard about another person using the Diamant software. Knew nothing about it, but it sounded interesting. Now that I hear the price, I can see it will be way too high for me. Here is a guy out West doing cine' scanning. He has some interesting things at his site. Who knows, maybe he is a member here? Lasergraphics Scanstation Film Scanning and Restoration 2K 4K 6.5K HDR for 8mm Super8 16mm S16 35mm — Nicholas Coyle On a different note... After I sent in my previous rant this morning about people pestering me for a commercial license to use my films...what did I have in my inbox? 2/16/22 Hi, Daniel. My name is XX, I am a video producer who has been hired to create a marketing campaign for a client based around the XXX series. I came across some footage you had uploaded to the Internet Archive that would be perfect for the ad campaign we are working on, but it was uploaded with a CC Non-Commercial License. I was wondering if this was the correct license for this footage, and if so, if it would be possible to obtain a commercial license. Here is the video in question: Motorcycle Hill Climb 1945 D. D. Teoli Jr. A. C. : D. D. Teoli Jr. A. C. : Free Download, Borrow, and Streaming : Internet Archive Thanks in advance for any assistance you can provide, and for all your work in preserving antique media! -- XX (xxx) xxx-xxx xxxxxxxxx@gmail.com The pestering is constant with these people. And even when you refuse them, they still pester you. God forbid you do ever agree to something, they never reply to your emails again like CBS did. The scum. If any of you deal in stock footage, send me your contact info and I will make a list of stock companies and send it out with my refusals, so they can contact you. Same as I said before that I don't like cleaning film, I don't like this constant email pestering crap from producers. I like digitizing films and I like putting them up on the net...and that is it.

I wasn't thinking scanning as a job to teach. I was thinking just for the additional education, learning about scanning and for the handling film onsite type of thing. Once graduated they may shoot film and need scans, so they learn from the bottom up. Yes, any fool can buy a scanner...as long as they are a rich fool!

I've got my film Archive stored all over. Rents keep going up like hell and I got rid of all my storage lockers I rented due to costs. I don't have a space big enough to store the film all in one place, so I break it up wherever I can find space. I'm just starting to alphabetize the film Archive into A,B,C, order. This section in the photo will hopefully be for films 'M through T.' If I was a good anal person, I would have them all bar coded, scanned and computerized. But not being a good anal person, I'd be thrilled with just having it in A,B,C, order and hand-written in a logbook. (I removed some items from the photo for privacy reasons.) Lately I've scaled back some with the film acquisitions. After nearly a decade of film acquisition only a negligible portion of the films have been scanned due to cost. As I've said before, if you are broke, scanning is the shitty part of cine' film work. The acquiring film can be done on a tight budget. Sometimes you can get films for a buck or two a reel. In fact, the vented plastic archival cans cost more than some reels! Other times it may be $35 a reel. But, whether it is $1 or $100 a reel, it is all miniscule peanuts compared to the cost of a scanner or paying companies to get scans. I got over a thousand reels, which is roughly a million feet of film. To get all that film scanned it is $300,000 to $500,000. Just depends on what kind of scans you want...cheap or good scans. So, I figured, no use adding more fuel to the fire with acquiring another million feet of film that will never get scanned. I've written to many philanthropists that work in all areas of interest from art to film to see if they would help with acquiring a cheap sound scanner and have never received a reply from any of them. Kickstarter said NO to me running a crowd funded 16mm scanner request. I asked the I.A. if they would help or at least loan me a 16mm sound scanner for a couple years. Nothing. In fact, they banned me for a time. I find it amusing how film production companies write me for use of my films for commercial projects and offer me $1 or £1 to sign a commercial use release. Why? Why would I stick my neck out for nothing? What is in it for me? I make nothing with open content work. Plus no one ever wants to help with scanning costs. I don't mind giving things away for free for educational and historical use, even if they won't help...but that is it. I tell them all the same thing...go to a stock footage company and PAY! Or go buy the film and you be responsible for using it commercially. There is no other area of my archival work that is as troublesome as cine' film. Take this 1910 ad of Aunt Jemima. I probably have the largest online, open content, highest quality (res) Aunt Jemima Archive in the world. This ad, which is part of my 1/4 million ad Advertising Archive, is my most expensive ad. I paid about $28 for it. But, it came in a 1910 magazine that had another 100+ ads in it. So, if you prorate the cost per ad to the Advertising Archive, the cost is negligible. And sometimes I can buy vintage mags at a swap meet or yard sale for .25 or .50 cents and get the same 100+ ads in them. And it is the same with most of the other areas of collection. They are not that $$ to deal with. And even if certain items are somewhat higher to acquire; once you acquire the material you are pretty much done with costs. The material can easily be scanned or photographed or in the case of audio and VHS, digitized at home for next to no cost. But, not so with film. Even the video hosting sites have gone downhill over the years. I hadn't put up anything in years at Vimeo due to censorship, but tried one upload this Xmas. I got lots of followers at Vimeo and feel bad I never give them anything, but it is not that I don't want to, it is censorship that is the issue. Boom...an hour after I uploaded the film, Vimeo shut it down and sent me this notice. I'm surprised they leave up the old films I uploaded... NSFW 1928 Cine Art short Hollywood Sand Witches scanned with the $6,000 Retroscan. Well, that is the state of affairs for the Daniel D. Teoli Jr. Small Gauge Film Archive on February 16, 2022. Life can change on a dime...for better or worse. Hopefully things get better for the Film Archive. I have many fantastic films in the Archive, but they do no good unless they get digitized.

Is there anything you don't like about your scanner. Have any issues with it?

I was going to start a thread asking just that...are film schools still shooting film? I wonder why the film school does not offer scanning experience as well. Just as they used to and maybe still do, teach the wet darkroom with photography.

You can put up the whole film and put a split second counter on it. That is what Periscope Films does. Then people buy the film 'by the second' that they want. He puts films all over the place.

That is good! Glad things are booming for you. You got a beautiful operation and I know it take a lot of $$ for overhead to run it.

That is interesting. I think Tyler said his FF didn't work out of the box and he had trouble with it. How was yours getting it to operate? Did you get any help from the instructions? I do the same thing as you, except it is all open content. No $$ for me. And Getty won't have anything to do with me and the I.A. can hardly stand me! If all a person seeks is $$, they will pass up on things that do not produce $$. Or they will not do things if it affects their $$. I have no such issues. BUT...it takes money to deal with the money sucking cine' film! My VHS Archive is much more affordable. But I prefer cine' film. Yes, Prelinger is the King! He got started early and had a good bankroll. Lobster in France is another fantastic Archive. Here is Prelinger's wife... Interview of archivist Megan Prelinger RWM : D.D. Teoli Jr. as archivist : Free Download, Borrow, and Streaming : Internet Archive

Kinetta never got anywhere, did they? Aren't they defunct? And $60k is way too high for that machine me thinks. http://www.kinetta.com/images/clipboard.jpg?crc=3888319758 Perry said the Retroscan is a toy. That Kinetta looks like a kid's toy. It may scan great, but it still looks like a toy. "But I mostly use the FF because it's a few feet from my bedroom door...' Jeeesus, that is what I need. A cine' scanner in my bedroom! You live in cine' scanning paradise.

That is not true. As an open content Archive, I have no business plan other than I buy lotto tickets all the time. But since Lasergraphics plans to raise the prices, I will have to double my lotto ticket purchases! I write Lasergraphics all the time for sponsorship for my film Archive...never got one reply. They must love money over the love of film. OK, they are a biz and need profit, but still if you love something it overrides profit.

What are they scanning? You had said Cintel is no good for archival 16mm. Are they doing indie dailies or their own stuff? If Cintel made a 16mm unit with a good 4K sensor and a warped film gate that read optical sound for $20K...then they would have something. But, you know the deal with 'if'...if grandma had balls, she would be grandpa!

If they don't use them, tell them to loan me one for 2 years and I'll add their name to all my productions. May not do them any good, but I get millions of eyeballs over the year viewing with my stuff. If it is just sitting, might as well put it to use. As I've said many a time. The film acquisition (archival) is not the issue. It can be acquired very cheap, somewhat cheap or not too expensive most of the time. The scanning $$ is the issue, not the film acquisition.

Sure, operation is a big deal. Can't say about ScanStations though, no experience there. But when I tried auto exposure vs. manual exposure, it made a world of difference which setting I was using. Had to stop the auto and go with manual exposure for scans. Even then, manual / best light won't cut it all the time. Many of the films have to be timed for the exposure on each section. So, lots to learn about film scanning.

Thanks for the rundown Tyler. I'm hoping to get back to some of these scanner threads I started so I can digest what has unfolded. Just no time. I've got about 18 PDF's to download, so am trying to read and answer a few posts today as I download the PDF's. That is how I gotta work, sad, but that is it. Never thought about a clean room. But makes sense. Exactly what do you do to clean each frame? What sort of wipes and cleaner? Yes, it sounds terrible if you have to clean each frame. I can hardly stand to clean the roll...as fast as I can run it through the rewinds. I hate it. All I want is the scan, not the rest of the hassle. Slow, methodical cleaning is not good if you got ADD. The ADD'er does not like repetitive, slow work. Now, I don't mind scanning that much, it is kinda fascinating, especially if you have not previewed the film in the editor. You see it all unfold, which can be very fascinating if you got a 'pig in a poke' film and have no idea what you got. I always run the film through the rewinds to see the condition of the film before scanning. But I don't run through the editor much anymore. Again...time problems. I may loupe the film here or there, but content is 98% blind many times. It is mainly the cleaning I don't like, as slow drying cleaner takes many passes to dry up. If I don't have the time, I can wipe it pretty clean and let it sit not perfectly dry for a few hours to evaporate before scanning. But I prefer to dry it properly. I wish I had one of the hypersonic film cleaners. Slow drying cleaner does a better job that fast-drying cleaner (Edwal) at getting the dirt off, but slow drying cleaner is a pain to actually get dry in a hurry. This thread was started Tyler, to get a better idea of where the scanning biz is headed for those that may want to buy a new or used scanner in the future. It is an inquiry into the questions of... Will the use of film keep dwindling and as well as the demand for archival scans? Are major companies going to stop making scanners / go out of biz? Will they make cheaper scanners to broaden their market of ever decreasing or stagnant customers? Are the people that thought they can charge $300 to scan a small roll of film going to be short on biz and start selling their scanners? Things like that.

Looks good Perry...but I don't know what the hell to do with it. Does it read optical sound? Does it have the software? Does it come with instructions or is it like the Lasergraphics and you are on your own? Would it be good for an archivist and warped film? Don't know?? Can you buy parts for it? These types of things are only good for those in the know. I wish I knew more about it. You take good care of your equipment Perry, looks very clean.

Can't say about creative use. But many of my still camera lenses suffer from loose focus rings and some have loose aperture rings. I use gaffers tape to fix focus for zone focus shots. Such as working in the dark with IR flash in crowds. The adjustments can change easily from bumps or rubbing. For IR flash I don't change focus much, so it works fine. Same with aperture, I use one aperture generally and change the flash power. So, I can work fine with fixed focus and fixed aperture. You can tape things down for any use, but it may not work well for other types of shooting that need constant adjustments.

Can't find the film in question. Spent half an hour looking, but it got buried back in the hoard. BUT...you are right about the 8mm. I took out an old 8mm reel and matched it up to 16mm. Same exact sprocket size as 16mm and same ratio as the missing film. As I was looking for the lost film, I noticed it was fairly common to use old, undeveloped 16mm film as leader. Never thought about it much before. But this was the first time in over a thousand reels I saw someone using uncut 8mm film as 16mm leader. Thanks for the help!

Click to view larger size This was a 1991 public service announcement in P.O.N.Y X-Press magazine. A publication put out by Prostitutes of New York. (An informal guild of sex workers.) I was scanning the mag for my Curator-at-Large in England. He supplies me with material he finds in the USA he wants scanned and I scan for him. And it is also shared with my Archive, so, we both benefit. Normally I don't read much of the text I'm scanning; I just look at some of the photos. And even then, not much time for the photos. I scan many tens of thousands of pages a year, so can't look at everything. And I'm not much of a reader anyway, I like photos. Point of all this is...I'm lucky I found this interesting tidbit because I usually don't read the mags.

Ok, will work on getting a photo. The 8mm could be a possibility, but don't know. The sprocket holes look to be the same size as regular 16mm. It will take some time to get it. I found it while organizing my 16mm film and don't remember which can it was from. Hopefully in a few days.

Someone used a piece of raw, undeveloped 16mm film stock as leader on a reel of a 16mm silent film. The piece of film in question is double sprocket. (Each side has sprockets.) And it has 3 sprockets for every 2 standard 16mm sprockets. In other words, where the standard 16mm film has no sprocket, this film has a sprocket, and all sprockets on this film are evenly spaced. What do they use this type of 16mm film for?

Kodak Cine' Film Product Catalog 2006 D. D. Teoli Jr. A. C. : D. D. Teoli Jr. A. C. : Free Download, Borrow, and Streaming : Internet Archive Kodak Motion Picture Film Price Catalog 3.9.09 D. D. Teoli Jr. A. C. : D. D. Teoli Jr. A. C. : Free Download, Borrow, and Streaming : Internet Archive

Kodak Essential Reference Guide For Filmmakers D. D. Teoli Jr. A. C. : D. D. Teoli Jr. A. C. : Free Download, Borrow, and Streaming : Internet Archive

https://16mmfilmtalk.com/download/file.php?id=12056 https://16mmfilmtalk.com/download/file.php?id=12057 A little piece of Paul Ivester's collection. Racked, barcoded and organized! March is my A,B,C, month. All films get put in A,B,C, order and get written in a logbook. That is my goal! (Fingers crossed.) If I can do that, then the next step may be to write it down in a computer ledger that is searchable for key words. But that is not that big a deal to me. I'd would just like to know what title I have for now.

Never heard of him, but he sounds important. If you got a blog, do a piece on him. If you don't got a blog, do it here.

OP...a sucky scanner does not give you sharp grain.