Daniel D. Teoli Jr.

From what you say, it sounds like they are a money hungry company that knows they have a lock on the market and does not give a shit about their customers unless they are very $$ clients. I only deal with archival material. Any new production I do personally is digital. But I have a ton of film, running into the million+ feet to scan. I wonder if the relatively low-price tag of the Archivist and greed precludes Lasergraphics from offering basic support or even giving the buyers an instruction manual? do they give better support and instruction manuals with the higher priced models? Or does Lasergraphics not give new buyers support for the high-priced models as well unless you pay extra for it? If I ever had the $$ to buy an Archivist, I guess it would be worth driving across country to their factory to see it run, learn how to run it and pick it up. Would cost more than shipping it, but at least you would know something how to use it.

That is good to know Perry. I will write Lasergraphics and ask how much to PayPal them with each email so they will reply. You would think they would support new buyers of their equipment instead of just dumping it on them with no support. Now, there is a opportunity for you Perry, when you got some time or have some intern work for you. Make various Lasergraphics instructionals for YT. You can advertise your company and help others out as well. Selection from Agricultural Archive DDTJRAC

Yes, I am referring to their cheapest model...the Archivist. And thanks Dan for the scoop. Finding prices / getting Lasergrahics to reply to email on this stuff is almost as bad as trying to find out who is the curator of photography at an art museum. I had no idea they still sucked with support if you threw some money their way. They are a terrible company to deal with. I've written them numerous times and nothing. I think one time I got a reply from years of writing. I still write them to be a sponsor of my film Archive. Or lend me a used Archivist for a few years. Or whatever they can do for me. Nothing. Never the courtesy of a reply to say go F off even. I tell them I will put their name on all my stuff as a sponsor. I get millions of eyeball views per year. But no replies. Here is the deal. They can't keep selling an endless supply of these scanners. There is a limited market. Years ago they charged $7,500 to set it up and a short training on site. Now they do it cheaper by zoom. Maybe covid? Maybe being realistic after they ran out of deep pocket customers? I don't know. As far as focus? We used to have grain magnifiers in the darkroom to focus out enlargers. For cine' film, I focus on the fly over the sprocket area and film image. Color film has dye and no visible grain usually. Same with lots of duped multi-gen film. Hard to see the grain. Maybe the $$ scanners have a magnifier option for focus?

Self-portrait Sarah Biffin https://news.artnet.com/market/sarah-biffin-2051895? When things get too depressing in the film biz...remember it could be worse!

Recently I scanned an archival film needing to be timed scanned. It was a 1937 600 footer on Bible Camp. It was done by a semi- pro / advanced amateur that took on the job of memorializing the event. I didn't know there were 2 parts to the film until I hit the 2nd part. The 2nd reel was the finished reel with titles, intertitles and all. The 1st part were the outtakes and not used in the finished film. But I didn't know any of that other than the title Bible Camp 1937. The film was exposed pretty good throughout, although there were areas that benefitted from exposure adjustments. But the main problem was the entire 2nd reel's framing was off. I could have cropped the entire 2nd reel to fix framing. But decided to rescan it starting with the 2nd reel to frame it right. A lot of times you don't know how long an exposure issue or framing problem runs for. To do a scan right, you really need to see the film in its entirety before scanning and take some notes. But that is hard to do, at least for me, being a one-man operation and overloaded with work. I just scan first and if things go south with the scan, then will rescan parts. <><><><> A young Annie Leibovitz guarding the cameras.

That is a good idea. That is what the museums would do for their copy stand work. All my stuff is archival footage. So usually nothing to go by like that.

People tend to get agitated at Christmas. But I don't know all the history of this mentioned bickering, so just guessing. I've been on forums since the bulletin board days back in 1998. So, I've seen a lot of Christmas holidays go by on forums during those decades. One-time someone called me a 'mouth breather' on a forum. I made a mouth breather production out of their idea and am thankful for their insult! A Mouth Breather Production DDTJRAC

Don't know about all that. Just getting back to the thread. Have not been following the replies. I like to let things brew a while and see what the replies are. And due to ADD, sometimes I read the thread backwards! As far as... "I will never understand people who make feature films that nobody will ever see. Is it an exercise in futility? " Everything we do is not a masterpiece. We try, some things work out, some are flops. But as we try things we never know where a flop will lead us.

I think it is a term used by scanning companies. I knew about it before I learned of the term. When doing scans I would sometimes rewind film because the settings were crap or the framing was off. This is especially prevalent with home movies and ancient stag films which are multi, multi dupes. I just didn't know what to call it. If you get the sane pretty good you can post it better than if the scan is poor and there are no details to post. Say in the highlight area that is easily blown out with my scanner. I just didn't know if it is better to start a new scan where you start the new timed scan or just pause the scanner and add it to the old scan. Rewinding the scanner has to be done by hand with my scanner and it is done blind. No way to review the rewind other than start the scanner up again. Do the big boy scanners have that same issue, or can you rewind and review at the same time to find the exact spot?

Thanks! Good seeing the photos. Looks like a pretty clean design inside. Was wondering if the users thought it to be a good value. And if there were any issues with it as far as reliability. When scanners go on the blink what usually goes out?

What is the verdict? Anything as good or better in its price class? <><><><> July 1982 Frederick's of Hollywood Archive DDTJRAC

On the high-priced scanners can you adjust the magnification easily? On my scanner, getting an over-scan is a job. You have to change the extension tubes / washers and it is a big over-scan. There is very little range to it once it is set.

Thanks Robert. I will have to see if my software has a constant crop option. As of now I crop it out but have to manually crop the rest of the sides to get it timed with the uncropped segment. BTW... I looked at some of your photos of Cinelab at the site. Very impressive operation you got! And that is understating it. I like how you are open to working with experimentation and encourage film students. Only suggestions are... 1) Finish up the walls and paint over the drywall tape. 2) Put a few people in the photos with lab coats and ties like the old dye transfer techs used to dress up. Bob Pace in his lab Of course, if someone comes to visit, they will say...where are all the techs in lab coats!

https://news.artnet.com/market/melania-trump-launched-nft-platform-first-offering-watercolor-eyes-branded-amulet-inspire-2049967 I can't figure out exactly what they are. Is it like selling shares in a company or a thing? I looked them up. It said NFT's are related to cryptocurrency, which would mean it is nothing. But it looks like with NFT's you have something physical or at least digital. Is it like selling the exclusive digital rights to an image?

Seems to be more and more people going into scanning. Is the archival scanning biz...going up, down or steady? And what about big and indie budget movie film scanning. What are the trends for it? 'Deakins as a teenager' DDTJRAC

When you get a timed scene scan do you get a bunch of individual scans of each scene that has different needs? Or is it just one scan of all the timed scenes combined?

Film Collectors forum mentioned microfilm as well. Possibly oxidation. Also this, it covers a lot of issues. https://psap.library.illinois.edu/advanced-help/slide-film-bw Has anyone seen it on color stock?

Age, maybe 1940s or so. I've seen it only on BW stock as far as I can remember. All the stock I've seen it on is vintage. No telling about storage.

Is there a name for it? I've seen it on a few films. Many times, it migrates to a figure in the film.

A lot of the warped films continually get out of frame when being scanned. It is about impossible to keep up with trying to adjust on the fly. Do the hi-priced scanners automatically adjust for framing? If so, how fast do they adjust once detected? Or for problem films do you just over scan and crop?

You like to password protect everything? Full report... Password protection of your digital media…a surefire plan for your media to die with you. – Daniel D. Teoli Jr. Archival Collection – II (home.blog)

https://www.sprocketschool.org/wiki/Special:ListFiles

I mean the full size maximum the scanner would produce. DPI is dots per inch. It is adjustable on flatbed scanners. It is a measure of resolution. Just wondering the resolution ability of a cine' scanner compared to a digital camera or flatbed scanner.

I saw on eBay someone was selling a set of 16mm lab prints. One reel had the image (I think it was a neg) and one had the optical track on film. Is this the common way things are done? How is the reel of optical sound synched with the final film? Is it contact printed?

If a 4K cine' scanner was a camera...how many megapixels would it be? If a 4K cine' scanner was a flatbed scanner...how many dpi would it scan?