Jump to content
Will Montgomery

Ultra 16 Telecine

Recommended Posts

What telecine machines can handle Ultra 16?

 

Considering modifying a Scoopic for this format, but the local Y-Front & Millennium machines can't see into the sprocket area.

 

Would I be limited to Spirits only?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What telecine machines can handle Ultra 16?

 

Considering modifying a Scoopic for this format, but the local Y-Front & Millennium machines can't see into the sprocket area.

 

Would I be limited to Spirits only?

 

Hi,

 

Spirits don't support Ultra 16. I am fairly sure that no other telecine on planet earth does either.

 

Stephen

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I seem to recall that bonolabs was working with Ultra16. You might check them out. www.bonolabs.com ... I can see them on the right side of my screen...

 

Bruce Taylor

www.Indi35.com

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I seem to recall that bonolabs was working with Ultra16. You might check them out. www.bonolabs.com ... I can see them on the right side of my screen...

 

Bruce Taylor

www.Indi35.com

 

 

you might want to make sure your lens will cover the wider frame. i dont think it will.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I seem to recall that bonolabs was working with Ultra16. You might check them out. www.bonolabs.com ... I can see them on the right side of my screen...

 

Bruce Taylor

www.Indi35.com

 

Hi Bruce,

 

I don't think they had any idea what Ultra 16 is, they just gave an answer to a questin they did not understand IMHO. It would cost a facility an awful lot of money for very little return, thats why it's not supported.

 

Stephen

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hi Bruce,

 

I don't think they had any idea what Ultra 16 is, they just gave an answer to a questin they did not understand IMHO. It would cost a facility an awful lot of money for very little return, thats why it's not supported.

 

Stephen

 

I suppose the only facilities that would be immediately be able to deal with it would be archive and amateur film telecine people who use Movie Stuffs's transfer equipment. As far as I am aware their equipment allows versatile zooming in on the frame area and easy adjustments, I think Justin Lovell uses the Super 8 version for 'max-8/super-duper-8' transfers.

 

http://www.moviestuff.tv/16mm_telecine.html

 

I hear their equipment producers very good results, considering their equipment is semi-recycled and a fraction of the cost of standard telecine equipment.

Edited by Andy_Alderslade

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Bonolabs does handle it, in fact they kind of promote it.

 

http://www.ultra16mm.com/

 

However they have a different philosophy on transfers which I totally respect but is not right for me. They prefer to give flat transfers and allow the client to make their own color adjustments while I'd prefer a hot shot colorist to do that work for me at transfer time which saves me decisions down the road and adds value to the already crazy price of telecine.

 

you might want to make sure your lens will cover the wider frame. i dont think it will.

I've been told by a trusted camera tech that the Scoopic lens can handle Ultra 16 but will not handle Super 16 without the major reconstruction of re-centering the lens. And since Ultra 16 is easily backwards compatible with Regular 16 I thought I'd give it a try. But if no one can see into the sprocket area for telecine then there's not much reason to do it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Bonolabs does handle it, in fact they kind of promote it.

 

http://www.ultra16mm.com/

 

However they have a different philosophy on transfers which I totally respect but is not right for me. They prefer to give flat transfers and allow the client to make their own color adjustments while I'd prefer a hot shot colorist to do that work for me at transfer time which saves me decisions down the road and adds value to the already crazy price of telecine.

 

 

Before people start jumping on the Bonolabs Ultra 16 bandwagon, I recommend taking a minute to look at this link, and the pictures attached to it:

 

http://www.cinematography.net/digitk/digitk.htm

 

Earlier this year I tried to get Bono to do a test for me to dissipate doubts generated by the above link. He flatly refused, unless I paid full price, no refund, etc. Very customer un-friendly, to say the least. "Satisfaction guarantee? what do you think, we care about our clients?" could have been the answer. I strongly discourage anyone from dealing with Bono

Edited by Saul Rodgar

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Very customer un-friendly, to say the least.

I wasn't going to say that, but since you brought it up first, that was pretty much my experience too. I think they are used to dealing just with students who want to get the cheapest price possible. I really got a negative feel from them. Maybe since much of their business is government archiving work & students they don't see the need to by kind to customers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Bonolabs does handle it, in fact they kind of promote it.

 

Hi,

 

Whilst they promote it on there home page, it's not sated as a format they can transfer. Have you seen the results? & are both sides of the perfs being scanned or just 1 side using a S16 gate.

 

Stephen

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hi,

 

Whilst they promote it on there home page, it's not sated as a format they can transfer. Have you seen the results? & are both sides of the perfs being scanned or just 1 side using a S16 gate.

 

Stephen

 

Bono claims to have recieved a U16 gate recently:

 

Our highly modified new Ultra16mm gate has arrived. Some basic preliminary testing has shown the image to be razor sharp and extremely even and flat across the image focus plane. We’re very happy so far and the stock testing will take place in the next few weeks. Our processors are now being brought back online and we’ll be offering complete packages as before. The stocks/processes that will be offered are Color neg (ECN2), B&W neg and E-6.

 

http://www.ultra16mm.com/

 

Bono uses a Cine Glyph scanner.

 

http://tig.colorist.org/pipermail/tig/2005-April/005928.html

 

As to what they mean by "razor sharp image and extremely even and flat across the focus plane" is anybody's guess, judging from this example:

 

http://www.cinematography.net/digitk/SF_Bono.tif

Edited by Saul Rodgar

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Bono claims to have recieved a U16 gate recently:

 

Our highly modified new Ultra16mm gate has arrived. Some basic preliminary testing has shown the image to be razor sharp and extremely even and flat across the image focus plane. We?re very happy so far and the stock testing will take place in the next few weeks. Our processors are now being brought back online and we?ll be offering complete packages as before. The stocks/processes that will be offered are Color neg (ECN2), B&W neg and E-6.

 

http://www.ultra16mm.com/

 

Bono uses a Cine Glyph scanner.

 

http://tig.colorist.org/pipermail/tig/2005-April/005928.html

 

As to what they mean by "razor sharp image and extremely even and flat across the focus plane" is anybody's guess, judging from this example:

 

http://www.cinematography.net/digitk/SF_Bono.tif

 

Sounds like Ultra is now a real format! :) At last someone has made a gate for it.. Well done Bono.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sounds like Ultra is now a real format! :) At last someone has made a gate for it.. Well done Bono.

 

However the quality from cropped 16mm transfered on a Spirit may well look better.

 

Stephen

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sounds like Ultra is now a real format! :) At last someone has made a gate for it.. Well done Bono.

 

Stephen is right, it is not so much about making a U16 gate as having the know how and equipment to do a good job transfering the footage. ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

All true, but if you are already using a quality machine like a Spirit and a good colorist, then a little extra negative to work with can make a difference. I see a difference between 16mm zoomed & cropped for 16:9 vs. Super 16; more noticeable in poor lighting conditions and faster stocks of course, but still there is a difference.

 

Much more important to have a great colorist in any case.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
All true, but if you are already using a quality machine like a Spirit and a good colorist, then a little extra negative to work with can make a difference. I see a difference between 16mm zoomed & cropped for 16:9 vs. Super 16; more noticeable in poor lighting conditions and faster stocks of course, but still there is a difference.

 

Much more important to have a great colorist in any case.

 

Hi,

 

Thinking about it the Kinetta archive scanner would work. The lenses you use when shootin S16 are in most cased going to be the limiting factor.

 

The biggest risk with Ultra 16 is the processing machine & Ultrasonic scratching in the sprocket area. S16 was an issue as many labs did not modify their equipment for sevreal years.

 

Stephen

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
All true, but if you are already using a quality machine like a Spirit and a good colorist, then a little extra negative to work with can make a difference. I see a difference between 16mm zoomed & cropped for 16:9 vs. Super 16; more noticeable in poor lighting conditions and faster stocks of course, but still there is a difference.

 

Much more important to have a great colorist in any case.

 

I agree, but if the telecine machine is funky and the image is soft on the edges, good colorist or not, it is not going to work. I guess we are both agreeing that the telecine machine has to be in good working order in order to get good results with any format . . . So yes, a good colorist is essential to good results on a good machine.

 

And I really agree that 16 zoomed in is grainier, generally speaking, than S16.

 

There are advantages and disadvantages to R16, S16 and U16, and here they break them down rather nicely. Not coincidentally, this website seems to be and offshoot of Bonolabs.

 

http://marylandfilms.com/16mm-super16-ultra16-compared.html

 

The main caveat against U16, personally speaking, being that there is a myriad cameras that shoot the S16 format AND any number of proven S16 post workflows (digital and optical), whereas U16 is only supported by Bono right now -and for the foreseeable future- and U16 mm camera conversions are not very common.

 

I personally rather use S16 because it affords me a lot more flexibility in post, being that my working relationship with Bono took a nose dive and he is the only game in town.

 

But, it all boils down to user preference, I suppose.

Edited by Saul Rodgar

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
However the quality from cropped 16mm transfered on a Spirit may well look better.

 

Stephen

Would love to see the gate used on a spirit!

 

Why not use a 1.5 anamorphic lens on standard 16mm? I do.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Would love to see the gate used on a spirit!

 

Why not use a 1.5 anamorphic lens on standard 16mm? I do.

 

Hi,

 

It's easy to see a S16 gate for a Spirit, just ask at any facility who owns one. Don't drop one it's about 40,000 Euro from memory.

 

Stephen

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hi,

 

It's easy to see a S16 gate for a Spirit, just ask at any facility who owns one. Don't drop one it's about 40,000 Euro from memory.

 

Stephen

Sorry for the misunderstanding Stephen but I meant I would like to see Bono's ultra gate used on a spirit. I understand there may be issues with scanning or whether these gates are interchangeable but I think the questions are worth asking for the interested parties. Even if nothing else it opens or closes the idea. Bono obviously thinks its a good idea otherwise he wouldnt have spent all that money on his gate. Obviously putting his money where his mouth is. Of course quality may be a problem with his telecine but again I still think its worth exploring all possibilities for those who are interested.

 

Even if its to conclude the idea is a non starter and using a 1.5 anamorph is a better idea for those cash strapped or dont want to rent :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sorry for the misunderstanding Stephen but I meant I would like to see Bono's ultra gate used on a spirit. I understand there may be issues with scanning or whether these gates are interchangeable but I think the questions are worth asking for the interested parties. Even if nothing else it opens or closes the idea. Bono obviously thinks its a good idea otherwise he wouldnt have spent all that money on his gate. Obviously putting his money where his mouth is. Of course quality may be a problem with his telecine but again I still think its worth exploring all possibilities for those who are interested.

 

Even if its to conclude the idea is a non starter and using a 1.5 anamorph is a better idea for those cash strapped or dont want to rent :)

 

Hi,

 

Bono's gate would not fil on a Spitit. Has anybody seen the results of a Bono U16 transfer?

With the price of S16 cameras, I would have thought the easiest route was to use one with some decent lenses.

 

Stephen

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
There are advantages and disadvantages to R16, S16 and U16, and here they break them down rather nicely. Not coincidentally, this website seems to be and offshoot of Bonolabs.

 

http://marylandfilms.com/16mm-super16-ultra16-compared.html

 

Adam Frey of Crimson Chain Productions is quite active on the Konvas.org forum and site.

 

While he probably uses Bonolabs, I don't believe he's actually affiliated with them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'll just butt in here and throw in my 2¢ worth. It has always baffled me why anyone would pursue Ultra 16 when you can use Super 16 with its proven workflow and dozens of top transfer houses supporting it, or if you don't have access to a Super 16 camera, you can use a Regular 16 camera and frame and transfer 16:9 (with a slight increase in grain size), and use a proven workflow and dozens of top transfer houses. Why go in a "screw up" a perfectly good Regular 16 camera.

 

As posted many times in the past, below is Regular 16 footage, framed 16:9, transferred on a Spirit.

 

ClipOld.jpg

 

Regular 16 framed & transferred 16:9

 

Best,

-Tim

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.



  • The Original Slider



    Visual Products



    Gamma Ray Digital Inc



    Tai Audio



    Broadcast Solutions Inc



    Serious Gear



    Metropolis Post



    Just Cinema Gear



    FJS International



    Glidecam



    Paralinx LLC



    New Pro Video - New and Used Equipment



    Abel Cine



    CineLab



    Media Blackout - Custom Cables and AKS



    Ritter Battery



    Rig Wheels Passport



    G-Force Grips



    Wooden Camera


    Cinematography Books and Gear
×
×
  • Create New...