GoldenEye v Spirit v HDR Scanity v Arriscan 2K scanning of 16mm

[Stephen Perera]

....so its looking like I'm going to go with Cinelab in London (daily flights between Gibraltar-London) as soon as I figure out how to get the reels over without fogging them! so now I have options in terms or pricing for 2K scanning...

 

In order of price:

Goldeneye 2K - £10/min

Spirit 2K - £15/min

*HDR Scanity - Arriscan 2K - £25/min

 

*They say this is their newest machine

 

Spirit 4K - £45/min

HDR Scanity 4K - Arriscan 4K - £75/min

 

Is there anywhere I can see results of these scanners (Vimeo links?) with 16mm film OR can anyone talk about them and give me their opinion on what to go for.....

 

I'm hoping to hear 'the difference between the Spirit at 2K and Scanty is huge' OR 'there is a negligible difference go for Spirit as cheapest' and such like comments

 

My first choice would have been to send it all to our friends at Cinelab Boston but the unprocessed 500T film would go through too many X-ray machines at airports

[Mark Dunn]

There are threads here on hand searches. IIRC security will co-operate if you provide a changing bag so they can open the can, or you could stick to 100' spools. Let the airports know in advance.

Have you thought about

https://www.on8mil.com/16mm/#

plus processing though. North London. No experience myself but an archive client of mine is about to use them so he must have had a recommendation. I'm handling the film so if I get to see the scan I'll let you know about it, disclosure permitting. It's a 2.5K scan for a show that may be getting a cinema release pre-broadcast, so presumably sufficient.

Edit- just worked out it's no cheaper than your cheapest quote.

Edited April 3, 2018 by Mark Dunn

[Stephen Perera]

thanks for the comments.....well, Cinelab did Phantom Thread so I think they are good enough for me hahahahahahahah

[Perry Paolantonio]

The Scanity and Arriscan are totally different machines made by different manufacturers.

 

I'll be honest - basing your decision on the hardware isn't the best way to get the best results. I would stick with recommendations for a specific facility instead. I mean, the hardware matters to a point. Any studio with these machines should do a nice job. They all have strengths and weaknesses, but you should be fine with any of them. I'm partial to flat data scans, so I'd stick with the Arriscan or Scanity, and maybe the GoldenEye, depending on which model it is (the older ones were a bit problematic but the GoldenEye 4 is supposed to be pretty good.

 

I would also point out that a scan on the same machine in two facilities is likely to look very different. The machine is a (big) part of the equation, but it's only part. An operator who knows what to do with that machine is arguably more important. Different versions of the software/hardware matter, as does the workflow at the facility in question. Believe me, I've seen plenty of scans done on all of the machines mentioned above that were done incorrectly, so they looked terrible and had to be re-scanned.

[Dan Hasson]

Cinelab London are great. I've only been there once to drop off rushes but they gave me a tour of the lab. Such a friendly team over there.

[Stephen Perera]

The Scanity and Arriscan are totally different machines made by different manufacturers.

 

I'll be honest - basing your decision on the hardware isn't the best way to get the best results. I would stick with recommendations for a specific facility instead. I mean, the hardware matters to a point. Any studio with these machines should do a nice job. They all have strengths and weaknesses, but you should be fine with any of them. I'm partial to flat data scans, so I'd stick with the Arriscan or Scanity, and maybe the GoldenEye, depending on which model it is (the older ones were a bit problematic but the GoldenEye 4 is supposed to be pretty good.

 

I would also point out that a scan on the same machine in two facilities is likely to look very different. The machine is a (big) part of the equation, but it's only part. An operator who knows what to do with that machine is arguably more important. Different versions of the software/hardware matter, as does the workflow at the facility in question. Believe me, I've seen plenty of scans done on all of the machines mentioned above that were done incorrectly, so they looked terrible and had to be re-scanned.

 

Perry yes that makes sense I have a LOT of experience scanning photographic film and its definitely my 'skill' or lack of it thats the final "10%" of quality achieved that's needed for professional use in printed material etc.....saying that, the machines need to be in a certain 'level' of capability......my Scanmate 5000 drum scanner is on the same level as my Hasselblad Flextight scanner but its way off level to the Epson flatbeds back in the day.....anyway.....thanks for the input!!!

[Stephen Perera]

Cinelab London are great. I've only been there once to drop off rushes but they gave me a tour of the lab. Such a friendly team over there.

yes i get good vibes off them....I made it perfectly clear I'm a nobody in the film world and that I'm not coming in pretending to be otherwise but that I do know what I see though from 30 years as a graphic designer/photographer (including a lot of scanning side film, black and white film and colour negative film as I mentioned before)...in other words.....I will know what's crap coming off a colour negative.....if a 'scan' comes back with clipped highlights when I've metred to control them plus I know the latitude of my emulsion I will now the operator didn't give a crap about my work when scanning it

Edited April 4, 2018 by Stephen Perera

[Will Montgomery]

Honestly the most important piece of the puzzle will be who is coloring the film. Any of those scanners will do fine in the hands of a competent and qualified colorist.

 

Some of the best looking images on film I've ever had were scanned in SD but were colored by an amazing colorist that brought out the film's fullest potential.

 

All of the machines listed there will do great, especially if as you say the operator knows what they are doing. I'd go with the least expensive and spend the difference and more on the colorist.

[Stephen Perera]

Honestly the most important piece of the puzzle will be who is coloring the film. Any of those scanners will do fine in the hands of a competent and qualified colorist.

 

Some of the best looking images on film I've ever had were scanned in SD but were colored by an amazing colorist that brought out the film's fullest potential.

 

All of the machines listed there will do great, especially if as you say the operator knows what they are doing. I'd go with the least expensive and spend the difference and more on the colorist.

 

Hey Will, in case you missed it on another related thread I had this is what I did as an edit with the first roll of 500T they telecine'd for me......em....my first roll of cine film EVER actually haha.....

Here's is what they gave me:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WhywskpuT-I&feature=youtu.be

.....and this is what I did with it as a proof of concept for the client:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tjaD7L3EkR8&feature=share

 

don't like the lettering i put over it so ignore that! The good thing is it was approved and have green light to roll camera! Ive since shot another roll of 100ft and have just received a fresh roll of 400ft 500T to continue the project.....

Edited April 4, 2018 by Stephen Perera

[Will Montgomery]

 

Hey Will, in case you missed it on another related thread I had this is what I did as an edit with the first roll of 500T they telecine'd for me......em....my first roll of cine film EVER actually haha.....

Here's is what they gave me:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WhywskpuT-I&feature=youtu.be

.....and this is what I did with it as a proof of concept for the client:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tjaD7L3EkR8&feature=share

 

don't like the lettering i put over it so ignore that! The good thing is it was approved and have green light to roll camera! Ive since shot another roll of 100ft and have just received a fresh roll of 400ft 500T to continue the project.....

 

It has a very cool 70's look to it. When they do type over it you should use After Effects to track the camera flutter and track the overlays to that and soften them just a little so it looks like it was done optically.

[Daniel D. Teoli Jr.]

Isn't it sad OP. All that work just to have the film ruined. In 2018, just how it is. Good luck with your film!

[Stephen Perera]

Isn't it sad OP. All that work just to have the film ruined. In 2018, just how it is. Good luck with your film!

 

well thats the thing.....no matter what level you're at the effort is the same plus when it comes out of your pocket even more so...

 

....the edit i created got a resounding approval from the owners, master blowers and staff of Gibraltar Crystal which

1. gave me the green light to do the project in 16mm as was my wish

2. gets everyone believing in me more and their mental investment in the project increases exponentially

 

The biggest irony of all = every single person commented on how cool the 'artefacts flying in' looked hahahahahaha where I'm going crazy thinking if the lab has **(obscenity removed)**ed it up or not

 

Lesson to everyone here and in all forums where we go on on and on and on about our perceived 'quality' outputs is not to get too caught up in stuff the public doesn't even see or think as as bad as we think it is!!!

Edited April 8, 2018 by Stephen Perera

[Jon O'Brien]

 

... is not to get too caught up in stuff the public doesn't even see or think as as bad as we think it is!!!

 

Which is the classic inclination of creative people/artists.