Jump to content

Blackmagic's new Cintel scanners...C and S Drives


Recommended Posts

  • Premium Member
13 hours ago, Robert Houllahan said:

The Scan Station has to be able to see the perforations with the imaging sensor to register the perfs and stabilize the film, there is no external sensor or mechanism. The transport is driven by a servo controlled capstan which has a optical encoder wheel attached to it, the film is driven at constant speed and then the machine vision perf stabilization does the rest.

Got ya, so it's just AI machine learning software that reads the perf. Seems pretty straight forward to me. 

I was trying to come up with a solution that doesn't require the perf to be in frame. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Site Sponsor
4 hours ago, Tyler Purcell said:

Got ya, so it's just AI machine learning software that reads the perf. Seems pretty straight forward to me. 

I was trying to come up with a solution that doesn't require the perf to be in frame. 

I would not exactly call it an AI but it has a certain area that it expects the perforations to be in and then looks for a specific shape and the contrast of it.

If you want to do really well stabilized film scanning without machine vision perf stabilization you will need a far better mechanical film transport than the ones on any of these new scanners. You can trigger the lamp/camera with a number of perf detector technologies from capacitive, laser or the optical encoder on the capstan.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, Tyler Purcell said:

Pretty good honestly, one of the better machines out there thanks to the gate design and the capstan drive. 

Our little Film Fabriek also has a gate for warped film and can run it capstan without frame detection. It needs to be heavily post stabilized, but it does work. We've run film with destroyed sprockets and the results look like a normal piece of film. 

Is the focus on your machine manual? If so, do you focus still frame or as the film is running?

I'm asking since you brought up sharpness of grain, so was wondering how it focuses. 

The Retroscan has a still setting for focus. But I found the best focus is achieved by running the film some, then rewinding it once focus is achieved. I move be head over enough to see the sprockets. That helps a lot as a focus aid. 

 

 

 

Edited by Daniel D. Teoli Jr.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Premium Member
3 hours ago, Daniel D. Teoli Jr. said:

Is the focus on your machine manual? If so, do you focus still frame or as the film is running?

Yep, we can do both paused (but tight against the gate) and running. 

3 hours ago, Daniel D. Teoli Jr. said:

I'm asking since you brought up sharpness of grain, so was wondering how it focuses. 

Yea, I think the problem is the lens. It's nothing special. I really wish we could change it for something else that was better, but alas I haven't found anything that has better specs optically; MTF. 

3 hours ago, Daniel D. Teoli Jr. said:

The Retroscan has a still setting for focus. But I found the best focus is achieved by running the film some, then rewinding it once focus is achieved. I move be head over enough to see the sprockets. That helps a lot as a focus aid. 

I agree 100%. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Premium Member
9 hours ago, Robert Houllahan said:

If you want to do really well stabilized film scanning without machine vision perf stabilization you will need a far better mechanical film transport than the ones on any of these new scanners. You can trigger the lamp/camera with a number of perf detector technologies from capacitive, laser or the optical encoder on the capstan.

The registration on our scanner is very good, it's better than a Spirit.

Our solution to make it slightly better is develop a gate that holds the film firm in place with a spring loaded rail. 

I have a spare gate to do this with, just need someone to machine the parts. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, Tyler Purcell said:

Yep, we can do both paused (but tight against the gate) and running. 

Yea, I think the problem is the lens. It's nothing special. I really wish we could change it for something else that was better, but alas I haven't found anything that has better specs optically; MTF. 

I agree 100%. 

Is it a C mount? Who makes it? I've got a Ricoh and it seems pretty good. But I've got no res charts, I'm judging just from eyeballing it. I use f5.6 mainly, sometimes f4 if I have to. It would be nice to test these scanner lenses with a good res chart. You can also get C mount lens adapters for M43 and Sony E to see how the lenses perform. But flat field is not the same as 3 D on a still cam.

When you get caught up make a YouTube video on your machine. Also another way to spread your name around online. I had contacted Filmfabriek a while back. (US Sales) They didn't impress me with their sales material. Hardy much at all. You would figure a company selling $$ machines would have some decent sales material / video's.

Now will you machine scan this? What about the cheap Lasergraphics Archivist...can it handle it?

The%203%20Graces%201.03mb%20D.D.%20Teoli

Photo: D.D.Teoli Jr.

The Retroscan can do it. Anything worse and the Restrocan won't do it. I'm talking warpage where you take the tape off the film head, sit the reel flat on a table and the whole film unwinds under its own power to the very end because of the warpage. I had a reel like that or two. Too bad I didn't make a video of it. Kinda mesmerizing to watch the film unwind on it own power and end up as a pile of film on the floor!

Edited by Daniel D. Teoli Jr.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Premium Member
14 hours ago, Daniel D. Teoli Jr. said:

Is it a C mount? Who makes it? I've got a Ricoh and it seems pretty good. But I've got no res charts, I'm judging just from eyeballing it. I use f5.6 mainly, sometimes f4 if I have to. It would be nice to test these scanner lenses with a good res chart. You can also get C mount lens adapters for M43 and Sony E to see how the lenses perform. But flat field is not the same as 3 D on a still cam.

This is the lens: 

https://schneiderkreuznach.com/application/files/3615/4115/5140/19746_Apo-Componon_2-8_40.pdf

It has a Makro-adaptor 6.5mm with a m42x1 diameter I guess? or maybe that's the image circle (coverage) after the conversion of the macro adaptor. 

It's pretty fast but I find it to be soft and distorted below F5.6, so we shoot as closed as we can. 

The lens is very small, similar to a C mount lens on a bolex. Close focus isn't very good either.

I believe they sourced this lens because it was a low-cost option and they needed that focal length. 

14 hours ago, Daniel D. Teoli Jr. said:

When you get caught up make a YouTube video on your machine. Also another way to spread your name around online. I had contacted Filmfabriek a while back. (US Sales) They didn't impress me with their sales material. Hardy much at all. You would figure a company selling $$ machines would have some decent sales material / video's.

They have zero info and not only that, nobody uses them with Camera negative. There are now only 3 of them in the US. We had growing pains and the scanner does not work out of the box, but with some patients and some experience at making mechanical things that move film work... something I have a bit of, we figured out how to make it work successfully. We will be modifying our own gate to make it work even better, but that's a much longer term project due to the cost. 

14 hours ago, Daniel D. Teoli Jr. said:

Now will you machine scan this? What about the cheap Lasergraphics Archivist...can it handle it?

We've done quite a bit of warped film. If it's not brittle it will work. The original retroscan's don't have a real gate, so it would be way worse at doing it than the Filmfabriek.  I have a warped film gate that helps greatly. If you want me to test it for ya, I'd love to try it. 

Edited by Tyler Purcell
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, Tyler Purcell said:

This is the lens: 

https://schneiderkreuznach.com/application/files/3615/4115/5140/19746_Apo-Componon_2-8_40.pdf

It has a Makro-adaptor 6.5mm with a m42x1 diameter I guess? or maybe that's the image circle (coverage) after the conversion of the macro adaptor. 

It's pretty fast but I find it to be soft and distorted below F5.6, so we shoot as closed as we can. 

The lens is very small, similar to a C mount lens on a bolex. Close focus isn't very good either.

I believe they sourced this lens because it was a low-cost option and they needed that focal length. 

They have zero info and not only that, nobody uses them with Camera negative. There are now only 3 of them in the US. We had growing pains and the scanner does not work out of the box, but with some patients and some experience at making mechanical things that move film work... something I have a bit of, we figured out how to make it work successfully. We will be modifying our own gate to make it work even better, but that's a much longer term project due to the cost. 

We've done quite a bit of warped film. If it's not brittle it will work. The original retroscan's don't have a real gate, so it would be way worse at doing it than the Filmfabriek.  I have a warped film gate that helps greatly. If you want me to test it for ya, I'd love to try it. 

 

No internet since last night. Just came back on around 11 am. That's the Rustbelt.

Schneider used to be top end glass. But...they began to farm out the lenses to other countries to make. So, who knows?

I don't want to send out the warped film I posted, too rare, but when I get another one to test, I can send it to you. That warped film is very rare. The 3 Graces.

Here is untoned version. The final toned version is at the I.A., but I can't get it to show up. 

Strong NSFW

 

 

Here is what you do...

Go to B&H, buy all their C mount lenses that may apply to you. Test them and send back what is junk for a refund. Make sure you document everything for your blog.

You mention image circle. In the old days of the wet darkroom we used to use the next size lens up with image circle so we could print through the center of the lens to get less spherical aberration from the edges. For 35mm, instead of using 50mm we used 75mm or 80mm. For 6x6 instead of 75mm we used 135mm. But, you had to have the adjustment for height if you wanted to make large photos. 

I don't know if that is possible with film scanners. I have to use extension tubes and washers for lens adjustment on the Retroscan, so I don't fool with it much. If they make a C mount adjustable extension tubes, that would be a plus for tests.

These scanner manufactures are terrible. Epson should get going with a good 16mm sound scanner for  $9,999. Film work is such enjoyable work...except for dealing with these GD scanning companies. That is what I hate.

My Retroscan had a small spot on the sensor when new. It is not an issue except on rare occasions. I don't clean sensors I leave them as is. I've never cleaned a sensor and have had tons of digital cams. Cleaning is a good way to ruin them. Just saying, new out of the box and scanner had a dirty sensor.

But the original Leica Monochroms were worse. Tons of spots on the the sensors. In the instructions it even said in an addendum to try not to stop down too much to minimize the spots. Just terrible how things are with some companies. Finally Leica recalled and replaced the sensors.

 

...maybe you should be FF's field man for their scanners!

 

 

Edited by Daniel D. Teoli Jr.
  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Correction to previous post on enlarging and using a larger image coverage circle...

For 6x6 negs we used a 105mm, not a 135mm.

For 6x7 negs we used a 135mm.

If you can find vintage Rodenstock, Schneider or El Nikkor enlarging lenses from the 1970s and 1980s, they were all great options. But can you adapt to the scanner?

I read one had a M39 mount. We didn't pay attention to the mount, we mounted them on a lens board and swapped the board on the enlarger when we changed lenses.

Here is a M39 to C mount adapter for Bolex...used for $49! 

s-l1600.jpg

If you can buy them new and return if they don't work out you may want to experiment with vintage enlarging lenses.

 

Edited by Daniel D. Teoli Jr.
  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Site Sponsor
On 8/7/2021 at 2:17 AM, Tyler Purcell said:

The registration on our scanner is very good, it's better than a Spirit.

Our solution to make it slightly better is develop a gate that holds the film firm in place with a spring loaded rail. 

I have a spare gate to do this with, just need someone to machine the parts. 

The Spirit 2K/4K has a spring loaded rail and a ceramic guide for the side closest to the film deck. Registration is fairly good for a telecine and also depends on what features are enabled on the machine.

It is not a mechanical or machine vision registered system and without one of those features in 2021 a scanner is relegated to being a dailies machine which will require allot of un-required work in post.

 

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...