Jump to content



Photo

Super 8 - Quality differences


  • Please log in to reply
25 replies to this topic

#21 Dan Peterson

Dan Peterson
  • Basic Members
  • PipPip
  • 10 posts
  • Other
  • Minneapolis

Posted 06 August 2018 - 01:23 PM

Thanks for that info Perry! Before I used Gamma Ray's excellent scanning services, I had my Super 8 film scanned by a firm I will not mention (in California). Despite my clearly written instructions when I shipped the film to them, they scanned at 18 fps when I told them it was shot at 24 fps. So the resulting ProRes file I got from them was crap. I will never use them again!  It was also Tri-X film, so the final render and subsequent compression knock down by YouTube has crazy compression blocking and makes me sad to watch.

 

While I have your attention:

All things considered; which scanning format would you recommend to a prosumer with Super 8 film:

ProRes 4:2:2 Super 2k or 10-bit .DPX sequence Super 2k (I always want overscan)?

(Vegas works in an 8-bit environment, so I'm assuming I'm already losing some data from the 10-bit .DPX)

 

Also, when you say Uncompressed, which file/format/codec specifically?

 

Thanks in advance!


  • 0

#22 Perry Paolantonio

Perry Paolantonio
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 569 posts
  • Other
  • Boston, MA

Posted 06 August 2018 - 02:24 PM

ProRes is 10 bit as well. I'd stick with ProRes 422 for black and white and 4444 for color. You're only gaining better color sampling with 4444, so no point in making a bigger file if it's B/W footage. 

 

By Uncompressed I'm referring to DPX. Though we can handle a lot of formats on the Lasergraphics scanner, the only three we ever really do are ProRes, DPX or CinemaDNG image sequences. 

 

As for Youtube, if you upload HD, you get ok HD. If you upload 2k, you get better HD and ok 2k. If you upload 4k you get better 2k. It's a fluke of their algorithm - they seem to apply less/better compression to higher resolution uploads. 


  • 0

#23 Jon O'Brien

Jon O'Brien
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 566 posts
  • Other
  • Brisbane

Posted 06 August 2018 - 10:48 PM

Flicker was ever so slightly noticeable at 18 fps but all the projectors could run at that speed, even sound projectors. I started out as a filmmaker at 18 fps but soon went to 24 when I got my first sound camera. The improvement in sound quality on the magnetic stripe was fairly noticeable.


  • 0

#24 Will Montgomery

Will Montgomery
  • Sustaining Members
  • 2126 posts
  • Producer
  • Dallas, TX

Posted 07 August 2018 - 09:41 AM

Scans are amazing today and a great value, but with these flat scans you need to know your way around Resolve or how to color well. In the "old days" 10 years ago, I'd always have a colorist make the footage beautiful before I'd be editing and it was a pleasure to work with. I know it makes more sense to color after you've edited but it was nice to work with perfectly colored footage.


  • 0

#25 Patrick Cooper

Patrick Cooper
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 921 posts
  • Other

Posted 08 August 2018 - 10:58 AM

Yep, a lot of variability in quality in super 8 clips on youtube. As for the second clip you posted, another hint that it's 16mm is the wide angle distortion evident in a number of shots. That's something you rarely see in super 8 (especially to that degree.) Typically, with super 8 zoom lenses, the shortest focal length is usually 6 or 7mm which won't give you much coverage. And if there's any distortion, it's going to be very mild. 


  • 0

#26 Dan Peterson

Dan Peterson
  • Basic Members
  • PipPip
  • 10 posts
  • Other
  • Minneapolis

Posted 08 August 2018 - 11:21 AM

Any interesting tidbit I found out in the last few days:

I was looking at Nick's clips on YouTube, and for more info I right-clicked on one of his videos in YouTube and selected "Stats for nerds". From that I saw he rendered to 2034 x 1440p, and YouTube had assigned the VP9 codec to his clip(s).  I had rendered to the exact same frame size and rate (24 fps), but YouTube was assigning the BT709 (?) codec to my clips AND I could not get a 1440p playback (only 1080p), even on my 90 MB Comcast pipeline at home.

 

More Googling and I found this tip:

1. Go to "Video Manager," find your video, click "Edit", click on the "Enhancements" tab, and drag the little preview slider all the way to the left. You don't touch anything else, just drag the slider to the left and click save changes. Your video should get VP9 soon. (source: https://www.vegascre...utube--100282/)

 

I did this little tweak, and now my videos playback at 1440p, when before I could only get 1080p (even though they were rendered and uploaded at 1440p).

 

See for yourself in this updated version of my clip (i.e., see if you can get 1440p playback, I can at home, but at work I only get 1080p, probably due to a restricted internet download speed): https://www.youtube....eature=youtu.be


  • 0


Ritter Battery

Abel Cine

FJS International, LLC

Broadcast Solutions Inc

New Pro Video - New and Used Equipment

Paralinx LLC

Gamma Ray Digital Inc

Wooden Camera

Glidecam

Metropolis Post

Rig Wheels Passport

Tai Audio

Media Blackout - Custom Cables and AKS

CineLab

Visual Products

Metropolis Post

Visual Products

Tai Audio

Rig Wheels Passport

FJS International, LLC

Ritter Battery

Gamma Ray Digital Inc

Paralinx LLC

Glidecam

Media Blackout - Custom Cables and AKS

CineLab

New Pro Video - New and Used Equipment

Abel Cine

Wooden Camera

Broadcast Solutions Inc