Jump to content


The Cheapest Vision2 200t Possible? An answer.


  • Please log in to reply
28 replies to this topic

#1 santo

santo
  • Guests

Posted 08 March 2006 - 11:09 PM

With some new lenses and cameras I need to test, I now have an excellent excuse to shoot more super8. I'll be shooting in Vision2 200t and I need at least a Standard Def 10 bit uncompressed video transfer on hard drive so I can really see the way things are. I thought this time I'll look for what is possible on super 8 negative transfers to professional grade video format with price as an issue. Here's the cheapest combination (no student discounts -- I'm not a student):

FILM, buy direct from Kodak. Most current US price I have is $15.15
http://www.kodak.com/US/plugins/acrobat/en...2%20prices'

PROCESSING AND TRANSFER, Cinelab. V2 200t developing is $15 and prepped for transfer, too. Transfer, direct to hard drive 10 bit uncompressed with Blackmagic Design Codec, $125 hour supervised transfer!
http://www.cinelab.com/

So V2 200t can be had for $30.15 US developed.

Can anybody beat that? I am pretty certain it can't be done unless somebody has a student discount.

Compared to what I spent last year at full retail at Henry's for a cart of old K40 which was roughly $28 US with processing included.

Thanks Steve Hyde for bringing this cinelab place to my attention a little while back. I just picked up an email from them and confirmed things with regards to the terrific telecine deal.
  • 0

#2 Peter Duggan

Peter Duggan
  • Basic Members
  • PipPip
  • 46 posts
  • Sound Department

Posted 08 March 2006 - 11:52 PM

Spectra processes the negative cart for $14. They prepped my neg even though I didn't ask them to, but I'm not sure if it was because of the delay in processing or if it's because it's part of the price.
  • 0

#3 santo

santo
  • Guests

Posted 09 March 2006 - 09:14 AM

So down to $29.15 for V2 200t with processing.

Damn shame Spectra doesn't offer the progressive thinking direct-to-hard drive transfer which is the inevitable and superior future.
  • 0

#4 Brant Collins

Brant Collins
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 165 posts
  • Producer
  • Little Rock, Arkansas

Posted 09 March 2006 - 10:00 AM

http://www.cinelab.com/

I do not see on their web site where they offer the hard drive option? Can you send your own hard drive?
  • 0

#5 santo

santo
  • Guests

Posted 09 March 2006 - 10:18 AM

Here's my email from them. I'm sure they won't mind in the least if I post it here.

Hi,

I've been reading some on the internet about your direct-to-hard drive film transfer service you are said to offer. Could you answer some questions about it?


Sure

First, do I simply send you a hard drive and the film?

That would be fine

Second, is there any extra cost over doing a miniDV transfer?

None other than tape stock

Third, is it a full 10-bit transfer? And if so, do you use the common Blackmagic Universal Codec with it?

Yes full 10 bit from Color Corrector to a G5 with a Blackmagic card, 10 bit.

Fourth, you can handle super 8 in this way?

Yes we do this all the time, that Telecine will run Super8, 16mm, super16, 35mm and Super35

Thanks for taking the time to answer these questions.

Glad to.

-Rob-


Robert Houllahan
Filmmaker
V.P. Technical Director / Colorist
Cinelab www.cinelab.com
Lab 508 672 1204
Cell 401 499 6411

  • 0

#6 Brant Collins

Brant Collins
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 165 posts
  • Producer
  • Little Rock, Arkansas

Posted 09 March 2006 - 12:09 PM

Thanks, hope to be trying it soon
  • 0

#7 steve hyde

steve hyde
  • Sustaining Members
  • 446 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Seattle

Posted 09 March 2006 - 01:07 PM

Well, I think it is important to keep in mind that a cheap transfer is a cheap transfer. Rank Turbo transfers have a distinct "look" and to my eyes they look like work prints. I'm not sure how valuable it really is to have a 4:2:2 10 bit uncompressed work print. Perhaps it is valuable for cinematographers that are well versed in NLE color correction, grain reduction etc. and have the tools to do this.

However, out of curiosity I just got an xfer from CineLab yesterday and I'm in the process of reviewing the material. The reels in this xfer were not ideal for any kind of quality testing since it is mostly hand processed black and white negative for a video installation. I'm planning to send them some S16 color negative Friday so that footage will give me a better idea about the quality of their "Rank Turbo" xfers.

Rank xfers have a cheap hourly because the equipment is much cheaper than the Thompson stuff that posthouses like FSFT are using. If you like a rough grainy look, Rank xfers are good for that. If you want your Vision 2 super 8 to look "the best it can" I don't think a higher bit rate on a Rank will give you the "best" results. So for me this cheapest route to Vision 2 scenario is the cheapest way to get a work print DVcam tape, not a route towards a polished-finish super 8 film unless you plan to recapture selects.

As I plan for a short with a 10:1 shooting ratio on color negative, I am thinking it makes the most sense to print all the work out via Rank for off-line editing with intentions to conform my final edits back to the camera original negative in a supervised session at FSFT on the Shadow with a tapeless 4:2:2 10 bit SDI to my external hard drive.

All this said, I'll only recapture selects from the camera original if I think that makes sense for the project.
Otherwise, I'll just finish on the Rank work print and put myself into the next project. With this in mind, having the 4:2:2 Rank files would be nice to conform to.


Steve
  • 0

#8 santo

santo
  • Guests

Posted 09 March 2006 - 01:40 PM

Unfortunately Steve, you once again show that you don't know what you're talking about and are in need of corrective eye surgery. No quality Rank Turbo transfer handled by somebody competent has a "rough grainy look". hahahahahahahaha -- Christ, half the major features would look like poop! Think about it. The only reason your super 8 was from before was, is because you had it transfered to miniDV. But I've gone through this and explained it extensively before with numerous examples.

What the Shadow and Spirit have going for them is that they are a lot easier to maintain and therefore you are more likely to have transfers that are from a machine that is set up correctly. This is the advantage if there is one. Flying Spot enjoys the use of such a machine and good colourists who know what they are doing. They deserve credit, but they charge a huge premium for it. But Rank Turbo with a good colourist, running properly, is its equal. Blacks are BLACK. Colours are VIBRANT. Industry standards we're talking about here. However, I can't defend Cinelab at this point, I haven't had them transfer anything.

But you go ahead and enjoy spending all that extra money for nothing by transfering your footage twice! If you get a decent Rank transfer you'll realize it is a waste of money and time to do so.
  • 0

#9 Anthony Schilling

Anthony Schilling
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1053 posts
  • Camera Operator
  • Portland, OR

Posted 09 March 2006 - 04:59 PM

Damn shame Spectra doesn't offer the progressive thinking direct-to-hard drive transfer which is the inevitable and superior future.

I asked them about direct to drive transfers yesterday. Seems they want to get into it as soon as they raise enough $$ for the setup. They are currently still investing in other quality assurance improvements/products ect. Hopefully they get on the waggon soon, I'm dying to try some cross processed E-6 transfers through them with their Velvia or 100D.

$125 hour supervised transfer!

And no additional cost for the hard drive upload? Sounds almost too good to be good, but worth looking into. These services need to get better and cheaper evetually.
  • 0

#10 Brant Collins

Brant Collins
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 165 posts
  • Producer
  • Little Rock, Arkansas

Posted 09 March 2006 - 05:39 PM

if it is 10 bit uncompressed shouldn't it be 4:4:4 not 4:2:2? If they have the right black magic card it should be 4:4:4.

Edited by brant, 09 March 2006 - 05:40 PM.

  • 0

#11 Alessandro Machi

Alessandro Machi
  • Sustaining Members
  • 3318 posts
  • Other
  • California

Posted 11 March 2006 - 02:50 AM

I asked them about direct to drive transfers yesterday. Seems they want to get into it as soon as they raise enough $$ for the setup. They are currently still investing in other quality assurance improvements/products ect. Hopefully they get on the waggon soon, I'm dying to try some cross processed E-6 transfers through them with their Velvia or 100D.
And no additional cost for the hard drive upload? Sounds almost too good to be good, but worth looking into. These services need to get better and cheaper evetually.



I have no reservations about transferring velvia super-8 to betacam sp at Spectra. It will look quite spectacular even without 10 bit. From what I've already seen, it does seem to have the potential to look just like 16mm in terms of having a grainless look and color intensity.

However, I've also seen 200 T transferred at Spectra that also looked quite spectacular. Maybe it would be wise to not assume that all rank operators don't take care of their ranks when it's quite possible your sainthood nominee probably takes the cake in terms of lack of maintenance.

Santo, where do you get off accusing all of those rank operators of not maintaining their ranks yet you actually had the gall to nominate the one place that probably does one of the worst jobs of maintaining their ranks.

sheesh.
  • 0

#12 santo

santo
  • Guests

Posted 11 March 2006 - 08:30 AM

Maybe it would be wise to not assume that all rank operators don't take care of their ranks when it's quite possible your sainthood nominee probably takes the cake in terms of lack of maintenance.

Santo, where do you get off accusing all of those rank operators of not maintaining their ranks yet you actually had the gall to nominate the one place that probably does one of the worst jobs of maintaining their ranks.

sheesh.


I honestly can't see how anybody who is sane and has a working understanding of the English language could conclude that I'm "accusing all of those rank operators of not maintaining their ranks" in the above posts, Alex.

And which business operation are you accusing that: "takes the cake in terms of lack of maintenance" and "probably does one of the worst jobs of maintaining their ranks" ??? Perhaps you can specify whom you are talking about exactly, and spill the beans on what actual knowledge and information you have on this to make such a slanderous accusation? Sainthood...
  • 0

#13 Chris Burke

Chris Burke
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1675 posts
  • Boston, MA

Posted 11 March 2006 - 09:13 AM

I asked them about direct to drive transfers yesterday. Seems they want to get into it as soon as they raise enough $$ for the setup. They are currently still investing in other quality assurance improvements/products ect. Hopefully they get on the waggon soon, I'm dying to try some cross processed E-6 transfers through them with their Velvia or 100D.
And no additional cost for the hard drive upload? Sounds almost too good to be good, but worth looking into. These services need to get better and cheaper evetually.



I live in Boston, close to where Cinelab is, and have used them a good deal. Yes the direct to drive option does sound too good to be true, but it isn't. they really do have to update their website with all of this information. For Super 16 projects, they offer, 400' of any Fuji stock, processing, prep and I think a best light, direct to drive option applies, $200 or I think even $198. I have had Super 16 and Super 8 best lighted to hard drive, and it look great, best light is 14¢ per and scene to scene is 18¢ per foot. In my opinion, they offer a great service for the price. The tk is fine for editing and having a screener to show to investors who will pay for the Shadow or Spirit sesssion. You end up with a better than Digibeta quality file at a fraction of the cost. I have always made a window burn tape back up, incase the drive goes south.

For a camera test, I sent three 100' spools of 7274 to them along with 3 DVD-Rs and had them put the data files on the DVDs, one spools per. This saved me on shipping a drive around. If you are having say one hours worth of footage transfered, it is still only about 81.31 GB, so you don't need a huge drive. For short films, Super 8 et al, I think this is the way to go.

:D
  • 0

#14 steve hyde

steve hyde
  • Sustaining Members
  • 446 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Seattle

Posted 11 March 2006 - 11:23 AM

But you go ahead and enjoy spending all that extra money for nothing by transfering your footage twice! If you get a decent Rank transfer you'll realize it is a waste of money and time to do so.


Well there are a lot of ways a filmmaker can spend money, and this is one of them. If you think color correcting scene to scene with power windows and designing a "look" with a colorist from the camera original negative is a waste of money, that is understandable. Maybe you are right.

Good luck,

Steve
  • 0

#15 Stuart Brereton

Stuart Brereton
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 3059 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Los Angeles

Posted 11 March 2006 - 12:36 PM

What the Shadow and Spirit have going for them is that they are a lot easier to maintain....But Rank Turbo with a good colourist, running properly, is its equal. Blacks are BLACK. Colours are VIBRANT. Industry standards we're talking about here.


Nonsense. The Rank Turbo line was introduced in the 1980's, and was later replaced by the Ursa line. They are competent machines, particularly with some after market mods, but to suggest they are the equal of a Spirit is pure fantasy.
  • 0

#16 Alessandro Machi

Alessandro Machi
  • Sustaining Members
  • 3318 posts
  • Other
  • California

Posted 11 March 2006 - 01:06 PM

Nonsense. The Rank Turbo line was introduced in the 1980's, and was later replaced by the Ursa line. They are competent machines, particularly with some after market mods, but to suggest they are the equal of a Spirit is pure fantasy.


I disagree. I'm pretty sure I'm seeing about the best Super-8 will look from "Film & Video Transfers" and "Spectra Film & Video". I haven't done enough with Yale to know if they are in the same league or not, but all three of these places (all located in Southern California) are serious about their transfer quality and I think that is always the most important aspect.

And yes, aftermarket mods and upgrades really do make a difference and bridge the gap to what the newer transfer technologies are doing.

-----------------------------------------

The only reason your super 8 was (grainy?) from before was, is because you had it transfered to miniDV. But I've gone through this and explained it extensively before with numerous examples.

What the Shadow and Spirit have going for them is that they are a lot easier to maintain and therefore you are more likely to have transfers that are from a machine that is set up correctly. This is the advantage if there is one.



This statement is a slap in the face to the Rank Owners that take pride in their transfer services and pay for proper maintenance on their machine.

Philosophically speaking what you state has truth, but when it comes down to individual ownership of a rank, stick specifically to who you know does good transfer work versus bad, if you did, you might not be so quick to annoint "sainthood" status as you have in the past.
  • 0

#17 santo

santo
  • Guests

Posted 11 March 2006 - 01:36 PM

I am no expert on telecine, I am the first to admit. However, Alex's first statement is certainly true regarding the best looking super 8 transfers. Currently the only Shadow exception we see comes from Flying Spot. That's it. The rest of the best are all done on Rank Turbos that are kept up and have dedicated Super 8 mods and some of the latest tech improvements, run by competent colourists who care. That's just the way it is. If you get a solidly handled scene-by-scene corrected transfer on such a set up in the first place, the independent filmmaker on a budget of their own making (ie. their pocket) need not worry about transfering again for any practical reason.

Having said that, thinking about Steve's situation, sitting in the same city as Flying Spot, it makes little sense for him not to show up and watch the session and get it all done there initially. I'm sure they would probably be flexible enough, if he explains his plan, to cut him a deal where he won't have to send it out somewhere else first and then get it transfered a second time there. A good place is always going to be flexible and do some wheeling and dealing if you're a nice person. Heck, I fired off a few query emails to Rosen who works there once and he was immediately helpful and offering all kinds of possible deals for business.

Duplicated post-production which can in some way be avoided is one of the biggest hidden drain holes of indie film production. I don't know how many times I've read about or talked to people who regret taking a bunch of extra steps they didn't need to in post, their previously carefully budgeted and executed project draining them dry of their last penny in credit or whatever. Money should hopefully be spent in front of the camera before instead if you're going to go broke.
  • 0

#18 santo

santo
  • Guests

Posted 11 March 2006 - 01:53 PM

Philosophically speaking what you state has truth, but when it comes down to individual ownership of a rank, stick specifically to who you know does good transfer work versus bad, if you did, you might not be so quick to annoint "sainthood" status as you have in the past.


As you won't come out and name who you're slandering, I'll say that I've never promoted any service or product that I know wasn't good anywhere (and completely without compensation).

I thought some of the best super 8 transfers I've seen to date appear in major Hollywood films, actually. Like, say, NATURAL BORN KILLERS -- best that crappy old 7240 ever looked anywhere Even that Neil Young movie, lensed with a mediocre Eumig Nautica, had a really good transfer. Or the latest Pro8 demo reel, even, looks terrific. All Rank transfers.
  • 0

#19 Stephen Williams

Stephen Williams
  • Sustaining Members
  • 4708 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Europe

Posted 11 March 2006 - 02:05 PM

[quote name=
This statement is a slap in the face to the Rank Owners that take pride in their transfer services and pay for proper maintenance on their machine.
[/quote]

Hi,

There is one big problem with a Rank TK and that the tube.
The life of a tube is about 1 year in a facility if your lucky. A replacement tube will cost in the region of $5000. The quality of a transfer with a 1 week old tube is higher than a 6 month old tube.

Stephen
  • 0

#20 steve hyde

steve hyde
  • Sustaining Members
  • 446 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Seattle

Posted 11 March 2006 - 05:19 PM

For those interested in learning more about telecine I have heard TIG is a good resource for this:

http://colorist.org/.../Telecine_Types

I have not used this website myself...

hope this helps,

Steve
  • 0


Ritter Battery

Broadcast Solutions Inc

Glidecam

Technodolly

The Slider

Media Blackout - Custom Cables and AKS

Rig Wheels Passport

Abel Cine

Metropolis Post

Wooden Camera

CineLab

rebotnix Technologies

CineTape

Tai Audio

Opal

Visual Products

FJS International, LLC

Aerial Filmworks

Gamma Ray Digital Inc

Paralinx LLC

Willys Widgets

FJS International, LLC

Media Blackout - Custom Cables and AKS

Ritter Battery

Broadcast Solutions Inc

Opal

Technodolly

Abel Cine

Visual Products

Metropolis Post

CineLab

The Slider

Willys Widgets

Wooden Camera

Gamma Ray Digital Inc

rebotnix Technologies

Glidecam

Paralinx LLC

CineTape

Aerial Filmworks

Rig Wheels Passport

Tai Audio