Best lo-fi transfer set up?
Posted 27 March 2006 - 10:17 PM
Are any of those video transfer devices I see on eCheeze any better than the others? I was reading about the Kodak Moviedeck...anyone have one to chime in on about?? I like the look of it as far as ease of use goes.
I was hoping that Bentley thingamabob would work, but from all accounts, I might have well as rolled up my $20 and smoked it.
Posted 28 March 2006 - 11:11 PM
Just project your image onto the screen on one side and film the image off the other with your DV camera.
I hook my DV directly to my computer and import as the projector runs.
Sure there's some flicker (minimal), and sure the image isn't amazing, but that's how my parents watched it; projected on a Da-Lite screen some 30 years ago.
This is super 8, people expect it to look like crap. I'm not saying super 8 does look like crap - it doesn't - I'm saying that you don't need a perfect image to make a great little movie.
This is a picture from mike nyberg's amazing super 8 page. It shows a video transfer using a box similar to mine.
Posted 29 March 2006 - 01:13 AM
Posted 02 April 2006 - 08:03 AM
Posted 02 April 2006 - 02:38 PM
Unless you are planning on going into the home movie transfer business, buying a Workprinter or, my God, a Sniper, means an outlay of thousands of dollars. Completely insane -- can't even hold a candle to uncompressed harddrive 10 bit (Rank, Shadow) which is now readily available at half a dozen places. And besides, think about it, you're shooting reversal anyways (negative does not work worth a poop in those things), so you can do an edit of what you decide you want from raw footage doing an off the white paper on the wall transfer and send that reel in for a real transfer, so getting a real transfer makes even more sense economics-wise.
* The big concern with mathis's sugestion is getting your exposure on the camcorder right. And this is because you are shooting a projected image off a white sheet of paper. Almost always you're going to see people being fooled into thinking that they are seeing a better exposure with their reversal exposed even 2/3 of a stop off. Of course they are not. The camcorder is autoexposing under to compensate for the artificially bright light on the white paper in the bright spots! Which is naturally far brighter than in the original scene, so the iris closes more than it should for a correct transfer. *
Posted 03 April 2006 - 11:32 PM