Jump to content


Photo

Quick Question - Super 16IP or 35mm IN for telecine?


  • Please log in to reply
5 replies to this topic

#1 Isaac Chung

Isaac Chung
  • Basic Members
  • PipPip
  • 36 posts
  • Director

Posted 03 May 2007 - 06:45 PM

I already have a telecine for my Super 16mm IP, but half of it looks terrible, so I will need to do it again. The question is, since the film is already blown up to 35mm and I have a 35mm IN, should I do the telecine with the 35mm IN? Will it yield better results?

Sorry if this has been answered before--kind of in a rush and couldn't find any results on search.
Thanks,
Isaac
  • 0

#2 David Mullen ASC

David Mullen ASC
  • Sustaining Members
  • 20074 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Los Angeles

Posted 03 May 2007 - 06:57 PM

Take both in and put a reel up and look at them and decide.

I've never gotten a straight answer from a colorist on that one, regarding whether it was better to use the S16 IP (because it was contact-printed and only one generation removed) or the 35mm IN (because it was steadier, bigger, etc.)

Trouble with the 35mm IN is that any S16 dust has been photographed into the image and is enlarged. So my guess would be to use the S16 IP, but if you've got both there, maybe you can take a look at a shot from both and decide.
  • 0

#3 Isaac Chung

Isaac Chung
  • Basic Members
  • PipPip
  • 36 posts
  • Director

Posted 03 May 2007 - 08:09 PM

Thanks Dave, in other words, I guess there's not clear answer--that's actually somehow comforting.

isaac

Take both in and put a reel up and look at them and decide.

I've never gotten a straight answer from a colorist on that one, regarding whether it was better to use the S16 IP (because it was contact-printed and only one generation removed) or the 35mm IN (because it was steadier, bigger, etc.)

Trouble with the 35mm IN is that any S16 dust has been photographed into the image and is enlarged. So my guess would be to use the S16 IP, but if you've got both there, maybe you can take a look at a shot from both and decide.


  • 0

#4 adam berk

adam berk
  • Sustaining Members
  • 168 posts
  • Director

Posted 03 May 2007 - 08:12 PM

Thanks Dave, in other words, I guess there's not clear answer--that's actually somehow comforting.

isaac



Hey Isaac, if you do get the chance to look at both on the telecine, would you mind posting back here with your findings? It would be interesting to hear how it works out for you.
  • 0

#5 Isaac Chung

Isaac Chung
  • Basic Members
  • PipPip
  • 36 posts
  • Director

Posted 03 May 2007 - 08:27 PM

I can do that, but there's a chance, b/c I'm pressed for time with my project, that I'll just go with whatever protocol is practically the fastest .

thanks,
isaac


Hey Isaac, if you do get the chance to look at both on the telecine, would you mind posting back here with your findings? It would be interesting to hear how it works out for you.


  • 0

#6 Brian Drysdale

Brian Drysdale
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 5196 posts
  • Cinematographer

Posted 08 May 2007 - 11:23 AM

I've done it with the 35mm IN - it worked extremely well.

Although, because the title cards were shot on 35mm, I also had to get their fade in & out opticals done in an online facilty after the TK transfer.
  • 0


Rig Wheels Passport

Tai Audio

Media Blackout - Custom Cables and AKS

Broadcast Solutions Inc

Willys Widgets

Glidecam

Visual Products

Aerial Filmworks

New Pro Video - New and Used Equipment

CineTape

Metropolis Post

Technodolly

CineLab

FJS International, LLC

Wooden Camera

Ritter Battery

Gamma Ray Digital Inc

rebotnix Technologies

Abel Cine

The Slider

Paralinx LLC

Media Blackout - Custom Cables and AKS

Glidecam

rebotnix Technologies

Gamma Ray Digital Inc

Visual Products

Willys Widgets

New Pro Video - New and Used Equipment

CineTape

Aerial Filmworks

Tai Audio

Broadcast Solutions Inc

FJS International, LLC

The Slider

CineLab

Metropolis Post

Technodolly

Rig Wheels Passport

Paralinx LLC

Ritter Battery

Wooden Camera

Abel Cine