Jump to content


DIY DI?


  • Please log in to reply
14 replies to this topic

#1 Glen Alexander

Glen Alexander
  • Guests

Posted 22 May 2008 - 12:46 PM

has anyone chopped and modified this for continuous 35mm film?

it's slow 40sec a shot but 4000dpi @16bit is pretty good.

Edited by Glen Alexander, 22 May 2008 - 12:47 PM.

  • 0

#2 K Borowski

K Borowski
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 3905 posts
  • Camera Operator
  • I.A.T.S.E. Local # 600 Eastern Region

Posted 22 May 2008 - 03:28 PM

has anyone chopped and modified this for continuous 35mm film?

it's slow 40sec a shot but 4000dpi @16bit is pretty good.


Problem is, there seems to be a limit on the maximal length of film that you can scan, plus there's the added difficulty of writing/finding software that will put the frames in order and play them all back in motion, rather than just letting you view them one by one and align and order them one by one to play in some sort of nonlinear editing program.
  • 0

#3 Glen Alexander

Glen Alexander
  • Guests

Posted 22 May 2008 - 05:23 PM

Problem is, there seems to be a limit on the maximal length of film that you can scan, plus there's the added difficulty of writing/finding software that will put the frames in order and play them all back in motion, rather than just letting you view them one by one and align and order them one by one to play in some sort of nonlinear editing program.


wouldn't be too difficult to pop the top off the scanner and rig a simple servo motor with a worm gear, advanced film one frame at a time, scan, dump full 16-bit tiff to a file and number sequentially. it would take a long time at 40sec/scan but a lot cheaper than commercial rates.
  • 0

#4 K Borowski

K Borowski
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 3905 posts
  • Camera Operator
  • I.A.T.S.E. Local # 600 Eastern Region

Posted 22 May 2008 - 09:35 PM

wouldn't be too difficult to pop the top off the scanner and rig a simple servo motor with a worm gear, advanced film one frame at a time, scan, dump full 16-bit tiff to a file and number sequentially. it would take a long time at 40sec/scan but a lot cheaper than commercial rates.


IDK about the 9000, but the 35mm-only version with the long roll adapter can only do 40 files in a scan run, so you could only scan 1 2/3 seconds at a time. You'd probalby have to do some custom modifications.

There ARE some scanners that were designed for still photography that'd work great for this though: the Kodak HR 500 and Kodak 3570 come to mind.
  • 0

#5 Nate Downes

Nate Downes
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1638 posts
  • Florida, USA

Posted 23 May 2008 - 07:15 AM

I have the HP Photosmart negative scanner, and it would be relatively easy to modify for this it looks like. (I'd add in a roller to hold the negatives in place before and after the scanner, myself)
  • 0

#6 Glen Alexander

Glen Alexander
  • Guests

Posted 23 May 2008 - 08:13 AM

I have the HP Photosmart negative scanner, and it would be relatively easy to modify for this it looks like. (I'd add in a roller to hold the negatives in place before and after the scanner, myself)


http://graphics1.kod...t_3/default.htm

this one scans at 5,500 dpi
  • 0

#7 Walter Graff

Walter Graff
  • Sustaining Members
  • 1334 posts
  • Other
  • New York City

Posted 23 May 2008 - 09:16 AM

http://www.bcs.tv/st...l.cfm?id=805761
  • 0

#8 Glen Alexander

Glen Alexander
  • Guests

Posted 23 May 2008 - 09:26 AM

http://www.bcs.tv/st...l.cfm?id=805761


well yes, that would work but at 375k USD version 4kUSD, the 4k is better performance and cost. 1.9 sec per frame at 14-bit, the kodak is 40sec frame at 16-bit.

13dB difference in fps performance + XE
8k vs 5.5k slight advantage to XE
2 bits difference in image quality +Kodak
19dB difference in price +Kodak

XE more resolution with less bit depth, i'd go for less resolution at greater bit depth.
  • 0

#9 Walter Graff

Walter Graff
  • Sustaining Members
  • 1334 posts
  • Other
  • New York City

Posted 23 May 2008 - 09:31 AM

Actually is says it's been reduced to $157,000.
  • 0

#10 Glen Alexander

Glen Alexander
  • Guests

Posted 23 May 2008 - 09:44 AM

Actually is says it's been reduced to $157,000.


ah cheap :lol:
  • 0

#11 Paul Bruening

Paul Bruening

    (deceased)

  • Sustaining Members
  • 2858 posts
  • Producer
  • Oxford, Mississippi

Posted 25 May 2008 - 09:40 PM

The latest Epsons can do about 6400 X 9600 dpi. It's about $200.00. It has a built-in backlight. But from what I can gather, it does not cover the entire scan area. I can't get any exact numbers on scan time. Apparently, it's real slow. Assuming that as many as 7 rolls could be scanned, side-by-side, for the scan length of 11 inches, 192 2-perf frames could be scanned on each pass. A feature of 173,000 frames would take 901 scan passes (1,802 scan passes for 4-perf, 1,351 for 3-perf). Sure a transport system could be built to pull those frames through with a stepper motor and a full area back light could be installed. The issue remains, how long will an adequate resolution scan take? If you're looking at 40 minutes per pass you'll get the scans (not including normal set-up delays, Digital Ice and digitally chopping up the page and storing the sequences you could get the scans in around 25 days. Counting in all those stated delays you'd be looking at something on the order of six times the 25 days (Digital Ice alone causes a 4X delay on the CPU). Scanners get sharp images. Software can do the chop, invert and clean. Backlight and stepper transport are doable. The problem is still TIME. This is why DIY scanners still lean on DSLRs. Sure, they've got their own sets of hassles (and they are considerable). But, they are a little faster.

That's not the God's truth. It's just some observations.
  • 0

#12 Phil Rhodes

Phil Rhodes
  • Sustaining Members
  • 11945 posts
  • Other

Posted 26 May 2008 - 06:49 AM

The elephant in the corner here is registration, since you don't have a precision movement controlling film positioning.

This may be work-aroundable if you can scan the sprocket holes and stabilise in software. Spirit does this in the vertical axis anyway and if you can scan at sufficient resolution that the reposition doesn't murder the sharpness, this could be a very acceptable solution.

P
  • 0

#13 Glen Alexander

Glen Alexander
  • Guests

Posted 26 May 2008 - 06:55 AM

The latest Epsons can do about 6400 X 9600 dpi. It's about $200.00. It has a built-in backlight. But from what I can gather, it does not cover the entire scan area. I can't get any exact numbers on scan time. Apparently, it's real slow. Assuming that as many as 7 rolls could be scanned, side-by-side, for the scan length of 11 inches, 192 2-perf frames could be scanned on each pass. A feature of 173,000 frames would take 901 scan passes (1,802 scan passes for 4-perf, 1,351 for 3-perf). Sure a transport system could be built to pull those frames through with a stepper motor and a full area back light could be installed. The issue remains, how long will an adequate resolution scan take? If you're looking at 40 minutes per pass you'll get the scans (not including normal set-up delays, Digital Ice and digitally chopping up the page and storing the sequences you could get the scans in around 25 days. Counting in all those stated delays you'd be looking at something on the order of six times the 25 days (Digital Ice alone causes a 4X delay on the CPU). Scanners get sharp images. Software can do the chop, invert and clean. Backlight and stepper transport are doable. The problem is still TIME. This is why DIY scanners still lean on DSLRs. Sure, they've got their own sets of hassles (and they are considerable). But, they are a little faster.

That's not the God's truth. It's just some observations.


at $200 bucks a pop, buy 10.
  • 0

#14 Glen Alexander

Glen Alexander
  • Guests

Posted 26 May 2008 - 06:57 AM

at $200 bucks a pop, buy 10, some cheap old Dell's from ebay ..


  • 0

#15 Glen Alexander

Glen Alexander
  • Guests

Posted 08 June 2008 - 07:39 PM

these little fellas has some possibilities if you could control film reels on each side

http://www.scanace.c...uct/PF3650u.php

"...Automatically loads and batch scans 35mm roll films and filmstrips..."

http://www.scanace.c.../pf7250pro3.php

Edited by Glen Alexander, 08 June 2008 - 07:41 PM.

  • 0


Wooden Camera

The Slider

rebotnix Technologies

Aerial Filmworks

Media Blackout - Custom Cables and AKS

Willys Widgets

CineTape

Abel Cine

Tai Audio

Paralinx LLC

Broadcast Solutions Inc

Ritter Battery

Metropolis Post

Opal

CineLab

Glidecam

FJS International, LLC

Visual Products

Technodolly

Rig Wheels Passport

Gamma Ray Digital Inc

CineLab

FJS International, LLC

Rig Wheels Passport

Abel Cine

Willys Widgets

rebotnix Technologies

Tai Audio

Ritter Battery

The Slider

Aerial Filmworks

Paralinx LLC

CineTape

Technodolly

Metropolis Post

Visual Products

Media Blackout - Custom Cables and AKS

Gamma Ray Digital Inc

Opal

Glidecam

Wooden Camera

Broadcast Solutions Inc