Jump to content


What shops have the Arri 6k scanner?


  • Please log in to reply
14 replies to this topic

#1 Glen Alexander

Glen Alexander
  • Guests

Posted 18 November 2008 - 10:34 PM

post prices if you have any.
thx
  • 0

#2 John Brawley

John Brawley
  • Sustaining Members
  • 834 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Atlanta Georgia

Posted 19 November 2008 - 10:31 AM

post prices if you have any.
thx


Where ? LA ? Thailand ? Eastern Europe ?



jb
  • 0

#3 Glen Alexander

Glen Alexander
  • Guests

Posted 19 November 2008 - 05:59 PM

Where ? LA ? Thailand ? Eastern Europe ?



jb


since the number of people who could actually afford to scan at 6k is probably limited, anywhere.

i have one number from a lab here in LA $0.75/FRAME@6k, $0.50/FRAME@4k

so 20minutes is about 29000 frames, $22,000@6k, $15,000@4k

note per FRAME not foot
  • 0

#4 Robert Houllahan

Robert Houllahan
  • Sustaining Members
  • 1582 posts
  • Industry Rep
  • Providence R.I.

Posted 19 November 2008 - 07:16 PM

I think some shops are running Arriscan's at around $1K / hour go by the specs for frame rate to calculate cost per frame or foot, roll etc. i.e. at 2k maybe its 4fps and 6k its 0.7 fps. Check my numbers with Arri's website to verify fps.

-Rob-
  • 0

#5 Mike Nichols

Mike Nichols
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 101 posts
  • Producer

Posted 20 November 2008 - 09:30 AM

I THINK Goldcrest has one. Not being up on the technology, it was my understanding that when I had my scan done, they did a 3K>2K scan and the option for 6K>4K was available.
  • 0

#6 Robert Houllahan

Robert Houllahan
  • Sustaining Members
  • 1582 posts
  • Industry Rep
  • Providence R.I.

Posted 20 November 2008 - 11:07 AM

I THINK Goldcrest has one. Not being up on the technology, it was my understanding that when I had my scan done, they did a 3K>2K scan and the option for 6K>4K was available.



Goldcrest does have one as does CO3.

-Rob-
  • 0

#7 Dan Goulder

Dan Goulder
  • Sustaining Members
  • 1259 posts
  • Cinematographer

Posted 20 November 2008 - 12:42 PM

I THINK Goldcrest has one. Not being up on the technology, it was my understanding that when I had my scan done, they did a 3K>2K scan and the option for 6K>4K was available.

Hey Mike, was your scan used on 2-perf material? If so, I'm curious as to how your selects were pulled. Were you able to read and log edge codes in the 2-perf format, or what?
Thanks.
  • 0

#8 Mike Nichols

Mike Nichols
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 101 posts
  • Producer

Posted 20 November 2008 - 03:22 PM

Hey Mike, was your scan used on 2-perf material? If so, I'm curious as to how your selects were pulled. Were you able to read and log edge codes in the 2-perf format, or what?
Thanks.


Yes, Goldcrest scanned my 2 perf neg. Basically, what I did was edit the offline in DVCAM that was done direct to disk from Rob at Cinelab. I spit out a reference movie and handed over the negative, Final Cut Pro EDL and ref movie to goldcrest and the VERY patient scanner Chris did the scan. There were some instances where we struggled with frame accuracy, but with the generous addition of 3 second handles, we more than covered ourselves. Reconforming was actually pretty easy once I figured out what the heck I was doing. I just took my offline edit offline and reconnected each edit with the corresponding DPX stack.

Because of the unruly nature of DPX files, I am actually converting all my stacks to 10bit RGB LOG Kona files.
  • 0

#9 Glen Alexander

Glen Alexander
  • Guests

Posted 21 November 2008 - 02:39 PM

Cinelab seems very expensive if their 35mm processing is .17/ft, you should be able to get processing for .10 to .14/f.
t
  • 0

#10 Glen Alexander

Glen Alexander
  • Guests

Posted 21 November 2008 - 02:39 PM

Yes, Goldcrest scanned my 2 perf neg. Basically, what I did was edit the offline in DVCAM that was done direct to disk from Rob at Cinelab. I spit out a reference movie and handed over the negative, Final Cut Pro EDL and ref movie to goldcrest and the VERY patient scanner Chris did the scan. There were some instances where we struggled with frame accuracy, but with the generous addition of 3 second handles, we more than covered ourselves. Reconforming was actually pretty easy once I figured out what the heck I was doing. I just took my offline edit offline and reconnected each edit with the corresponding DPX stack.

Because of the unruly nature of DPX files, I am actually converting all my stacks to 10bit RGB LOG Kona files.


why didn't you go with SR?

what was cost?

Edited by Glen Alexander, 21 November 2008 - 02:41 PM.

  • 0

#11 Mike Nichols

Mike Nichols
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 101 posts
  • Producer

Posted 21 November 2008 - 10:57 PM

why didn't you go with SR?

what was cost?


I will most likely end up on SR. I went with scans because, believe it or not, financially, it made more sense!
  • 0

#12 Chris Burke

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

Posted 22 November 2008 - 10:22 AM

Cinelab seems very expensive if their 35mm processing is .17/ft, you should be able to get processing for .10 to .14/f.
t



where did you get .17 for 35mm from? There website states .14 per foot for 35mm, .12 if the daily is done there, which Mike did have. So it seems to be right on where you said it should be.
  • 0

#13 Glen Alexander

Glen Alexander
  • Guests

Posted 22 November 2008 - 11:58 AM

where did you get .17 for 35mm from? There website states .14 per foot for 35mm, .12 if the daily is done there, which Mike did have. So it seems to be right on where you said it should be.

http://www.cinelab.com/rates.php

today it shows 0.17ft for 16mm Color & B/W, and .14 for 35mm, i am the confident the rates were the same the other day when i looked but i could be mistaken.
  • 0

#14 Chris Burke

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

Posted 22 November 2008 - 02:12 PM

Cinelab seems very expensive if their 35mm processing is .17/ft, you should be able to get processing for .10 to .14/f.
t



the .17 is for 16mm. You were looking for 35mm, which is .14 per foot, .12 if you do the daily there.
  • 0

#15 Robert Houllahan

Robert Houllahan
  • Sustaining Members
  • 1582 posts
  • Industry Rep
  • Providence R.I.

Posted 22 November 2008 - 06:10 PM

the .17 is for 16mm. You were looking for 35mm, which is .14 per foot, .12 if you do the daily there.



Sorry but the website is a little unclear about pricing, we are going to have our web girl change some of that. It is $0.14/ foot for 16mm and that drops to $0.12/foot over 1200' or if you do a daily, this includes video prep. We run 35mm B+W for $0.17 and 35mm Color for $0.12 / foot. which also includes prep for video. We also do not have a minimum for procesing only for print (200 feet) or video transfer ($75 for students/indies) so we think the pricing is on par with what you would get in LA and we also do deals for volume.

-Rob-
  • 0


Rig Wheels Passport

CineLab

FJS International, LLC

Tai Audio

Broadcast Solutions Inc

rebotnix Technologies

Media Blackout - Custom Cables and AKS

Wooden Camera

Metropolis Post

Ritter Battery

The Slider

Opal

Glidecam

Visual Products

CineTape

Gamma Ray Digital Inc

Abel Cine

Aerial Filmworks

Willys Widgets

Technodolly

Paralinx LLC

Technodolly

Glidecam

Visual Products

Rig Wheels Passport

CineLab

FJS International, LLC

Metropolis Post

Aerial Filmworks

Ritter Battery

Gamma Ray Digital Inc

Media Blackout - Custom Cables and AKS

Paralinx LLC

Opal

Broadcast Solutions Inc

The Slider

Abel Cine

rebotnix Technologies

CineTape

Willys Widgets

Tai Audio

Wooden Camera