Jump to content


Photo

Noisy HD Telecine


  • Please log in to reply
12 replies to this topic

#1 Caio Pedron Peres

Caio Pedron Peres

    New

  • Basic Members
  • Pip
  • 3 posts
  • Student

Posted 26 June 2011 - 11:10 PM

Hi, everyone! I recently filmed with 7213 stock (Kodak, 200T Vision 3) on Super 16. Now I'm watching it on a ".MOV" (QuickTime), HD (1920x1080), codec: Y'CbCr 10 bit 4:2:2 HD (1-1-1) from the lab telecine. I just see it too noisy for my taste, since it's well exposed and there's no color grading. The monitor is an IMac blacklit LED display with higher resolution. Isn't it supposed to be a "clean" image?

Thank you!

Caio
  • 0

#2 Ben Syverson

Ben Syverson
  • Basic Members
  • PipPip
  • 98 posts
  • Other

Posted 27 June 2011 - 12:44 AM

Post an image... 16mm at 1080p will definitely have some visible grain, but it's impossible to know how much is too much without seeing it.

Edited by Ben Syverson, 27 June 2011 - 12:44 AM.

  • 0

#3 Will Montgomery

Will Montgomery
  • Sustaining Members
  • 2030 posts
  • Producer
  • Dallas, TX

Posted 27 June 2011 - 09:28 AM

If you're new to film and used to the "pristine" quality of digital, even well exposed S16 footage make look a little noisy depending on exposure and lighting. Also, remember that a still or paused frame will have more noticeable grain than when it is actually playing.

This is one reason why it's good to sit in on the transfer session and you can ask them to dial in a little noise reduction if it is really an issue.

It could also be a transfer on a cheap telecine by an operator that didn't take the time needed to clean it up so maybe if you post something we can give a better qualified opinion.
  • 0

#4 Caio Pedron Peres

Caio Pedron Peres

    New

  • Basic Members
  • Pip
  • 3 posts
  • Student

Posted 27 June 2011 - 12:29 PM

OK! Here is an example! What do you think?

Thank you.prueba.jpg
  • 0

#5 Stephen Williams

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

Posted 27 June 2011 - 01:36 PM

OK! Here is an example! What do you think?

Thank you.prueba.jpg


What did you rate the stock at and what was the telecine, seems reasonable but could be better.
  • 0

#6 Stuart Brereton

Stuart Brereton
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 3054 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Los Angeles

Posted 27 June 2011 - 03:18 PM

Film grain always looks worse when you see a still image. Choice of Telecine machine can also make a big difference. A Spirit will give you far better results than an older Ursa Diamond.
  • 0

#7 Caio Pedron Peres

Caio Pedron Peres

    New

  • Basic Members
  • Pip
  • 3 posts
  • Student

Posted 27 June 2011 - 03:52 PM

I rated it 125 ASA, because I had a 85 filter on camera, since there was a HMI one meter and a half from the little boy's face. Just the old fashion way.
The transfer was a HD (1920x1080), codec: Y'CbCr 10 bit (linear) 4:2:2 HD (1-1-1), ".MOV".
And, yes, I was full open on this one, I know it´s the worst resolution, but I also shot a lot on T4.0 and in this kind of visualization it's tha same noise.
  • 0

#8 Ben Syverson

Ben Syverson
  • Basic Members
  • PipPip
  • 98 posts
  • Other

Posted 27 June 2011 - 05:21 PM

Looks slightly out of focus to me, but grain-wise it looks about right for 200 speed film.
  • 0

#9 Vincent Sweeney

Vincent Sweeney
  • Sustaining Members
  • 686 posts
  • Director
  • LA at the moment.

Posted 28 June 2011 - 02:27 AM

Looks a little like outdated film to me, on top of maybe a cheap or old lens/focus issue.

To me, this is not typical of S16.
  • 0

#10 Alain Lumina

Alain Lumina
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 115 posts
  • Director

Posted 18 July 2011 - 12:32 AM

i've had the same problem, i've never been able to pay for scene to scene supervised telecine and stuff with some dark comes out noisy.

my guess is since it's being scanned through a process much like when a digital video camera tries to adjust to a dark scene, it adds noise in it's struggle to find detail.

i'd rather they just let scenes have more black in them but it doesn't seem to work that way since i can't afford supervised.

i use neat brand noise reduction plugin or fcp, it works well and it still looks like film.
  • 0

#11 Alain Lumina

Alain Lumina
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 115 posts
  • Director

Posted 18 July 2011 - 12:45 AM

on looking at your sample it looks more like grain than noise as it lacks the outright "wrong" color flecks of true noise (ie green on his face). neat still smooths that, it'll look more like 35mm.
  • 0

#12 Mei Lewis

Mei Lewis
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 347 posts
  • Other
  • UK

Posted 21 April 2012 - 04:29 AM

Wow that's noisey. Have no idea what film is supposed to look like but that looks like ISO6400 or higher on my 5Dii.
  • 0

#13 Chris Burke

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

Posted 21 April 2012 - 01:32 PM

Wow that's noisey. Have no idea what film is supposed to look like but that looks like ISO6400 or higher on my 5Dii.



Not really "supposed" to look that way or any way in particular. Who told you that it was?
  • 0


Ritter Battery

Rig Wheels Passport

The Slider

Metropolis Post

Technodolly

Visual Products

Wooden Camera

Willys Widgets

Tai Audio

CineTape

Aerial Filmworks

FJS International, LLC

Opal

Paralinx LLC

Abel Cine

Broadcast Solutions Inc

Glidecam

rebotnix Technologies

Gamma Ray Digital Inc

CineLab

Media Blackout - Custom Cables and AKS

Willys Widgets

Technodolly

Rig Wheels Passport

Aerial Filmworks

CineLab

The Slider

Visual Products

CineTape

Wooden Camera

Media Blackout - Custom Cables and AKS

Paralinx LLC

Ritter Battery

Opal

rebotnix Technologies

Abel Cine

Broadcast Solutions Inc

Tai Audio

FJS International, LLC

Gamma Ray Digital Inc

Metropolis Post

Glidecam