Jump to content




Photo

16mm Kodachrome Print from 1960s - scanning & archiving

16mm scanning telecine 4k 2k

  • Please log in to reply
6 replies to this topic

#1 SWS

SWS

    New

  • Basic Members
  • Pip
  • 4 posts
  • Other
  • Los Angeles

Posted 30 April 2016 - 01:31 PM

Yes, another 16mm question :)

 

I have two 16mm color double-perf Kodachrome prints (less than 400' each) that I've been storing at the Academy archives in Hollywood. These prints from 1965 & 1968 document two world premieres here in Los Angeles and the color & condition of the both rolls are stunning. I don't think they've ever been projected. When we found them, we originally screened them on a flatbed Moviola and thought we had color reversal film. Closer inspection of the film over the light table revealed it was, in fact, Kodachrome.

 

My question is: what is the best way to both archive this & digitize it for use in Final Cut Pro? There is lot of discussion on the forum regarding 2K vs 4K 16mm scans, but I'm presuming this refers to NEGATIVE, not print.

 

Any tips, pointers or advice?

 

Many thanks :)


Edited by SWS, 30 April 2016 - 01:33 PM.

  • 0




#2 Robert Houllahan

Robert Houllahan
  • Sustaining Members
  • 1511 posts
  • Industry Rep
  • Providence R.I.

Posted 30 April 2016 - 03:01 PM

A Kodachrome print can easily be scanned directly to 2K or 4K on any modern scanner.

 

Potentially with Kodachrome you would want to think about a multi flash HDR scan but the film should be measured for shrinkage before it is scanned on a pin registered scanner.

 

As for archiving the film it should be stored in a vented archival polypropylene can in a humidity and temperature controlled environment where it can potentially last hundreds of years.


  • 1

#3 Tyler Purcell

Tyler Purcell
  • Sustaining Members
  • 2352 posts
  • Other
  • Los Angeles

Posted 30 April 2016 - 03:13 PM

Since you have only two rolls of film, I'd go all out and do a 4k scan, why not? You will capture all that beautiful grain in full detail and with a raw capture from a scanner, you can retain much of the color as well.

There are a few shops in town with scanners, but you won't find great pricing here, everyone rapes you. Honestly, throw it in a box and ship to someone who has a good scanner with excellent pricing.

I'm not going to mention anyone, but the two guys that always come to mind are religious posters, so they'll be posting momentarily! :)

Edit: Woot! Rob beat me to the punch! LOL :)
  • 1

#4 Simon Wyss

Simon Wyss
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1142 posts
  • Other
  • Basel, Switzerland

Posted 01 May 2016 - 12:35 AM

Technically, the best preservation method is to produce colour separations on polyester base black-and-white stock(s).

A bit expensive, though


  • 0

#5 David Cunningham

David Cunningham
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 974 posts
  • Cinematographer

Posted 03 May 2016 - 09:33 PM

You definitely want to go with a multiflash HDR scan on the Director at MetroPost in NYC. That's the best solution out there to get the complete density of Kodachrome without adding noise. The Director uses a proper gate but is optically pin registered so it's safe for warped or seubken film. See metpostny.com
  • 0

#6 Perry Paolantonio

Perry Paolantonio
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 344 posts
  • Other
  • Boston, MA

Posted 04 May 2016 - 07:16 AM

You definitely want to go with a multiflash HDR scan on the Director at MetroPost in NYC. That's the best solution out there to get the complete density of Kodachrome without adding noise. The Director uses a proper gate but is optically pin registered so it's safe for warped or seubken film. See metpostny.com

 

Actually, I don't think there is a sprocketless version of the director. There is a pinless optical registration option like on the ScanStation, but the transport itself is sprocketed, so you should be sure that the film isn't too badly shrunken. For film from this era, it could go either way, and will depend largely on how the film has been stored over the years. We've seen film from the 1960s that was in worse shape than film from the 1920s...

 

Also, depending on how the film was exposed, you may not need multi-flash HDR (which is much more expensive than a straight single-flash scan). The ScanStation has roughly 12-13 stops of dynamic range, but the Director will do a better job of pulling really deep detail out of the shadows when it's in HDR mode. If the footage isn't underexposed, you'll get a lot of good detail on a single flash scanner with the kind of range the ScanStation has. 

 

-perry


  • 0

#7 David Cunningham

David Cunningham
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 974 posts
  • Cinematographer

Posted 07 May 2016 - 06:27 AM

What perry said.
  • 0



Visual Products

CineLab

Paralinx LLC

Glidecam

Technodolly

The Slider

Willys Widgets

Broadcast Solutions Inc

rebotnix Technologies

Ritter Battery

CineTape

Aerial Filmworks

Abel Cine

Pro 8mm

Zylight

Tai Audio

Media Blackout - Custom Cables and AKS

Rig Wheels Passport

Visual Products

Technodolly

Tai Audio

CineLab

Glidecam

The Slider

Media Blackout - Custom Cables and AKS

Rig Wheels Passport

Paralinx LLC

Aerial Filmworks

Willys Widgets

Zylight

Abel Cine

rebotnix Technologies

Pro 8mm

Ritter Battery

CineTape

Broadcast Solutions Inc