Jump to content


Photo

Super8 - HD or 2k transfer?


  • Please log in to reply
53 replies to this topic

#1 Jason Banker

Jason Banker
  • Basic Members
  • PipPip
  • 55 posts
  • Cinematographer

Posted 15 July 2005 - 04:28 AM

Hi,


Does any one know where to get a super8 transfer to either HD or 2k? I looked at the Pro8mm pricelist and don't see them offered.

Can anyone comment on the possible quality difference between HD and 2k for super 8?


Thanks;)
  • 0

#2 Stephen Williams

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

Posted 15 July 2005 - 04:45 AM

Hi,
  Does any one know where to get a super8 transfer to either HD or 2k? I looked at the Pro8mm pricelist and don't see them offered.

  Can anyone comment on the possible quality difference between HD and 2k for super 8?
Thanks;)

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>



Hi,

I know there is a Super 8 gate for a Spirit that could give you HD or 2k data if you really needed it but IMHO HDCAM SR is fine for Super 8 originated material. What do you want to do? Output to 35mm?

I don't know where your based but www.onlinevideo.ch in Zurich could do that. I know they offer very good Super 8 rates on their Spirit.

Stephen
  • 0

#3 David Mullen ASC

David Mullen ASC
  • Sustaining Members
  • 19769 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Los Angeles

Posted 15 July 2005 - 10:12 AM

I heard that Laser Pacific did Super-8-to-HD transfers for "American Family" on PBS (the show was shot in 24P HD with Super-8 flashbacks.)
  • 0

#4 John Hyde

John Hyde
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 151 posts
  • Camera Operator

Posted 15 July 2005 - 11:18 AM

Unless dealing with compatibility on a project that is mostly HD, I think SD is still the better choice. I have seen some super 8 from laser pacific and quality difference is not on par with results from higher resolution films. It still looks like a SD transfer. Unfortunately, super 8 just does not have the resolution to make a significant difference in HD.

Edited by John Hyde, 15 July 2005 - 11:21 AM.

  • 0

#5 Brant Collins

Brant Collins
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 165 posts
  • Producer
  • Little Rock, Arkansas

Posted 15 July 2005 - 12:24 PM

www.bonolabs.com will do transfer to 10 bit uncopressed Quicktime and ship on a Firewire drive for a deposit fee(you get back when you return the drive) I have not used them yet but want to know if anyone has ever used them and what were the results
  • 0

#6 Jason Banker

Jason Banker
  • Basic Members
  • PipPip
  • 55 posts
  • Cinematographer

Posted 15 July 2005 - 01:37 PM

Unless dealing with compatibility on a project  that is mostly HD, I think SD is still the better choice.  I have seen some super 8 from laser pacific and quality difference is not on par with results from higher resolution films.  It still looks like a SD transfer.  Unfortunately, super 8 just does not have the resolution to make a significant difference in HD.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>


What film did you shoot with for your transfer to HD?

I am trying to figure out the full limitations of S8 in terms of resolution using the maximum quality in film, lenses and transfer technology.

A Beaulieu S8 camera with quality prime lenses and maybe Vision 2 100ASA or EXR 50ASA with a 2/3 stop overexposed would be an optimal starting point for the conversion.

With that base, could the quality improve to a point where it might make sense to go HD or 2k scanning?

Edited by Jason B, 15 July 2005 - 01:45 PM.

  • 0

#7 Jason Banker

Jason Banker
  • Basic Members
  • PipPip
  • 55 posts
  • Cinematographer

Posted 15 July 2005 - 01:43 PM

www.bonolabs.com will do transfer to 10 bit uncopressed Quicktime and ship on a Firewire drive for a deposit fee(you get back when you return the drive) I have not used them yet but want to know if anyone has ever used them and what were the results

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>


What resolution is 10bit uncompressed quicktime? (720x480?)

Would this option mainly improve color information?

Could you explain a more about the advantages of 10bit uncompressed?

Thanks

Edited by Jason B, 15 July 2005 - 01:46 PM.

  • 0

#8 David Mullen ASC

David Mullen ASC
  • Sustaining Members
  • 19769 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Los Angeles

Posted 15 July 2005 - 01:48 PM

Yes, the truth is that, roughly, a scan that is 4K across for 35mm is the same as a 2K scan of something half as wide (like Super-16) so it follows that something half as wide again like Super-8 would only need to be scanned at 1K, which is close to standard def video. But still, HD would be a little better even for Super-8.

However, if the goal is a film-out, there is some advantage to transferring 24 fps Super-8 1:1 to 24P HD rather than 60i NTSC and have to deal with removing the 3:2 pulldown before transferring to film (depends on how you post the NTSC I guess). So 50i PAL may be a better format to transfer to than 60i NTSC if you can't afford 24P HD.

"Greendale", the Neil Young Super-8 feature, was transferred to betacam I believe and that was used for the film-out. Not that it looked very sharp, but it's hard to know if that was due to the photography or the transfer.
  • 0

#9 Jason Banker

Jason Banker
  • Basic Members
  • PipPip
  • 55 posts
  • Cinematographer

Posted 15 July 2005 - 02:10 PM

"Greendale", the Neil Young Super-8 feature, was transferred to betacam I believe and that was used for the film-out.  Not that it looked very sharp, but it's hard to know if that was due to the photography or the transfer.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>


David, do you happen to know what stock "Greendale" was shot on. I haven't seen the whole film but from the clips I saw it looked like Vision 800ASA?

If so, I had some of the Vision "1" line processed at Pro8mm and was shocked at how bad it looked!! Shot that footage before the Vision 2 was avalible.

Recently a friend of mine saw my S8 footage and wanted to shoot a test for flashbacks for his 16mm feature. Just trying to figure out how to achieve the best results. 2k seems overkill, technically, if the S8 resolution is too small to benifit from scanning. Thats good to know.
  • 0

#10 philwgreen

philwgreen

    New

  • Basic Members
  • Pip
  • 2 posts
  • Producer

Posted 15 July 2005 - 02:12 PM

Has anyone here actually shot Super 8 and then telecined to HD? Better yet, does anyone know where, or have, a sample quicktime could be downloaded?
  • 0

#11 Stephen Williams

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

Posted 15 July 2005 - 02:34 PM

Has anyone here actually shot Super 8 and then telecined to HD? Better yet, does anyone know where, or have, a sample quicktime could be downloaded?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>



Hi,

I've seen super 8 Vision 2 200T live in a Spirit at SD. I think the camera lens was the week link, not that well collimated. I think David is spot on in thinking that 1k is the limit for super 8.

Stephen
  • 0

#12 Jason Banker

Jason Banker
  • Basic Members
  • PipPip
  • 55 posts
  • Cinematographer

Posted 15 July 2005 - 03:00 PM

Could someone please post the actual pixel resolution of 1k,2k,and 4k?

I have never transfered Super8 to anything other than miniDV which is 720x480 pixel resolution? Being new to these other processes I could use the exact info.

thanks
  • 0

#13 John Hyde

John Hyde
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 151 posts
  • Camera Operator

Posted 15 July 2005 - 03:02 PM

With that base, could the quality improve to a point where it might make sense to go HD or 2k scanning?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>


No, I do not believe the improvement in quality is worth the money to go with HD. The base quality of super 8 just does not have the resolution for a truly noticeable difference. However, I have seen noticeable improvement with anamorphic super 8 in SD. This may translate even better with HD since the resolution of super 8 is being squeezed down.

The HD film transfer I saw was not with film I shot. It was shot with 200T Vision 2 Kodak brand film. Dailies were done at Spectra in SD. The film was re-transfered HD at Laser Pacific. They both looked great. But, there was not a significant difference in the picture.

At some point, I expect the cost of HD transfer to go down significantly. When this happens, it might be worth considering for my projects.
  • 0

#14 Jason Banker

Jason Banker
  • Basic Members
  • PipPip
  • 55 posts
  • Cinematographer

Posted 15 July 2005 - 03:56 PM

However, I have seen noticeable improvement with anamorphic super 8 in SD.  This may translate even better with HD since the resolution of super 8 is being squeezed down.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>


I have never used anamorphic lenses, and don't fully understand how "squeezing down" the picture could help the picture quality, could you explain the advantages of shooting anamorphic?

The aspect ratio would be widescreen but wouldn't that also soften the image?
  • 0

#15 David Mullen ASC

David Mullen ASC
  • Sustaining Members
  • 19769 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Los Angeles

Posted 15 July 2005 - 08:05 PM

Has anyone here actually shot Super 8 and then telecined to HD? Better yet, does anyone know where, or have, a sample quicktime could be downloaded?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>


How would you be able to tell the difference between an HD transfer and an SD transfer in a Quicktime movie? Can one post HD-resolution Quicktime movie files on the internet?
  • 0

#16 Ted

Ted

    New

  • Basic Members
  • Pip
  • 5 posts
  • 2nd Assistant Camera

Posted 16 July 2005 - 04:47 AM

Hi!

Hi have found two examples for S-8 Scans (Kodachrome K40).
The first one is a S-8 Frame-scan (Nikon ED 5000 Super Coolscan) with a resolution of 903x661 Pixel and the second picture shows a wetgate scan, PAL 720x576 Pixel.
Take a look at the cropping (left and right)!

Examples:
http://www.kamera-bo...s/s8_vergl.html

The complete thread in german:
http://www.kamera-bo...f91ac0f31744030
  • 0

#17 Filip Plesha

Filip Plesha
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1267 posts
  • Other
  • Croatia

Posted 16 July 2005 - 08:05 AM

There is a difference between SD resolution and 1K when it comes to super-8.
With larger formats it wouldn't make much difference, but with super8 it would because SD is below its limit, and 1K is around its limit.

With 16mm and 35mm both 1K and SD are below limit so they would behave in a similar way.

With super8 SD would provide some grain aliasing, 1K or 1.2K would prvide just the right sampling of grain.
  • 0

#18 David Mullen ASC

David Mullen ASC
  • Sustaining Members
  • 19769 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Los Angeles

Posted 16 July 2005 - 10:20 AM

That's why I think some marginal improvement would come with HD over SD, but note that scanning Super-8 at 720 pixels across as for SD is the equivalent of scanning 35mm at 2880 pixels across, nearly 3K, roughly figuring that 35mm is 4X the width. So SD isn't a bad format to scan Super-8 to.
  • 0

#19 Filip Plesha

Filip Plesha
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1267 posts
  • Other
  • Croatia

Posted 16 July 2005 - 05:01 PM

That's why I think some marginal improvement would come with HD over SD, but note that scanning Super-8 at 720 pixels across as for SD is the equivalent of scanning 35mm at 2880 pixels across, nearly 3K, roughly figuring that 35mm is 4X the width.  So SD isn't a bad format to scan Super-8 to.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>



I tis far from being bad. In fact when we are considering that this is air format (not archival) then it is very good. No other broadcast combination (of film and video transfer) captures 70-80% of information from film.

but It is not EVERYTHING from film, there is still some small gain from going to 1K, HD would be fully archival when it comes to 8mm film, but consumer HD resolution (1440 or 1200-ish) pixels would be more than enough, no need for maximum HD (1920)
  • 0

#20 Jason Banker

Jason Banker
  • Basic Members
  • PipPip
  • 55 posts
  • Cinematographer

Posted 16 July 2005 - 05:15 PM

There is still some small gain from going to 1K, HD would be fully archival when it comes to 8mm film, but consumer HD resolution (1440 or 1200-ish) pixels would be more than enough, no need for maximum HD (1920)

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>


So HD at "1440" would be the perfect archival resolution for super 8.

Is HD at any resolution considered 1k?

Could someone please post the actual pixel resolutions of 1k, 2k, and 4k?

Also is capturing to HD a telecine process or a scanning process?

Thanks
  • 0


Technodolly

Metropolis Post

Glidecam

Visual Products

Broadcast Solutions Inc

Aerial Filmworks

Opal

Wooden Camera

CineLab

The Slider

FJS International, LLC

Willys Widgets

Gamma Ray Digital Inc

Tai Audio

Rig Wheels Passport

Paralinx LLC

CineTape

Media Blackout - Custom Cables and AKS

Ritter Battery

rebotnix Technologies

Abel Cine

Broadcast Solutions Inc

Wooden Camera

Opal

Willys Widgets

The Slider

Tai Audio

rebotnix Technologies

Visual Products

Aerial Filmworks

Media Blackout - Custom Cables and AKS

Paralinx LLC

Technodolly

CineTape

Metropolis Post

CineLab

FJS International, LLC

Ritter Battery

Abel Cine

Rig Wheels Passport

Glidecam

Gamma Ray Digital Inc