Jump to content


Photo

How to shoot a HD monitor for Film Transfer


  • Please log in to reply
12 replies to this topic

#1 L K Keerthi Basu

L K Keerthi Basu
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 128 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • india

Posted 10 November 2005 - 11:06 AM

I have Question, I think this is not new to you people?

If we want to transfer a HD formate image to a Film formate. Why don't we shoot a HD image in a HD monitor with Film? Is this is Possible, If possible how to shoot this? What are the things to be cautious while shooting this?
I not speaking about the quality ,accutance and reproduction.

Iam new to this technique,

L.K.Keerthibasu
  • 0

#2 Stephen Williams

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

Posted 10 November 2005 - 11:13 AM

I have Question, I think this is not new to you people?

If we want to transfer a HD formate image to a Film formate. Why don't we shoot a HD image in a HD monitor with Film? Is this is Possible, If possible how to shoot this? What are the things to be cautious while shooting this?
I not speaking about the quality ,accutance and reproduction.

Iam new to this technique,

L.K.Keerthibasu


Hi,

I did this 15 years ago from an SD Broadcast monitor in PAL at 25 fps . It worked surprisingly well. You will need to test.

Stephen
  • 0

#3 David Mullen ASC

David Mullen ASC
  • Sustaining Members
  • 19759 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Los Angeles

Posted 10 November 2005 - 11:35 AM

Simplest thing would be to shoot an HD LCD monitor and not deal with any sync issues.

No, it would not look all that good.

A CRT film recorder basically IS a camera pointed at a high resolution monitor, but I believe it is a monochromatic monitor and the color is built up in three exposure passes through filters, plus it is shot single-frame, not at 24 fps.

Edited by David Mullen, 10 November 2005 - 11:36 AM.

  • 0

#4 Dirk DeJonghe

Dirk DeJonghe
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 605 posts
  • Industry Rep
  • Kortrijk,Belgium

Posted 11 November 2005 - 03:12 AM

Both Laser and CRT recoders would produce output that is barely watchable if it were not for the LUT. A great deal of skill and knowledge goes into these LUTs. How are you going to put a LUT between your HD monitor and the camera?
  • 0

#5 Phil Rhodes

Phil Rhodes
  • Sustaining Members
  • 11934 posts
  • Other

Posted 11 November 2005 - 07:23 AM

Hi,

Well, you could just batch it all through a photoshop action, with a given Curves preset. Of course you'd be eyeballing it, but I get the feeling you could achieve something watchable with testing.

Sorry to rain on your raining-on-the-parade!

I would try to find a high-res monochrome medical imaging monitor, and do the three passes; I'd also do it very slowly, and be prepared to do a lot of fiddling around with the monitor's controls - even down to going inside and tweaking the HT and focus manually - for reasonable results. Also, I'd try to come up with some software - not terribly difficult - to allow display of the image for a given number of scans, which is how the "real" CRT recorders work.

Phil
  • 0

#6 Mitch Gross

Mitch Gross
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 2873 posts
  • Cinematographer

Posted 11 November 2005 - 11:37 PM

Y'know, one could purchase some ingots of steel, buy some machine tools and with a lot of time and practice be able to build a barely functional automobile complete with internal cumbustion engine. Or one could go to a car dealership and buy a brand new properly made car.

There is a vast amount of knowledge, craftsmanship and technology that goes into even some of the simplest things.

BTW Phil, Dirk does this for a living, so he should know.
  • 0

#7 L K Keerthi Basu

L K Keerthi Basu
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 128 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • india

Posted 12 November 2005 - 10:45 AM

Thanks to all of you.

I know that people where doing this other then in India and got satisfactory results. Here in India the cost of transfering the HD to Film is realy high when comparing to Other countries, and they are not still that much quality. So that I came to know about this.
Iam just tring to test this if I get a that much result you have got that is doing here.
The basic problem here in India is we dont have a Good Technical superviser in Film recording and the people cant understand what we are explaining.
Dont think that Iam Blaming on others because we are suffering to bring this out.
So that Instead of getting that such a poor quality for high price why dont we try this for a very lower price with the available equipments.
Please Give me the technical issues which will cause and how to give the exposure. Whether I have to Expose this every shot by shot with a help of a Spot meter?

Regarding the LUT how to control that?
  • 0

#8 David Mullen ASC

David Mullen ASC
  • Sustaining Members
  • 19759 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Los Angeles

Posted 12 November 2005 - 11:05 AM

I don't think you've been listening to us... this is a BAD idea. Don't do it. It's not worth the money you're going to waste on the film stock, let alone the monitor.

What's the point of doing a cheap and bad DI? You might as well have shot on video to begin with! The entire point of a DI is to not visibly lower the quality of the original film in the digital intermediate step, otherwise you should just finish the movie photochemically, or just shoot in video.

THINK CAREFULLY: (1) If you spend all that money to shoot in film -- and then (2) all that money to transfer it to HD -- and then (3) severely lower the quality of the image for the final print by doing a cheap & bad DI, you just wasted your money!!!

Don't do it. Be smart and drop the idea right now. I mean, what you're trying to do requires a lot of money and technical expertise, and you're asking how you're going to expose the film during the transfer???

Edited by David Mullen, 12 November 2005 - 11:08 AM.

  • 0

#9 Phil Rhodes

Phil Rhodes
  • Sustaining Members
  • 11934 posts
  • Other

Posted 12 November 2005 - 11:08 AM

Hi,

Well, one of the things you could do is to shoot on video originally then lash something up to shoot it out.

But no, I wouldn't have thought this would be very useful for a commercially-released feature film. It's one of those things I'd probably try for the hell of it if I suddenly came into a lot of money, though.

Phil
  • 0

#10 Sam Wells

Sam Wells
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1751 posts
  • Cinematographer

Posted 12 November 2005 - 11:13 AM

Hmm, see August AC interview with Harris Savides where he talks about shooting the test DV output on an Apple Cinema display with his Arri 2C :)

Then again, having just seen "Last Days" which looks great IMO, maybe it's better he didn't go that route.......

-Sam
  • 0

#11 David Mullen ASC

David Mullen ASC
  • Sustaining Members
  • 19759 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Los Angeles

Posted 12 November 2005 - 11:14 AM

Well, one of the things you could do is to shoot on video originally then lash something up to shoot it out.


Yes, I guess he's talking about shooting HD to begin with, so it's not a DI technically (DI means digital is the intermediate step between film origination and a film print, i.e. "film-digtal-film").

But it's still a bad idea.

It's one of those things which would take a lot of time and money (equipment, testing) to get to work, negating any cost savings. Afterall, you're still talking about an HD monitor, a 35mm camera, 35mm processing & printing - and that's just to start testing to figure it all out. A very expensive hobby.

There's a reason why it costs so much money to set-up a HD-to-film transfer facility. Sure, a do-it-yourself approach could be taken if you don't care much about picture quality. Think about it: the image quality will mainly be limited by the quality of the monitor, not by the 35mm camera photographing the monitor. Does he really want to spend all that time & money and basically go into the transfer business?

Edited by David Mullen, 12 November 2005 - 11:24 AM.

  • 0

#12 L K Keerthi Basu

L K Keerthi Basu
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 128 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • india

Posted 12 November 2005 - 11:31 AM

I don't think you've been listening to us... this is a BAD idea. Don't do it. It's not worth the money you're going to waste on the film stock, let alone the monitor.

What's the point of doing a cheap and bad DI? You might as well have shot on video to begin with! The entire point of a DI is to not visibly lower the quality of the original film in the digital intermediate step, otherwise you should just finish the movie photochemically, or just shoot in video.

THINK CAREFULLY: (1) If you spend all that money to shoot in film -- and then (2) all that money to transfer it to HD -- and then (3) severely lower the quality of the image for the final print by doing a cheap & bad DI, you just wasted your money!!!

Don't do it. Be smart and drop the idea right now. I mean, what you're trying to do requires a lot of money and technical expertise, and you're asking how you're going to expose the film during the transfer???



Thank You David,

I understand. I Got it.

L.K.Keerthibasu
  • 0

#13 Mitch Gross

Mitch Gross
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 2873 posts
  • Cinematographer

Posted 12 November 2005 - 10:57 PM

Don't let the technical limitations of your locality stop you. Just because you are in India doesn't mean your film needs to be posted there. A friend recently completed a Super-16 feature in India and all of the post is being completed in Singapore, including a DI.

On the other hand, India is becoming a world leader in many technologies, and the post-production facilities are rapidly expanding. A feature I shot in 35mm is currently posting out in India, and we had to wait to ship our film negative because it shipped in a cargo container sharing space with a complete Celco system for scanning film to digital files and burning them back out to film. So the technology is available to you both locally and abroad if you look hard enough for it.
  • 0


CineTape

CineLab

Aerial Filmworks

Ritter Battery

Metropolis Post

Broadcast Solutions Inc

Abel Cine

Rig Wheels Passport

Glidecam

Opal

Willys Widgets

Technodolly

Media Blackout - Custom Cables and AKS

Visual Products

Paralinx LLC

FJS International, LLC

Wooden Camera

The Slider

rebotnix Technologies

Gamma Ray Digital Inc

Tai Audio

Tai Audio

Broadcast Solutions Inc

Rig Wheels Passport

Ritter Battery

Media Blackout - Custom Cables and AKS

Opal

CineTape

Willys Widgets

rebotnix Technologies

FJS International, LLC

Wooden Camera

Paralinx LLC

The Slider

Aerial Filmworks

Abel Cine

Visual Products

Technodolly

CineLab

Glidecam

Metropolis Post

Gamma Ray Digital Inc