Will2 wrote:
I'm sure it would slow everything down, but would a 2.7k or higher camera be possible?
Sure. The camera is totally removable and we will be offering affordable adapter plates. I would say the only limiting factor would be the chip size of the chosen camera. When you get too large, the distance from the film gets to be unwieldy but I'm pretty sure most any camera could be adapted to this unit. As I noted previously, I am working on a mod that will even allow start and stop of the frames. So, really, most any file size should be workable as long as speed isn't an issue.
memoriesrenewed wrote:
I noticed you moved the sensors to the left side and a bit closer, does that help with frame registration?
Yes. By simplifying the film path and having a "straight shot" between the sensor and the target area, the registration is more constant. Also, by moving the sensor before the gate, any image disturbance at the beginning of the roll due to leader thickness happens during the capture of the leader and not the actual film. Also, because the sensor is so much closer, minor jumps at splices are minimized or eliminated altogether. And, finally, the tension spring common to the all the previous Retro units has been eliminated with an auto tension mechanism that maintains perfect tension all the time without need for adjustment. Side to side registration is now regulated by lateral spring clips that maintain gentle pressure on the factory edge of the film.
memoriesrenewed wrote:
With the movable camera, does that mean overscanning will be possible?
Yes. Because the camera can move up and down and because the lens tube can be lengthened or shortened, you can pretty much have any cropping desired. However, the unit normally uses the entire imaging chip for max resolution of just the frame picture area. If you reduce the image to pick up the sprocket holes during capture, you will be limited to about 720p resolution, which looks great, but is less than what the camera can actually deliver. The Chameleon we use actually scans at 964p, which is about 80 lines short top and bottom of 1080. But, based on my experience, most people that seek to scan in 1080 want to include the frame lines visible at the top and bottom of the scan so they can be assured they are getting all the frame. They then crop into that 1080 image to pull out the 8mm frame. Ironically, when you do that, you actually end up with about a 964 capture frame. So rather than deal with the extra per frame data baggage of a 1080 capture for what is, essentially, a 4:3 frame, we just go ahead and capture 4:3 at 964 and the software will then gently upscale to 1080. Purists my differ but we've done tests and those missing 160 lines don't add up to much. I'm working on some samples for the web but it looks great.
aj wrote:
The blackbox with the rollers and gate is a module which can be interchanged with others?
Yes. The gates are attached by two thumb screws and it takes about 60 seconds to change gates, which auto align with the light source that is built into the base. So each gate has its own diffuser.
mr8mm wrote:Any thoughts on transferring sound to the digital image? I suppose the visual could be digitized then a second pass with a sound projector to add the sound to the digital image. Maintaining sync might be a problem but if done on small pieces might be acceptable.
We will (probably) never produce a sound unit. Too much R&D for too little gain, from my standpoint. If every roll of film had a soundtrack then that would be different, of course, but the majority of film out there is silent and that's where our market is.
Roger
