Super 16mm

[christoph]

i repeat;
[snip]you have some Super 16mm you want to send to a film festival,
which is saying submit on MiniDV tape.

err.. i definitely wouldnt send it in as minidv... i'd send it in as dvd *and* vhs (dvds sometimes dont work).

But, your film is a negative.

What do you do to convert it to positive on MiniDV,
if somebody else does it for you, how do they do it,
and what does it cost you ?

well, you miss 2 or 3 important things here:
if i shoot super16 negative i have to transfer *all* the footage to video in order to edit.. but i also need some kind of keycode reference to be able to make the negative cut after my final edit.
also, these are my fricking *CAMERA ORIGINALS!!!* (sorry to shout) - i wont, ever, run them through a workprinter....
and once i've made an expensive keycode accurate negative transfer, chances are that it looks better than what could be achieved on a workprinter anyway.

the only moment if i would consider your route is if i want super16 positive print daylies of the negatives anyway in order to be able to project the film while editing, ie if i work parallel on a classic steenbeck and on the computer... but most ppl are too lazy for that.

so to answer your questions:
- i have the negatives telecined with keycode...
- they do it on a spirit or similair machine...
- cost is maily a matter of negotiation.. for indie shorts we pay like 400-700 euros (depending on the project and if you include prep time) for 2 hours of footage (about 3-4 hours machine time).

++ christoph ++

ps: oh, and do you know that dust is a major problem on negatives?

[Nigel]

Steve--

I made the home-movie connection on my own after going to your website. I am confused at exactly what your intentions are/were.....

For my situation where I am shooting S16 and getting paid to do so--Or when I am shooting S16 for myself and need it to look tops. I am paying around 300 US Dollars an hour for transfer(DigiBeta and DVCam Simuldub)--It isn't a fire and forgoet kind of process either. I will book time and actually go in and sit with my colorist and give him the over all look I am after--Sometimes even before I start the shoot. During the session he knows what I want because he has been included in the process.

When you shoot S16 you will always have at least a BetaSP tape in your hand coming out of the booth. S16 is by no means 35 but it goes through similar production channels.

Good Luck
PS--Lately I have been using
http://www.moderndigital.com
They have a Sony Vialta which can do some totally amazing things.

[Dave Hardy]

I assume you are using a computer NLE system such as Final Cut Pro Avid or Perrmiwr Pro. Shoot a greyscale chip chart at the head of the roll, so that after you reverse the polarity of the image you can extract the orange mask by using the color corrector to sample the white mid grry and black chips. Often just sampling the white will pull the balance to where it should be. You may have to streach the mid tones if the exposure range looks too compressed.

Dave Hardy
Vancouverr B.C.

[mattias]

What do you do to convert it to positive on MiniDV

you don't. get it transferred the "regular" way instead.

/matt

[hmm]

if i shoot super16 negative i have to transfer *all* the footage to video in order to edit..

i'm trying to understand. i've been told 99 % of what film shooters have is the orange looking negative, which you cannot see to edit in that form.

35mm still camera strips are negatives too right ? all orangie looking.

we don't put those in our photo alblums, we get full colour positive
still image prints of each photo done to put in our photo alblums.

how is your footage transfered in to something you can see and edit ?

what do you do your editing on ? a steenbeck or something ?
or on computer ?

[hmm]

I assume you are using a computer NLE system such as Final Cut Pro Avid or Perrmiwr Pro. Shoot a greyscale chip chart at the head of the roll, so that after you reverse the polarity of the image you can extract the orange mask by using the color corrector to sample the white mid grry and black chips. Often just sampling the white will pull the balance to where it should be. You may have to streach the mid tones if the exposure range looks too compressed.
Dave Hardy
Vancouverr B.C.

YES ! -

well, something like that. After a lot of experimenting incremental
increases of various sliders, I found a combination that captures the full deep colours, etc, then with the computer I reverse the polarity and do fine-tune adjustments. Thank you Dave !

[hmm]

Steve--
I made the home-movie connection on my own after going to your website. I am confused at exactly what your intentions are/were.....

AH ! - now that's understandable why your conclusion.
I registered to this forum site with hmm long time ago,
long before I recently started up http://www.dvfilms.ca for S16.

For my situation where I am shooting S16 and getting paid to do so--Or when I am shooting S16 for myself and need it to look tops.
I am paying around 300 US Dollars an hour for transfer(DigiBeta and DVCam Simuldub)--

So, for say a 1 hour final result, how long does it take,
and how much does that cost you ?

What kinds of 'things' do you mostly shoot ?

Where do your projects wind up ? In theatres or TV or Film Festivals ?
steve h.

[christoph]

if i shoot super16 negative i have to transfer *all* the footage to video in order to edit..

i'm trying to understand. i've been told 99 % of what film shooters have is the orange looking negative, which you cannot see to edit in that form.

correct.. what i meant is that you transfer the original shoting fottage and not the final edit.. and therefore some sort of keycode data is essential if you want to get a realease print later on.
i suggest that you do a google search on "keycode telecine negative colorcorrection" since this forum is really about super8.

35mm still camera strips are negatives too right ? all orangie looking.

jup

how is your footage transfered in to something you can see and edit ?

that's a standard option on any decent telecine. it's a hardware function and can be done in real time so that you end up with a propely looking positive image on you video tape.

what do you do your editing on ? a steenbeck or something ?
or on computer ?

99% of todays super16 footage is edited on a NLE (ie computer).

[snip]...you can extract the orange mask by using the color corrector to sample the white mid grry and black chips. Often just sampling the white will pull the balance to where it should be. You may have to streach the mid tones if the exposure range looks too compressed.

YES ! -
[snip] I found a combination that captures the full deep colours, etc, then with the computer I reverse the polarity and do fine-tune adjustments.

actually NO! :/ - you can get some okish colors, but you wont get the "full deep colors". please try your best and then take the same footage to a professional transfer house and compare.

++ christoph ++

[MovieStuff]

Hi, Stephen!

Perhaps I can make some clarification on the subject of super 16 and the WorkPrinter.

You previously wrote:

....learning that S16 has been around for 31 years, i thought getting some of the trillions of feet of dusty S16 on tv a good idea

The thing is that any S16 that exists from the past is already on video because that's the only way S16 could be viewed, short of having everything blown up to a 35mm interpositive. Therefore, it is not likely that anyone having S16 from long ago will need another transfer when they already have a perfectly good Rank transfer of their original material. Even a S16 Rank transfer from 20 years ago will look just terrific.

You also wrote:

...and, i also figured it would be good for film festivals, VOD, and rental stores

That is potentially true. However, while equipment for regular 16mm is pretty cheap, the equipment for S16 is generally much more expensive. Therefore, most anyone working TODAY in S16 has a pretty decent budget, compared to those working in regular 16mm. If producing in S16, it does not make any sense to have a lab process your S16 footage and then send it across the continent (or even across town) to another telecine place for transfer when the lab that processed the footage will generally give you a good deal on the telecine using their Rank, Spirit or other high end unit; all of which are going to provide superior color correction for negative handling. That is why many labs also have telecine suites; to keep the telecine business in-house.

Ultimately, while you can run 16mm neg through a WorkPrinter-16, it was really meant for 16mm reversal and prints. There is no physical reason why you can't run S16mm neg on a WP16 but the market for it probably doesn't exist since the budget and associated higher stakes for a S16 production make any economy you might offer incidental, by comparison. By the time they packed up the film and sent it to you, they could be finished with an in-house Rank transfer, complete with frame accurate scene to scene color and density with minimal chances of abrasions or dust normally associated with running film on a projector, whether neg or reversal. The WP-16 runs film safely, yes, but the Rank is sprocketless and safer by comparison.

In short, people shooting super 16mm are going to stick with the labs they are used to working with that give them known, guaranteed results because, usually, there is a client looking over their shoulder that would not approve of the risk for the miminal money that could be saved by transferring super 16mm neg on a WorkPrinter-16, even if the results were exactly the same, which they won't be if working with negative. (That's why DaVinci and Dubner color correctors are so expensive!) And while reversal looks just great off of a WorkPrinter-16, virtually no one I know is going to wrap an entire S16 production shooting chrome when neg is so much easier to work with.

I hope this helps explain the lack of enthusiasm for running S16 on a WorkPrinter.

Roger

[hmm]

I hope this helps explain the lack of enthusiasm for running S16 on a WorkPrinter.
Roger

oh - well - my best qualities are stubborn stupidity and ignorance.

which isn't something to be proud of.

there's several ancient sayings
'what you don't know can't hurt',
'if einstein had known what he couldn't do,
he'd never have invented e=mc squared'

butt, in my case, i guess it's time to accept they ain't going to work for me.

i'd rather not have known that roger.



but maybe it's finally gotten thru my determination to not know.

it's been over a year of hoping,
i think i shall give up now and sell all my junk.

no offense intended, my fault entirely.
i do say thanks for trying to help me understand.

steve h.

[ericMartinJarvies]

hmm,

that's not to say you cannot capture the B&W and color reversal market out there that may exist, providing you get your message out to the right crowds. many people may shoot and process their own b&w films, and require them to be made into video. but the market is small. if you have a workprinter, and can afford to purchase a digital SLR camera like the rebal, or the kodak 14n, those particular cameras can be controlled via software on your host computer, and these software applications offer awesome color correction features, that if mastered, can generate absolutely beautiful images. images that can then be downsized to hd, and delivered in the hd(or even sd) formats.

over the months i have spent thousands of dollars sendig my various filmstocks to various developing labs/telecine transfer houses, and have NOT attended the sessions. what i can tell you from personal experience, is that you will most likely find many more BAD developers and color correctors then you will find GOOD ones. so, a potential market for you would br for those who do not have a transfer house in their local area, and and do not have previous relations with a lab/colorist.

perhaps the new filmmakers market would be your best best ... i personally beleive a new filmmaker should learn to shoot and theeby master their filming craft using reversal stocks ... it makes a better filmmaker out of a person, as there is less room for error. myself for example, i have yet to establish a routine relationship with a lab/transfer house, but am shooting and processing and transferring film ... i doubt i am the only one doing this.

another consideration would be the ultra 16 market, instead of the s16 market(or perhaps both). it is much easier for the low budget filmmaker to file away the gate and make a u16 frame then it is to change the inner-workings of a camera to make it s16 ... again, very small market, but a market none the less if that is what you are looking for.

i personally beleive that if you offered direct to disk transfers(forget about video tapes), you would get a niche market to some degree, if you communicate your message correctly. just imagine how nice it would be to receive a handful of data cd's or dvd's or a hard drive for that matter with hight res sequencial images, or perhaps an hd version of the transfer. one would have higher quality footage then possible on tape, and not have to rent a deck, or deal with tape at all for that matter UNTIL they have edited their footage and are ready to go back out to tape, at which case they can send in some data dvd's to a tape output house and have it done that way, or author their dvd themselves.

but alas, the financial realities of the market come into play ... from the looks of it, you would most likely make more money doing these transfer of 8mm, s8mm, and 16mm, instead of s16 or u16, as you probably guessed by now by some of the responses you have had.

over the past couple of months i have purchased a dozen or more bell and howell 16mm wind up cameras which i am converting to ultra 16mm. perhaps once these find their way back to ebay, you will have a few customers to speak of i wish i had not WASTED the money i did having my eclair converted to super 16 ... ultra 16 is just as good, if not better when factoring in all the facts and considerations.

filmmaking is EXPENSIVE ... no two ways around it. the people that are investing alot of money into s16(as nigel and roger mentioned) will not trust their footage to someone and some device that is not a BUZZ word or catch phrase in the industry(rank, spirit, etc.).

if you really want some business, go and talk with local government and private archeival agencies in your area that have a shit ton of 8mm and 16mm film sitting on the shelfs that need to be transferred to video/computer, and get their business ... they NEED to have it transferred, and unlike a dop or director, will not be concerned whether or not the machine you are using is a BUZZ WORD or CATCH PHRASE acceptable situation ... as long as it looks good and is a good price, they'll spend the money!

i can tell you from my own personal experiences, and my lifestyle and where i demographically live, it is NOT condusive for me to visit a lab/telecine house. this is why i have had to build my own digitizing solution ... my own everything solution in house. but there will come a time and a point wherein i am 100% confident with my film shooting/direction, using reversal stocks, self developed and self digitized, that i can then move onto negative films, wherein i will have a relationship with a lab and colorist for transfer ... and at that point, i will most likely no longer be using s16, and i will certainly not be chincing on the lab/transfer service/person/technology i use ... because my film and my reputation will literally be riding on it.

so clearly everyone has a differant angle on this subject, hopefully it provides you with a good outlook on the matter, so the decisions you make with regards to you transfer services are more prudent and financially benefical, then they are not.

best of luck to you

[monobath]

Dang, Eric. I thought I was verbose. Say... Didn't you recently take a vow of brevity? Not going too well, eh?

[Scotness]

i personally beleive that if you offered direct to disk transfers(forget about video tapes), you would get a niche market to some degree, if you communicate your message correctly. just imagine how nice it would be to receive a handful of data cd's or dvd's or a hard drive for that matter with hight res sequencial images, or perhaps an hd version of the transfer. one would have higher quality footage then possible on tape, and not have to rent a deck, or deal with tape at all for that matter UNTIL they have edited their footage and are ready to go back out to tape,

Yes great in theory but IMHO technology is still a year or two away from making this really easy - remember the thread I started about DIY 2k scanning? - I also posted it at cinematography.com and got some sobering responses - including this one:

3) the need for a large, fast drive array capable of dealing with 13 megs a frame (for a 2K file), which is about 400 gigs per 20-minute reel of negative. You also have to be able to backup these files, do fixes (when necessary), and delivery the files in different file formats to different companies.

(from) http://www.cinematography.com/forum2004 ... wtopic=955

Interestingly I notice another thread jsut started there about 2k telecine and Super 16

http://www.cinematography.com/forum2004 ... wtopic=835

~ hope this helps in some way

-- I guess as a prospective 16mm telecine customer (wether it be 16, Super 16 or ultra 16) I've kind of decided the money and effort that I could save by going through a DIY route would be better spent on working or fundraising so I can afford the proffessional post production route

Scot

[Nigel]

Scot--You are spot on!! If anyone thinks that they can compete with Cinesite, Thomson/Grass Valley or Sony by Frankensteining something together in their basement they are fools.

I am not going to take a project that has 500,000+USD riding on it and send it off to Timbuktu. CineSite has some great options going for S16/35 right now that are amazing. The future of film production is changing in so many ways that go beyond emulsions and cameras....I can't wait to see what I shoot is looking like in one year let alone 5.

Good Luck

[MovieStuff]

I am not going to take a project that has 500,000+USD riding on it and send it off to Timbuktu.

I could not agree more, Nigel. Units like the WorkPrinter16 have a place in the marktet and are a way to get more bang for the buck if the buck is limited. But, realistically, if I have a good budget, I am going to send my film off for telecine as well, even though I could build my own telecine unit. It isn't really about my expectations as much as it is my client's expectations or those of my backers or the producers. If I was just trying to satisfy me, and me alone, then I might try something that would allow me to save money and have a some control over the process. But, as I pointed out before, virtually anyone working in Super16 has a budget healthy enough to use the best that the industry has to offer. More to the point, the larger the budget, the higher the stakes so why even take a chance with that kind of money on the line? You and I are in total agreement on this.

Roger