NAB 2017 - any film/cine news?

[Andreas Wideroe]

Anyone visiting NAB this year who can give us some reports?

Is Kodak represented?

Are we seeing other things than more pixels?

How about filmscanners, processors and film/cine equipment?

I noticed Lasergraphics upgraded their Director to 10K, MWA Nova has a new version for their scanners out. Filmfabriek is present. Probably RTI and Filmlight aswell as Digital Vision?

Anyone?

/Andreas

[Davideo]

I just got back from Vegas today. I didn't see much new for motion picture film there.

Saw a Kodak booth which was very small and didn't see the Super8 camera there. It was for some other digital products.

Stopped at BlackMagic booth and got a good look at the 35mm Cintel scanner which also handles 16mm as an optional gate for a fee. It transfers at realtime but can be slowed down to as much as 1 frame per second for scanning which is useful for older, fragile film. Has removable rubber rollers that can be cleaned after each transfer. These rollers capture dust and dirt before entering the gate. No wet gate so you'll have to use an air blaster to blow away anything that may be in the gate. There are sprocket wheels before and after the gate and pin registration is electronic. DaVinci Resolve is the capture program used for the transfer process. Unit is compact and can sit on your desk but weighs a little over 100 pounds. They have sold and shipped between 100-200 units so far. Turnaround time after purchase is about 3-4 weeks for delivery. Optical sound is captured into .wav files which then can be cleaned up in a third party program.

Did not see the LaserGraphics booth there so was probably one of the small booths that's easily missed.

It was reported there were 130,000 attendees (up from the 100,000 estimate). Exhibit hall had over 1 million square feet of exhibits with over 1,800 companies. Took me a couple days to see most of it.

[Will2]

Stopped at BlackMagic booth and got a good look at the 35mm Cintel scanner

I'm hearing that it does a fine job on new or well-maintained film but for archivists the Lasergraphics workstations are amazing. I will say that Blackmagic makes the sexiest film scanner I've seen though.

[Davideo]

Yeah, Will, the LaserGraphics is probably more appropriate for damaged film and so is the Kinetta. Cintel at $30k versus LaserGraphics' $100k-plus and Kinetta's $175k-plus, I'm more apt to wait for Roger's next revolutionary marvel at a better price.

[Andreas Wideroe]

Stopped at BlackMagic booth and got a good look at the 35mm Cintel scanner

I'm hearing that it does a fine job on new or well-maintained film but for archivists the Lasergraphics workstations are amazing. I will say that Blackmagic makes the sexiest film scanner I've seen though.

Agreed. Too bad they don't have a zoom/movable camera/lens so you could get the same nice resolution for smaller formats. Only 35mm at full resolution. When I saw it on IBC a few years ago (pre-sales version) it lacked audio, but I believe the rollers were prepared for 8mm (if my memory serves me well).

/Andreas

[Will2]

Too bad they don't have a zoom/movable camera/lens so you could get the same nice resolution for smaller formats. Only 35mm at full resolution.

This is one of those basic design flaws that I just can't understand. If you work exclusively in 35mm, which perhaps some shops in LA do, fine...but there is so much 16mm out there in the world why would you handicap your machine like that? We're in a 4k world now.

[RCBasher]

Too bad they don't have a zoom/movable camera/lens so you could get the same nice resolution for smaller formats. Only 35mm at full resolution.

This is one of those basic design flaws that I just can't understand. If you work exclusively in 35mm, which perhaps some shops in LA do, fine...but there is so much 16mm out there in the world why would you handicap your machine like that? We're in a 4k world now.

Up until the availability of more affordable high resolution cameras, I would have agreed with the above. The FilmFabriek scanners which use my Cine2Digits system do indeed allow the camera to be moved. However, just moving the camera is not enough, the magnification has to change. This means another moveable part (such as bellows or helical for example) which can reduce the rigidity of the system which in turn can negate the higher resolution in the first place!

On a further practical front, if 4K is acceptable for 35mm, then 4K for 8mm is definitely overkill and even for 16mm rather questionable. So whilst in the past, having a lower resolution camera for 35mm (maybe 2K) because that was all that was practically available, cropping for 16mm would have been a bad thing. But with a 4K camera? Perhaps not so anymore?

[Will2]

On a further practical front, if 4K is acceptable for 35mm, then 4K for 8mm is definitely overkill and even for 16mm rather questionable. So whilst in the past, having a lower resolution camera for 35mm (maybe 2K) because that was all that was practically available, cropping for 16mm would have been a bad thing. But with a 4K camera? Perhaps not so anymore?

I've done come tests recently with 5k scans of 16mm vs. 2k scans finishing to HD. Sorry I don't have them to post at the moment but I can tell a difference in the final HD file for sure. Over-scanning is a good thing. Of course much depends on the lens/focus for sure. Is it worth the difference in price? Almost certainly not unless you're doing a high-end commercial job.

The other advantage on 4k scans even in 16mm is that it allows you to re-frame a little. You can zoom in & tighten a shot without a huge jump in quality although grain can be noticeable depending on the stock. Shoot 50D in well-lit conditions and you're fine.