|
|||||||||
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
February 26th, 2004, 03:48 AM | #1 |
Inner Circle
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Santa Rosa, CA
Posts: 390
|
HDV Telecine?
Has anyone heard anything about telecine to HDV? I was thinking about it today and I'll bet Super-16 would make a sweet telecine to HDV. Anyone heard of anyplace offering it?
Shoot, telecine to HDV, edit in FCP and have the negative conformed and a print struck later if there's ever a need. Meanwhile you have a 720p HDV master to show around that originated on film. Super-35 3-perf is another possiblity with a lot of promise. Telecine to HDV. Edit in FCP. Eventually have a DI made and a print struck if need be. Have a 720p master from film in the meantime. Just seems like a really nice way to edit film on a laptop while looking at a really beautiful image. |
February 26th, 2004, 06:54 AM | #2 |
RED Problem Solver
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Ottawa, Canada
Posts: 1,365
|
How do you telecine 24fp 16mm film to a 30fps (progressive) video format - 3:2 pulldown ain't going to work?
Graeme
__________________
www.nattress.com - filters for FCP |
February 26th, 2004, 08:12 AM | #3 |
Inner Circle
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: San Mateo, CA
Posts: 3,840
|
Not sure I understand the reason for your workflow.
Are you talking about digital interpositives? Otherwise, just conform the negative normally. (And Graeme, the 24fps telecine is normally delivered in a 30fps video format.) |
February 26th, 2004, 11:02 AM | #4 |
Major Player
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Stockholm, Sweden
Posts: 331
|
16mm to HDV? What's the cost saving in that? Why not do telecine to DVCPRO HD or HDCAM and have a lot less compression?
I can see the theoretical advantage in using HDV as an offline format for HD stuff in the higher end formats like celluloid (and the CineAlta process). But why spend big money on celluloid just to degrade it to HDV in post?
__________________
Martin Munthe VFX Supervisor/DP/Director |
February 26th, 2004, 12:23 PM | #5 |
Inner Circle
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Santa Rosa, CA
Posts: 390
|
<<<-- Originally posted by Martin Munthe : 16mm to HDV? What's the cost saving in that? Why not do telecine to DVCPRO HD or HDCAM and have a lot less compression?
I can see the theoretical advantage in using HDV as an offline format for HD stuff in the higher end formats like celluloid (and the CineAlta process). But why spend big money on celluloid just to degrade it to HDV in post? -->>> I've shot quite a bit of Super-8 and had it telecined to Mini-DV for student projects. It looks really interesting, but in that case you're looking at Mini-DV as the final product unless you want to go and do a 16mm blowup later. The point of HDV telecine wouldn't be that HDV was the final product necessarily. It would be a beautiful format to shop around and if the project took off you could always have the negative conformed and a print struck. As far as why not a less compressed format, because HDV is small and editable while still being beautiful. You could carry around a whole film on a Powerbook. To answer Richard, a digital interpositive with Super-16 or 3-perf 35mm yields a much more beautiful final print than going through an optical stage, though that's always an option if the final client opts to have the prints made that way. Just thinking out loud, really, but wondered if anyone had heard of an HDV telecine suite. |
| ||||||
|
|