Ok, so has anyone ACTUALLY done a 35mm blow up from an HD10?

Les Dit · January 16th, 2004, 08:47 PM

No, 2K only. Almost all DI work is 2K, for 4 perf 35mm work.
-Les

<<<-- Originally posted by Rob Belics : Can your lab do 4k scans? -->>>

Rob Belics · January 17th, 2004, 09:51 AM

Yeah, that's sad.

How long does it take, ie, per minute or whatever?

Les Dit · January 17th, 2004, 12:28 PM

It takes about 600 frames an hour.
It's not the 2K res you need to be 'sad' about, because thats not the problem (limit) what it's all said and done.
Most theaters projection quality is what's the issue. Due to frame registration jitter, and poor optics ( the kid doesn't focus) the resolution is about 1000 pixels across, at best.
A good percentage of theaters are really DVD quality, I'd say.
-Les

Dustin Cross · January 17th, 2004, 03:00 PM

Les,

Where do you get for film scan done? $10k seems cheap. How much film is being scanned for $10k?

What are you editing on?

Film out is still pretty expensive right? I see numbers like $300 per minute.

James Ball · January 17th, 2004, 06:24 PM

dustin

The scan he's talking about is scanning the dailys to a digital format. Telecine.

the digital intermediate is on your hard disk

you can burn this out for the $300/minute you mention is burning the edited film + sound to 35mm film.

Dustin Cross · January 17th, 2004, 06:56 PM

I understand the entire DI process. Actually he is not talking about telecine. Telecine is the process of scanning film and converting it into video. Typically used for offline. He is doing full rez 2K scans.

I am interested in hearing about how many feet of film he is scanning at 2K for $10K. $10K isn't that much. My problem would then be how to get that footage to me in Hawaii. 2K scans can add up to a lot of TB.

Les Dit · January 17th, 2004, 07:57 PM

No Telecine here. Full 2K Cineon files, with full chroma res, as opposed to the HD transfers that give you lower quality.
7000 ft ( 80 min) for $10K

As far as getting the files shipped, all I can say is that 200 plus gig firewire drives are getting mighty cheap these days !
I used to use 35 gig DLT tapes, but those are obsolete now.Also, I have a file format that supports compression with 12 bits per channel, that makes each frame about 5 meg instead of the normal 10 megabytes.

I'm not new to this, trust me :)

-Les

Dustin Cross · January 17th, 2004, 08:45 PM

Les,

What file format are you using?

I was recently reading about a new Lacie 1TB firewire drive that would make things easier.

Is it your business that does the scans or do you send it out?

Les Dit · January 17th, 2004, 11:59 PM

I own the scanner, but it is run by a small company for me, which I have an agreement with. You can email me privately if you would like to pursue this, since it's getting a bit off topic here on the DV forum. My mail is lesd@earthlink.net.

A small TB drive array would do it, or even a couple of 300 gig drives. FedEx is a good slow speed network. The drives would be passed back and forth a few times, during the project.

I can get some good laser output rates as well, either at the company that runs my scanner, or a large studio I have some connections with. Both are Arri Lasers.

-Les

Rob Lohman · January 18th, 2004, 10:04 AM

If my math is correct the cineon files are around 12 MB per frame
(instead of 10, (2048 x 1556 x 30) / 8 = 11.95), which yields
288 MB per second (at 24 fps), or 17280 MB per minute (17 GB).

For those 80 minutes that would be 1382400 MB which is roughly
1350 GB or 1.3 TB. Or five 300 GB drives.

Les Dit · January 18th, 2004, 12:54 PM

Thanks Rob,
I like to use 10 to make my mental math easier!
The 300 GB drive mechanisms are about $270 these days, making them much cheaper than the old DLT tapes that were the industry standard for file swapping only 2 years ago.
-Les

Chaim Bianco · January 25th, 2004, 11:10 AM

yo les,

i remember you writing on usenet that the most rez anybody will ever squeak out of 16mm color neg is about 1700 pixels across, and any more than that is just sub-sampling the grain.

obviously there's a big difference between 7245 shot at f8 on a sunny day through a $5000 prime, and 7279 shot at f2 with a filmschool bolex. so i assume grainier stocks shot under non optimal conditions can probably be scanned at less that 1700 wide. but how much less? 1k?

heres another question:

when you scan 16mm do you scan at 2k and then scale it down to 1280+ , or do scan a 1700 wide window out of a 2k area.

Les Dit · January 25th, 2004, 02:12 PM

Hi Chaim,
As you know, film stocks are evolving along with video, and the newest stocks from Eastman are showing almost no grain. With super 16, we get the full 2K across and resize to a smaller frame as needed. As disk storage is so cheap now, it's feasible to deliver uncompressed frames to the client.
To compete with the HD transfers, the scanning rates have dropped well below 10 cents a frame. In fact, the cost more depends on if the film is being scanned as a cut negative, or in other words, keeping the amount of winding and reel swapping down to a minimum.
-Les

January 17th, 2004, 03:00 PM	#34
Dustin Cross Regular Crew Join Date: Apr 2003 Location: Austin, Texas Posts: 133	Les, Where do you get for film scan done? $10k seems cheap. How much film is being scanned for $10k? What are you editing on? Film out is still pretty expensive right? I see numbers like $300 per minute. __________________ Mahalo, Dusty

January 17th, 2004, 06:56 PM	#36
Dustin Cross Regular Crew Join Date: Apr 2003 Location: Austin, Texas Posts: 133	I understand the entire DI process. Actually he is not talking about telecine. Telecine is the process of scanning film and converting it into video. Typically used for offline. He is doing full rez 2K scans. I am interested in hearing about how many feet of film he is scanning at 2K for $10K. $10K isn't that much. My problem would then be how to get that footage to me in Hawaii. 2K scans can add up to a lot of TB. __________________ Mahalo, Dusty

January 17th, 2004, 08:45 PM	#38
Dustin Cross Regular Crew Join Date: Apr 2003 Location: Austin, Texas Posts: 133	Les, What file format are you using? I was recently reading about a new Lacie 1TB firewire drive that would make things easier. Is it your business that does the scans or do you send it out? __________________ Mahalo, Dusty

January 18th, 2004, 10:04 AM	#40
Rob Lohman RED Code Chef Join Date: Oct 2001 Location: Holland Posts: 12,514	If my math is correct the cineon files are around 12 MB per frame (instead of 10, (2048 x 1556 x 30) / 8 = 11.95), which yields 288 MB per second (at 24 fps), or 17280 MB per minute (17 GB). For those 80 minutes that would be 1382400 MB which is roughly 1350 GB or 1.3 TB. Or five 300 GB drives. __________________ Rob Lohman, visuar@iname.com DV Info Wrangler & RED Code Chef Join the DV Challenge \| Lady X Search DVinfo.net for quick answers \| Buy from the best: DVinfo.net sponsors

January 25th, 2004, 11:10 AM	#42
Chaim Bianco Regular Crew Join Date: Jul 2003 Location: Philadelphia , PA Posts: 39	les dit re: rez yo les, i remember you writing on usenet that the most rez anybody will ever squeak out of 16mm color neg is about 1700 pixels across, and any more than that is just sub-sampling the grain. obviously there's a big difference between 7245 shot at f8 on a sunny day through a $5000 prime, and 7279 shot at f2 with a filmschool bolex. so i assume grainier stocks shot under non optimal conditions can probably be scanned at less that 1700 wide. but how much less? 1k? heres another question: when you scan 16mm do you scan at 2k and then scale it down to 1280+ , or do scan a 1700 wide window out of a 2k area.

January 16th, 2004, 08:47 PM	#31
Les Dit Major Player Join Date: Oct 2003 Location: Southern Cal-ee-for-Ni-ya Posts: 608	No, 2K only. Almost all DI work is 2K, for 4 perf 35mm work. -Les <<<-- Originally posted by Rob Belics : Can your lab do 4k scans? -->>>

January 17th, 2004, 09:51 AM	#32
Rob Belics Major Player Join Date: Apr 2003 Location: St. Louis, MO Posts: 581	Yeah, that's sad. How long does it take, ie, per minute or whatever?

January 17th, 2004, 12:28 PM	#33
Les Dit Major Player Join Date: Oct 2003 Location: Southern Cal-ee-for-Ni-ya Posts: 608	It takes about 600 frames an hour. It's not the 2K res you need to be 'sad' about, because thats not the problem (limit) what it's all said and done. Most theaters projection quality is what's the issue. Due to frame registration jitter, and poor optics ( the kid doesn't focus) the resolution is about 1000 pixels across, at best. A good percentage of theaters are really DVD quality, I'd say. -Les

January 17th, 2004, 06:24 PM	#35
James Ball Regular Crew Join Date: Dec 2003 Location: Sulphur, LA Posts: 61	dustin The scan he's talking about is scanning the dailys to a digital format. Telecine. the digital intermediate is on your hard disk you can burn this out for the $300/minute you mention is burning the edited film + sound to 35mm film.

January 17th, 2004, 07:57 PM	#37
Les Dit Major Player Join Date: Oct 2003 Location: Southern Cal-ee-for-Ni-ya Posts: 608	No Telecine here. Full 2K Cineon files, with full chroma res, as opposed to the HD transfers that give you lower quality. 7000 ft ( 80 min) for $10K As far as getting the files shipped, all I can say is that 200 plus gig firewire drives are getting mighty cheap these days ! I used to use 35 gig DLT tapes, but those are obsolete now.Also, I have a file format that supports compression with 12 bits per channel, that makes each frame about 5 meg instead of the normal 10 megabytes. I'm not new to this, trust me :) -Les

January 17th, 2004, 11:59 PM	#39
Les Dit Major Player Join Date: Oct 2003 Location: Southern Cal-ee-for-Ni-ya Posts: 608	I own the scanner, but it is run by a small company for me, which I have an agreement with. You can email me privately if you would like to pursue this, since it's getting a bit off topic here on the DV forum. My mail is lesd@earthlink.net. A small TB drive array would do it, or even a couple of 300 gig drives. FedEx is a good slow speed network. The drives would be passed back and forth a few times, during the project. I can get some good laser output rates as well, either at the company that runs my scanner, or a large studio I have some connections with. Both are Arri Lasers. -Les

January 18th, 2004, 12:54 PM	#41
Les Dit Major Player Join Date: Oct 2003 Location: Southern Cal-ee-for-Ni-ya Posts: 608	Thanks Rob, I like to use 10 to make my mental math easier! The 300 GB drive mechanisms are about $270 these days, making them much cheaper than the old DLT tapes that were the industry standard for file swapping only 2 years ago. -Les

January 25th, 2004, 02:12 PM	#43
Les Dit Major Player Join Date: Oct 2003 Location: Southern Cal-ee-for-Ni-ya Posts: 608	Hi Chaim, As you know, film stocks are evolving along with video, and the newest stocks from Eastman are showing almost no grain. With super 16, we get the full 2K across and resize to a smaller frame as needed. As disk storage is so cheap now, it's feasible to deliver uncompressed frames to the client. To compete with the HD transfers, the scanning rates have dropped well below 10 cents a frame. In fact, the cost more depends on if the film is being scanned as a cut negative, or in other words, keeping the amount of winding and reel swapping down to a minimum. -Les