Author
|
Topic: Review Wolverine Reels2Digital MovieMaker 8mm film digitizer
|
|
|
Doug Stratton
Junior
Posts: 10
From: New York, NY, USA
Registered: May 2017
|
posted May 25, 2017 09:12 PM
It was seeing this thread with some info on whats going on behind the shell of the Wolverine that prompted me to join the forums. I did not see it mentioned, but in the US the rather well known (mainly) catalog company Hammacher Schlemmer a few months ago offered their exclusive version of the machine (for all intent purposes it seems Wolverine made this for HS and this will explain why the HS has 2 features the normal version does not.
Pretty much 100% the same in all specs except that the HS version allows for 400 foot 7" reels and captures at 1440x 1080
They also charge an arm and a leg for this ($500.00), but I bought it. Like many I was very unsatisfied with the horrendous mp4 artifact noise this created to try and keep a smaller file size (3" reels come out to about 236 megs)
what also got me interested was the post from Alan Taplow. If indeed its actually true with the whole new inners design, I am more concerned if they finally lowered the compression giving a larger file size and better quality. That is what I need to know.
My unit heats up like Roberts and I too was thinking to mod it for a fan. The only thing stopping me was if they ever upgraded the firmware or something else to improve the overall quality. HS gives a life time guarantee so no matter how long goes by, if I am not happy I can return it which means I obviously can't modify the machine
You guys are also aware that you can just rebuild the mp4 container the video stream is in and change the frame rate OF THE container and therefore you do not have to re-encode the clip or loss any quality.
MP4 like MKV is a container file for many different formats. When you remux your video stream back into a new mp4 container- computer programs obey the info of the container and not the actual file inside. So our files are 30 frames per second but you made the mp4 file saying the framerate is 24 frames per second. All media players will obey this. Now instead of always changing the speed in a player (or if you bring it somewhere else) it will play the speed it should be with no re-encode and no quality loss---
here is how to rebuild the mp4 container and fix it to the proper framerate with no re-encoding and no quality loss
Below is the tool used (my mp4 box gui) which is free and you can get this at videohelp.com (also where I posted info about the HS scanner).
So if you want to fix your clips speed with no encoding and in 20 seconds or less- follow these steps below:
on here download and install my mp4box gui https://www.videohelp.com/software/My-MP4Box-GUI
once installed open the program and you will see a box with 4 tabs you can choose (mux, demux, join and split)
1. click the demux tab and on the right side click "open" and now browse to any mp4 file made from the wolverine. It will then show the video track of that file and tell you its dimensions. Click the small box next to the video file it shows
2. Now hit "demux" (on the right). It will save a file in the same directory as your original mp4 video clip with a name something like "0021_track1.h264" That is actually the raw video stream from the mp4 file made by wolverine
3. with mp4box still open click the "mux" tab and on the right select "add" and browse to the demuxed track it just made (ex: 0021_track1.h264)
4. NOW on the bottom of the program box you will see an option on the left "FPS:"no change". Click that drop down box and select the proper framerate your film should be. Now hit "mux" and in like 4 seconds it will create a new mp4 file for you with a name like 0021_track1.h264-muxed.mp4
enjoy your proper speed clip-
This is the Hammacher machine with a 400 ft reel on it (Squirm, super 8 sound). Very similar to the Wolverine and upon first glance they look the same, but cosmetically a little different to allow the larger film reel. Sorry if the image is large
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gary Schreffler
Film Handler
Posts: 33
From: North Potomac, MD, USA
Registered: Jun 2017
|
posted June 12, 2017 12:24 PM
So far, I am pretty happy with this unit. I currently have a Moviestuff CineMate 20, which works great, but takes a lot of footprint. And my Moviestuff Workprinter XP has the same foorprint issue. So when I saw this Wolverine, I figured what the heck. I mostly like it because it has a smaller foorprint, even when I am doing 7" films and using my rewinds. I have to say that I am pretty much impressed with the output quality of this device. Probably as good as the Cinemate (after I edit the video in my Adobe, the differences are really impossible to distinguish).
One very pleasant surprise: it handled a film with sever VS (curly and does not lay flat). I had all but written this film off, despite its significance (footage of the F7F Tigercat aboard USS Kearsarge (CV-33) in 1948), as no projector I tried could even run this film. The Wolverine captured it almost perfectly, and the entire field is in focus, so the film is held very flat at the gate. I was not expecting that...
I haven't noticed a heating issue, yet. In the event I do, what size O-Ring has been found to be most effective?
-------------------- My God; It's Full Of Stars!
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
Gary Schreffler
Film Handler
Posts: 33
From: North Potomac, MD, USA
Registered: Jun 2017
|
posted June 14, 2017 03:05 PM
I will get a photo later, but it is very low tech. After playing with tandem reels and looped leader and whatnot, I discovered two things: ONE: I have a set of rewinds that only engage the gears and spindle when the crank is pushed in. TWO: a 7" rubber band (the type you buy at the supermarket that hold large trash bags to the trash can) makes a great drive belt. Since the rewind gears are not engaged, allowing the spindle to turn without any resistance (or wasting energy by turning the hand crank), the wear and tear on the rubber band seems minimal. I have done 13 full 7" reels now with the same rubber band, and it is not showing any signs of giving up.
I hope my attempt to describe this makes sense... [ June 15, 2017, 06:13 PM: Message edited by: Gary Schreffler ]
-------------------- My God; It's Full Of Stars!
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gary Schreffler
Film Handler
Posts: 33
From: North Potomac, MD, USA
Registered: Jun 2017
|
posted July 18, 2017 11:41 AM
I have been doing a lot of talking back and forth with the Wolverine technical people (a really good bunch of folks). I originally bought the belt-driven, non-vented back. I use it modified for 7" reels. I then sent it to them for evaluation, and they upgraded to the gear driven, vented back.
Interestingly, the gear-driven model performed miserably with the 7" setup. Constant slipping, chattering, machine turning off, etc., that made the conversion unviewable.
Wolverine then asked me to send the unit back to them for evaluation, and they subsequently advised that the gear driven units do not appear handle extra tension very well (the type of additional tension experienced with a 7" reel setup), so they have modified the unit again. Now back to belt-driven, but modified/improved over the first belt-driven iteration.
So I will now do robust testing with the latest model/improvement, and post the results here.
-------------------- My God; It's Full Of Stars!
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|