|
Author
|
Topic: Review Wolverine Reels2Digital MovieMaker 8mm film digitizer
|
|
|
Stan Jelavic
Master Film Handler
Posts: 314
From: Fort Lauderdale, FL, USA
Registered: Jan 2019
|
posted October 03, 2019 07:46 PM
Agree, the shorter screws is a better solution Kamel.
Regarding the 3rd speed it is possible Kamel. The only constraint is the encoding on the two input pins of the MSP, pin5 and pin6.
So currently if pin5 is high the speed is 2 sec, if pin6 is high it is 4 sec. If both are high it is 1 sec.
But I wanted to add the rewind.. So, maybe use both pins low, and use a rewind switch that shorts both inputs through diodes. Alternatively, we just have 2 sec and 1 sec and middle of the switch for rewind. The middle of the switch pulls both inputs high.
[ October 04, 2019, 11:59 AM: Message edited by: Stan Jelavic ]
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
David Brown
Film Handler
Posts: 42
From: Centerville, UT, USA
Registered: Oct 2019
|
posted October 08, 2019 10:18 PM
Resizing an 8k image down to 500 pix, I'm exhausted. Abt 7% of the original. I must say it looks a lot smaller than other images I've been seeing? It is also so small, no one will be able to see the grain that I was complaining about. Can't be the film stock, this had to be shot on Kodachrome II in 1965, it's only 8mm. It must be the conversion of film grain to digital pixel array that amplifies it. I've been shooting single frames with a dslr around 8k. For print, the grain is softened some by the printer, but not in a video. That's why I want 4k camera.
Questions:
1. the original camera in the Wolverine MMpro is the same resolution as the replacement being suggested. Can it be reused with the new board?
2. Could a 4k camera, like the one I saw on OEM Cameras also be used in place of the 2k camera suggested?
The 4k is significantly more expensive, maybe 4x. Would only be worth it if the images were to be processed for grain and jitter, then shrunk down to 2k.
I don't know, I would look for a smaller fov lens if keeping the original Wolverine. The digital zoom makes all the noise worse. Not that saving uncompressed stills won't make a huge difference with the same camera.
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
David Brown
Film Handler
Posts: 42
From: Centerville, UT, USA
Registered: Oct 2019
|
posted October 09, 2019 09:09 PM
Hi Stan
The 12mm lens should do what I was hoping for if the Movie Maker Pro's lens is 6mm. I'll be looking back through the thread for those details and samples.
4k is not a good choice for everyone, maybe not most. Those selling 4k capture, claim there is just a little more detail and tonal range left above a 2k scan. I believe a high-quality source has to be there first. I don't know if 4k is worth it to me. I recently intended to have a 50-foot reel scanned at 4k, but with the cost over $100, I changed my mind and went with 2k.
Now I'm troubled by the new Wolverine's output ( I own one) after it is promoted as a 2k sensor.
I have been taking some still captures from 8mm & s8mm with a dslr because some family events are only on 8mm. I don't have a way to frame register the images from 8mm, so capturing movies with my setup would be impossible.
Over the years I've transferred films to videotape, videotape with better scanners, and then dvd. Time to do it again.
Thank you for being there. This thread goes back years! It's been on my mind for years too.
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
David Brown
Film Handler
Posts: 42
From: Centerville, UT, USA
Registered: Oct 2019
|
posted October 11, 2019 12:32 AM
Kamel
I was just looking at that digital microscope last night on ebay!
I feel like I'm living in two time zones. I'm only on page 10 of this thread (2017) and now I'm "back to the future".
I am also now wondering if my WMMP(wolverine Movie Maker Pro) lens is exactly focused.
A note to those in the past: If the lens won't move, use acetone on a q-tip to dissolve the thread lock, not pliers!
Stan
I did try all the settings in the WMMP. The consensus of advice I found was not to use any of them.
There are 2 camps here, those who do post processing and those who don't. I post process. I do sharpening and all the other settings in post. They can contribute to greater compression artifacts if captured. This is also true if shooting new video today, don't sharpen in-camera, use low contrast and color saturation. It looks terrible if you don't post process, but leaves more latitude for adjustment.
So the 12mm lens on the new camera in the Hawkeye upgrade does not cover the entire sensor? 2592x1944 (RGB32/Y800)
Anyway, I like the idea of a new camera that fits in the existing housing. My macro setup with a dslr is VERY close to the film. I would not be able use a projector. In fact I had to make a "film gate" that attaches to the lens, which also eliminates high shutter speeds since this is over 6* magnification.
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[Cool]](cool.gif)
Printer-friendly view of this topic
