From: Sunnyvale, CA USA
Registered: Sep 2011
posted May 01, 2017 04:56 PM
Winbert....The Wolverine mechanical process of frame-by-frame capture I do like. It's not robust...but with a little babying it seems to work. It's the image compression that is the problem for me. I haven't seen an example from the Wolverine yet that the results weren't over compressed pixelated jagged-edge images. If you could output just the images into another post processing application, then you could control the compression and have more options, but I won't be running out to buy one anytime soon.
All I can say is...You get what you pay for.There are dozens of ways to telecine...and if the $300 machine helps preserve their memories and the quality meets their expectations...then so be it. Maybe future models will have more flexibility and compression options.
posted May 03, 2017 03:12 PM
Ditto Janice, absolutely you get what you pay for. I'm not at all impressed with the Wolverine's ability to represent what's actually on the film - it's just not that accurate. But for the price, well, the fact that it works is pretty dandy.