8mm Forum: Eumig projector for telecine?

This is topic Eumig projector for telecine? in forum 8mm Forum at 8mm Forum.

To visit this topic, use this URL:
https://8mmforum.film-tech.com/cgi-bin/ubb/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=1;t=001223

Posted by John Wilton (Member # 395) on June 01, 2005, 05:43 PM:

Sorry if this subject beaten to death...I'm new here. I have about 10 400 foot reels, some mono sound, that I want to transfer to miniDV (project and shoot quality, with 3ccd variable shutter camera). I have an ebay 607D coming for my silent reels and possibly to modify per the UK DIYtelecine site. But for my sound reels...

1) can I hope to get reasonably flickerless results with a slow (1/30?) shutter speed, running a sound projector at 18 or 24fps?

2) ebay has various S802 and S810D...am I right in thinking there's no line out on the 802, but there is on the 810?

3) Does the eumig-museum still exist? Probably has the answers to my questions, but the links seem to have gone cold.

4) Perhaps someone in the forum has the right sound projector for me...John (NYC)

Posted by Jan Bister (Member # 332) on June 01, 2005, 10:13 PM:

Hi John and welcome to the forum! Let me do a quick rundown on your questions...

1) Theoretically no... either 18 or 24fps captured at 60fps (NTSC interlaced frame rate) will flicker... In practical terms, your mileage may vary, however. It depends on the camera, too, I think. Actually, what kind of sound movies are we talking about? You could of course capture your sound movies as if they were silent (using a 20fps speed), record the sound separately, change its playback speed and then match it to the captured video - but naturally music and voices wouldn't sound right anymore...

2) I have no idea. I'd be surprised, though, if they didn't both have a line-out. [Eek!]

3) Ah, the Eumig museum... Yes, it sadly has gone defunct quite some time ago. Nothing like searching Google and finding references to sites that don't exist anymore. [Frown]

4) Oh, I have no doubt on that one [Big Grin]

But have you actually considered either 1. having your (sound) films professionally transferred to miniDV by an experienced transfer lab or 2. investing money in a WorkPrinter XP from http://www.moviestuff.tv/? The WorkPrinter would allow you very high-quality, frame-by-frame capture directly to your computer and you could keep the proper playback speed of the captured film without any flicker or hotspot issues. [Smile]

Posted by John Whittle (Member # 22) on June 01, 2005, 10:52 PM:

For your sound movies, there is a Kodak M-100 TV which is a Super-8 with five blade shutter and sync motor that will transfer and is set-up to work on an aerial image system.

But why mini-dv? Is that just the camera you're using?

Here's the run down for those of us in NTSC world. TV is a nominal 30 fps. In order to get a flickerless transfer you need to project with a speed and shutter interruption that works to multiples of 30fps. So 24 fps at 5 blade is 120 and this is divisable by 30 fps. You won't have a perfect lock with color being 29.97 but you may never see that line moving up thru the picture anyway. For silent you can choose 20 fps with three blades for 180 (again divisible by 30) or 15 fps with 4 blades for 60.

In each case you should use a synch motor.

There is another way, and that is non-real time transfer and that's been pointed to on this forum before. That equipment works well for direct computer capture and recoridng to a hard drive and then you can modify speed in Adobe Premier or Final Cut Pro if you use a mac.

In truth, the equipment and learning curve to do this right is more costly than having the films transfered professionally.

In just transfering some old tapes to DVD I wound up with several hundred pounds of "new" video gear including profession S-vhs machines, time base correctors, color synch generators, wave forum monitors. Now I've gone back and started re-doing everything I did before I put this palet of equipment together.

I do have a Kodak M-100 TV projector but at about $1000 plus shipping, it's probably not something you'd want to consider.

John

Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on June 02, 2005, 03:18 AM:

Buy, rent, borrow a Panasonic DVX100 MiniDV camera. Set it to 24P or 24PA mode and go. At 24FPS projection speed you will have no flicker, regardless of projector or shutter because it is LITERALLY recording at 24 frames per second.
Panasonic cameras - click on the AG-DVX100A

Posted by John Whittle (Member # 22) on June 02, 2005, 11:33 PM:

Brad, interesting you brought this up. I talked to a couple of Panasonic Engineers a couple of years ago at a trade show about this. I was going to take out the shutter in an Eiki ENT-T telecine and put in a one blade shutter and use the 24P on the Panasonic to do a frame capture which in theory would equal the quality of a Rank. The price of the camera (about $3K) didn't make it feasible for my experiment. Which an aerial image set up this should provide an ideal NTSC transfer for sound in real time.

For silent film you would have to do speed conversions in Premier or Final Cut--but you'd still have the best source material to start with.

I think the camaeras are still expensive even on ebay--but a great solution.

John

Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on June 03, 2005, 12:44 AM:

I have this camera and have tested it with 2 and 3 bladed shutters. You don't need to remove a blade to do it. In fact, if you did you would potentially induce a jitter to the image, as the shutter would then be off-balance and could physically shake the machine.

Using a piece of white formica across a room about 20 feet away and with the lens zoomed in pretty small with camera set up right beside the projector yielded incredible transfers. In fact they were better than the 8mm Rank Cintel stuff I've seen.

A tip - turn on the high speed shutter of the camera (250x1) and fine tune your projector's speed until you see no rolling bars. Then set the shutter back to normal (24x1). That will get your projector running dead on perfect speed, even though you can be noticeably off and still not have any rolling bars.

---------

I will be selling mine pretty soon to upgrade to a 24P HD camera. If anyone is interested, I will make a sweet deal on this one...and it's got very low hours on it.

Posted by John Wilton (Member # 395) on June 03, 2005, 01:11 PM:

Thanks for all the advice people...for what I need to do, the more expensive options are out; DIY will be good enough. I'll put a microswitch in a Eumig 607 to so as to do frame-by-frame picture capture, and get a Eumig S810 to capture the sound from my sound film...synch will not be critical, to the extent that I can remember what I shot 30 projector-less years ago. Basically a fun DIY project; the cost of having it done professionally or buying suitable machinery high enough that it wouldn't happen...much as I'd like John's projector and Brad's camera.

Jan, it looks as though there is no line out on the S802...no jack and none on the circuit diagram, where there are both on the 810.

John

Posted by John Whittle (Member # 22) on June 03, 2005, 06:03 PM:

quote:
Jan, it looks as though there is no line out on the S802...no jack and none on the circuit diagram, where there are both on the 810.

You can always use the external speaker output and make up a pad which is simply two resistors, one in line with the signal and the other between the signal and ground, to drop the signal to the proper level. Radio sells (maybe "used to sell"?) such an cable in the auto radio department.

I like the panasonic camera system, but I'd put in on my Laird telecine base and use aerial image instead of projection. If I removed a blade from the shutter, I'd balance it with a weight so that it didn't wear the bearings in the cam tank.

John

Posted by John Cook (Member # 203) on June 04, 2005, 02:18 AM:

Brad,

I too have experimented with projection and capture via camcorder, although my Sony D8 isn't nearly up to the task when compared to your Panasonic.

I've a question regarding your technique and past experiences when projecting long distances for camera capture. I've read numerous posts across the web of others (myself including) throwing a smaller (less than two foot) picture at close range against white poster board. This worked well for me using an Elmo GS800 but my GS1200 hot spots at close distances which has caused me to rethink my capture methodology.

My question is related to the physics related to a camera when the F-stop is set wide open for low light, at F1.4 the focus depth is limited due to the angle of the light coming into the focal point of the lens, conversly a greater depth of focus results as the Fstop is closed down in brighter light. Does your experience using a smaller projected image at longer distances appear to have a similar effect on the projected image? Does the image exhibit more depth of focus at this long distance with the lens adjusted to create a tighter beam? I haven't had time to experiment yet but your reply above in this thread sparked the F-Stop idea for greater depth of focus, the longer throw would also alleviate my hot spot problem but would produce a dimmer image for capture.

Thanks for the insight, John

Posted by Michael De Angelis (Member # 91) on June 05, 2005, 01:25 PM:

John,

I may not have tried or experienced capturing home movies to video,
but if you have a 'dimmer' capture that may not necessarily be a bad thing.

Because, you can edit or enhance the gain with darker images with an inexpensive video application known as Quick Time Pro.

Quick Time Pro, is a $30.00 upgrade to Apples Quick Time Player which is available for both Apple and the more Common PC clone products out on the computer market (DELL, Compaq, HP etc.) You can purchase online, or call Apple and request to purchase a 'Key' to unlock these great features if you already have Quick Time Player.

The 'Key' is a registration number which will unlock and give you full advantage of the Quicktime Application.

Currently, Apple is developing the new version, number 7 for PC, and should be out very shortly. If you wish to try this, it is cheap, and well worth the wait.
Check the Apple website and click on the Quick Time 'Tab' for details.

In Short, you can adjust the following: Brightness, Contrast, Color and Tint.
It's a cheap alternative to higher priced computer applications and worth a try.

Good luck with your project.

Michael

Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on June 05, 2005, 03:21 PM:

John C, yes to your post above and also to minimize any keystoning. When you do a short throw, you can't get the camera close enough to the projector's lens to not notice keystoning. At a distance with a small screen, you get the best focus, light and no keystoning to speak of.

Obviously a professional telecine chain is the better option as was mentioned by John W, but there truly is no benefit to removing one shutter with a 24P camera. If anything the focus could end up being compromised since the blast from the lamp on the film would be there 3 times as long in one burst.

I use the formica because it truly does make for great captures without the expense or hassle of an actual telecine.

I don't agree with Michael's idea of capturing dark and "fixing in post". The end results will always be worse than capturing at or just barely below ideal exposure level in the first place. You won't just be increasing brightness and such, but video noise as well (even with digital cameras).

Posted by John Whittle (Member # 22) on June 06, 2005, 07:56 PM:

quote:
I don't agree with Michael's idea of capturing dark and "fixing in post". The end results will always be worse than capturing at or just barely below ideal exposure level in the first place. You won't just be increasing brightness and such, but video noise as well (even with digital cameras).

Brad is right on the money here. Make as many corrections/fixes in the transfer as you can from inserting filters if necessary to running the signal thru a PROC amp (which adjusts the signal for chroma, tint, set up) or a color correction before recording. Once it's on tape you're limited in what you can do AND it can take a long time to apply fixes in editing since the entire sequence is re-rendered to apply the fix.

I'm glad that Brad has proved the 24P theory and it isn't necessary to remove a blade. I was even concerned that it might be necessary to build a trigger to generate a sync signal to genlock the camera to the projector--but appears that's overkill.

If you elect to do aerial image rather than shooting off a screen or a "box", you'll elminate keystone and any impefections from a screen. What you need is a condensor lens that's bigger than your image (a four-to-six inch dimeter works), a front surface mirror and a diffusion glass to place behind the projector aperture plate. When set up, it's like an optical printer and you are actually photographing the image in the projector gate. FWIW this is the same technique that was used to put Donald Duck and Bugs Bunny into live action shots where the aerial image is an "invisible image" focused at the cell on the animation stand. It's an old technique that works.

John

UBB.classic^TM 6.3.1.2