8mm Forum: Telecine brands????

»	8mm Forum » 8mm Forum » Telecine brands????

UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!

Author

Topic: Telecine brands????

Paul Bruty
Film Handler

Posts: 42
From: Ballarat Victoria Australia
Registered: Apr 2011

posted December 14, 2011 03:48 AM

Hi all, I am trying make a decision as to what telecine machine to purchase. I would prefer to not use a huge PC demanding reasonably slow frame by frame unit.

Moviestuff with a variety of models or the several focuskye Elmo machines. http://www.ebay.com.au/itm/130386824727?ssPageName=STRK:MEWAX:IT&_trksid=p3984.m1438 .l2649

Regards, Paul. [Smile]

[ December 14, 2011, 08:24 AM: Message edited by: Paul Bruty ]

| IP: Logged

Martin Jones
Phenomenal Film Handler

Posts: 1269
From: Thetford , Norfolk,England
Registered: May 2008

posted December 14, 2011 05:29 AM

My one question to the maker of the unit featured on the Ebay link is....
"What is the speed of the film , in frames per second, during transfer"?

He claims to provide "flicker free transfers" in "real time" without the "need for a computer"., and mention is made of a "sweet spot" in one of his "testimonials.

Frankly, I'm suspicious.
Martin

--------------------
Retired TV Service Engineer
Ongoing interest in Telecine....

| IP: Logged

Paul Bruty
Film Handler

Posts: 42
From: Ballarat Victoria Australia
Registered: Apr 2011

posted December 14, 2011 08:23 AM

Martin, we are lucky to have the PAL tv system. I get completely flicker free using a Sankyo 600 and a Samsung HD digital camcorder. I set the camcorder to 50/1. There is no external speed control on the sankyo so I am lucky that it works perfectly.

The 50' (I have not measured the film lengths) reels all run around the 3 min and between 30 and 40 seconds so the Sankyo is running just a little slow. My good fortune. I would love to be able to transfer during the day BUT my 2 telecine boxes don't give as good a results as projecting to a 6" x 4" white card in the dark, hence the reason for the question.

Regards, Paul. [Smile]

| IP: Logged

John Clancy
Phenomenal Film Handler

Posts: 1954
From: Cornwall
Registered: Jun 2003

posted December 15, 2011 03:22 AM

As you already have the equipment that can handle flicker free transfers I should go for an aerial image system if you can find one. Should be a fraction of the cost of a converted projector for 6pfs telecine use and, if the evidence of users postings on YouTube and other places are accurate, will give superior results - and at 16.66fps too!

--------------------
British Film Collectors Convention home page www.bfcc.biz. The site is for the whole of the film collecting hobby and not just the BFCC.

| IP: Logged

Janice Glesser
Film Goddess

Posts: 3468
From: Sunnyvale, CA USA
Registered: Sep 2011

posted December 15, 2011 11:56 AM

I believe a real-time aerial systems still needs a modified light source. The majority of FocusScan units sold on eBay are aerial systems. All of those projectors are advertised as having multiple mods. I only wish there was an example of its output somewhere to see. I emailed the guy making these units and he just said to send him a reel to convert to see the results. There are plenty of Workprinter examples on YouTube...but I don't see any related to this guys machines. I think if I was going with a realtime solution I would go with Movie Stuff's Cinemate system.

--------------------
Janice

"I'm having a very good day!"
Richard Dreyfuss - Let It Ride (1989).

| IP: Logged

John Clancy
Phenomenal Film Handler

Posts: 1954
From: Cornwall
Registered: Jun 2003

posted December 16, 2011 03:34 AM

I can't find these Focus Scan systems Janice so please point me in the right direction so I can take a look and pass my much valued opinion [Wink]

.

Light modification is not difficult. The only modified light system you need is a 10w or 20w lamp and some white plastic in front of the shutter to diffuse the light (and cut the light output right down) to avoid a hot spot down the middle. Run the new lamp off a separate power supply which can be had for very little money by purchasing something like a kit for recessed halogen ceiling lighting. Once you have this all you need is the lens to focus the video camera to the aerial image - and that I find is the difficult bit to get hold of so probably best to source that first.

--------------------
British Film Collectors Convention home page www.bfcc.biz. The site is for the whole of the film collecting hobby and not just the BFCC.

| IP: Logged

Martin Jones
Phenomenal Film Handler

Posts: 1269
From: Thetford , Norfolk,England
Registered: May 2008

posted December 16, 2011 05:41 AM

John,
Try the link in the first post in this thread!
Martin

--------------------
Retired TV Service Engineer
Ongoing interest in Telecine....

| IP: Logged

John Clancy
Phenomenal Film Handler

Posts: 1954
From: Cornwall
Registered: Jun 2003

posted December 17, 2011 03:21 AM

Thanks for pointing that out Martin. All that is required is the lens in this instance so what Paul needs to find is someone that just sells the lens/mirror assembly by itself. I would expect the cost to be less than £200 for a new assembly and probably nearer £100.

--------------------
British Film Collectors Convention home page www.bfcc.biz. The site is for the whole of the film collecting hobby and not just the BFCC.

| IP: Logged

Martin Jones
Phenomenal Film Handler

Posts: 1269
From: Thetford , Norfolk,England
Registered: May 2008

posted December 17, 2011 03:48 AM

Or achieve his aim with the equipment he already has to hand, and thus avoid any significant outlay.

Martin

--------------------
Retired TV Service Engineer
Ongoing interest in Telecine....

| IP: Logged

John Clancy
Phenomenal Film Handler

Posts: 1954
From: Cornwall
Registered: Jun 2003

posted December 19, 2011 03:41 AM

I think Paul needs the photographic mirror and lens assembly Martin as he's getting better results currently filming off a card. Personally I'd like to find a second mirror/lens assembly as my existing setup has some problems of its own.

--------------------
British Film Collectors Convention home page www.bfcc.biz. The site is for the whole of the film collecting hobby and not just the BFCC.

| IP: Logged

Martin Jones
Phenomenal Film Handler

Posts: 1269
From: Thetford , Norfolk,England
Registered: May 2008

posted December 19, 2011 04:47 AM

I understand where you are coming from, John. Personally, I do not use a mirror, or Condenser lens, or even the projectors own projection lens, but pick up "in-line" direct from the film. When I'm using a Video camera with non-interchangeable lens my ONLY addition in the optical path is a simple supplementary lens; when using an interchangeable lens camera my ONLY addition is an extension tube (which has NO effect on the images). Cleanliness and alignment of the optical components are no longer serious issues, and transferring in even strong room lighting isn't either. Paul already has most of what he needs to do it this way.
Martin

[ December 19, 2011, 01:13 PM: Message edited by: Martin Jones ]

--------------------
Retired TV Service Engineer
Ongoing interest in Telecine....

| IP: Logged

John Davis
Master Film Handler

Posts: 286
From: Dunfermline, Fife, UK
Registered: Jun 2008

posted December 19, 2011 03:52 PM

Martin,
I've thought about the direct from the gate method but I've seen some examples where there is significant drop off in image quality towards the edges suggesting the supplementary lens is not always top class. What supplementary lens do you use?
A lot of people promote the direct off gate method sighting the advantage of less optics to lose quality. But copying off a card uses the camcorder lens and the projector lens whereas direct off the gate uses the camcorder lens and a supplementary lens so really each method uses two lenses - or am I missing a trick?

| IP: Logged

Martin Jones
Phenomenal Film Handler

Posts: 1269
From: Thetford , Norfolk,England
Registered: May 2008

posted December 20, 2011 03:10 AM

John,
Transferring film to video is essentially the same as COPYING film to film; its only the second medium that is different, the mechanism is the same.
Would you suggest that in order to duplicate a film from 35 mm to 8 mm, say for Distribution to the film collecting fraternity, the best way is to project the film onto an A4 piece of paper on a wall and then film it with a camera?
I would love to provide a detailed reason here why I use direct to gate; sufficient say it's the nearest I can get economically to established "film copying" methods such as Optical Printers, it's the method employed (in variant detail) by the best commercially built Transfer Machines, used by VOLUME Transfer organisations, and it's actually surprising easy to achieve great results on a DIY basis.
I won't go into detail here: it would take up too much valuable Forum space, but if you (or anybody else) would like to contact me by email or PM I'll gladly send you my thoughts and reasons for arriving at this point, via "Telecine Boxes", "Screen on Wall" and "Aerial Image" methods... each one better than the previous one.
Martin.

--------------------
Retired TV Service Engineer
Ongoing interest in Telecine....

| IP: Logged

All times are Central

Printer-friendly view of this topic

UBB.classic^TM 6.3.1.2