8mm Forum: MovieStuff.TV's Newest Telecine...Anyone?

This is topic MovieStuff.TV's Newest Telecine...Anyone? 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=007868

Posted by Keith Heydon (Member # 3138) on January 27, 2013, 09:10 PM:

Just got an email reply from Roger regarding this newest product,

http://www.moviestuff.tv/retro_8_telecine.html

Looks great "on paper" ..and, not a bad price point..but am wondering if anyone has made the plunge or has any thoughts/comments /concerns about this product.?

Evidently, "camera is built in".

Keith

Posted by Dino Everette (Member # 1378) on January 28, 2013, 12:09 AM:

I should have one very soon, so I can report back

Posted by Janice Glesser (Member # 2758) on January 28, 2013, 11:29 AM:

Since I already have a Workprinter I haven't been interested in Roger's newest design. Appearance-wise it's a cute little compact all-in-one machine and it looks like a simplier operation. I think one would have to have a serious amount of film to transfer or start a business to justify the cost. I'll be awaiting Dino's review [Smile]

Posted by Thomas Dafnides (Member # 1851) on January 28, 2013, 08:37 PM:

Janice, are you entirely satisfied with the workprinter?

Posted by Bryan Chernick (Member # 1998) on January 28, 2013, 10:31 PM:

You would need to have around 10,000 feet of film to justify the cost.

Posted by Janice Glesser (Member # 2758) on January 29, 2013, 01:25 AM:

For me the Workprinter is fine...and cost-wise for an SD transfer system I already had a good camcorder, TV monitor, and dedicated computer and monitor. For an HD setup I bought an Intensity Pro capture card and I will need to rebuild my computer to a RAID or SSD system.

So...the basic Workprinter XP requires a lot of peripheral equipment which can be very costly. The new MovieStuff Retro 8 might be a cost effective alternative if you have the need to have a frame-by-frame transfer system.

Posted by Jon Addams (Member # 816) on January 29, 2013, 01:26 AM:

It'll take 30 minutes to scan a 50-footer that's 5 hours for 400' - ouch!

Jon

Posted by Janice Glesser (Member # 2758) on January 29, 2013, 01:35 AM:

I didn't notice that Jon...That's uber slow [Mad]

My Workprinter captures at about 8fps...and I thought that was slow [Smile]

Posted by Dino Everette (Member # 1378) on January 29, 2013, 01:35 AM:

but since it runs sprocketless it can handle damaged film which is a very good thing, and it is less expensive than the previous models.

Posted by Keith Heydon (Member # 3138) on February 14, 2013, 03:55 PM:

Hi there,

Wonder if anyone's taken delivery of one of the Retro 8 units yet?

Would love to hear some feedback.

KH [Razz]

Posted by Christian Bjorgen (Member # 1780) on February 14, 2013, 04:09 PM:

Looks quite interesting, too bad it would come at close to 4000 USD before it reached my doorstep [Frown]

Posted by Keith Heydon (Member # 3138) on February 28, 2013, 01:57 AM:

I understand the intro pricing ends tomorrow. Am wondering if anyone has taken delivery of the Retro-8, and has any comments or thoughts?

Thanks,
Keith

Posted by Pat Walls (Member # 3699) on May 08, 2013, 07:55 PM:

My Retro 8 is supposed to be shipped by the end of this month. It had better be good if it is to beat the quality of my Workprinter modified to Viper. I will let you know the results then

Posted by Sean Sexton (Member # 3457) on October 13, 2013, 10:32 AM:

I am curious if anybody has a review on the unit?

Posted by Janice Glesser (Member # 2758) on October 13, 2013, 06:56 PM:

Sean, I know Keith has received his unit...but has been too busy with his job to test it out. I was hoping he would have posted something by now. Also, Dino should have received his too.

Posted by Andy Goldsmith (Member # 3999) on October 27, 2013, 12:13 PM:

Hi
I've just become a member of this forum.I now have a retro 8 machine and can answer any questions that you might have.
First impressions is that the machine is very well built, and the quality of the output is good.
For me, the big plus is that one click of the mouse changes everything from std to sup 8 but the downside is the 2FPS capture

At first I thought that everything looked very 'digital' but after comparing screen shots with my 3ccd camera I can see that the result is just clearer
So generally very good ( It did take around 4 months to deliver though )

Posted by Sean Sexton (Member # 3457) on November 07, 2013, 10:58 AM:

Hi Andy. I glad to hear you have received your retro 8 b/c I'm thinking about picking one up. I currently use the Sniper HD 8 and 16, but wouldn't mind having a unit that I can use for damaged film like the Retro. Have you used the Sniper HD before? I'm curious about the comparison between the two. Also, also long is the processing time after the capture is complete? With the Sniper you did the initial capture and then you would set the FPS and SD/HD for output, which would take some time to complete. So I'm trying to find out if after capturing the reel you still have a long time to wait for final output?

Posted by Andy Goldsmith (Member # 3999) on November 07, 2013, 01:29 PM:

Hi Sean
I haven't used a sniper before,so I can't really compare, although it does seem to be a similar process.
You capture the film then add it to an album.
When you've completed your work you then choose SD/HD .mov files or as Image sequences ( which is what I tend to use ) it then copies to a another folder for you to edit as you wish.
Even with a fast PC HD files do take a while to render.
For me it took some time trying out all the various settings on both the unit and Sony Movie Studio to obtain the result that I was happy with.
I should mention that Moviestuff claim that you can load up and walk away, and to a degree you can, but remember it does rely on being able to see the sprocket holes to capture the frames. So if you start off with say a under exposed section, you've adjusted your light source to suit and then after a while it comes across some over exposed footage although it still travels through the machine the frames might not be recorded. So a certain amount of light adjustment will be required during transfer.
So I would stay with the machine and maybe do something else to kill the time as a 400ft spool does takes 4 hours!
All in all I am pleased with the unit

Posted by Sean Sexton (Member # 3457) on November 07, 2013, 02:06 PM:

Thanks for the quick reply Andy. When you say the rendering takes a while even with a fast PC, how long are you talking? If 400 feet take 4 or 5 hrs to capture, is the rendering time just as long? I'm really trying to get an idea of overall processing time for start to finished file so I can compare it to the Sniper HD. 400ft on Sniper takes about 40 minutes, and rendering it out takes 45min to an hour, but the time does change depending on SD/HD/TIFF etc. Thanks again.

Posted by Andy Goldsmith (Member # 3999) on November 07, 2013, 02:26 PM:

I mainly transfer to SD Image sequence, so a 50ft spool takes around 3-4 mins to render ( JPG Format ).mov seems to take about the same. Although I just capture all my film in one hit and then get it to convert overnight, so it's not really a problem for me.
I don't know how easy it is to go from STD to SUP 8 with the sniper but you just select from a drop down menu which film you are using and then you are good to go!( you don't even need to focus )

Posted by Zechariah Sporre (Member # 2358) on November 07, 2013, 04:11 PM:

Wow, that looks pretty neat. It would be a bit of an investment though. Does anybody know what his introductory price was for the unit?

Posted by Andy Goldsmith (Member # 3999) on November 07, 2013, 04:28 PM:

The Retro 8 ranges from $2495 to $2995
at the moment it is $2495
Their Retro 9.5 and 16 are both on special at $2995 ( normally $3995)

Posted by David Singer (Member # 3953) on January 18, 2014, 08:39 PM:

My Retro8 arrived yesterday and I was able to successfully set it up with a minimum amount of hassle. The first transfer looks good and the unit is easy to operate once loaded. The transfer rate is slow at 30 minutes for 50 feet which I knew going in but I'm retired and it will keep me out of harms way for a while. Actually quite awhile, I have about 10,000 feet of reg 8 and super 8 film of the kids and family from the 50's and 60's and 70's to transfer. But if I don't do it, the film probably will end up on eBay or in a garage sale or just tossed. Fortunately the kids are interested so I have incentive to do it. And with things like Dropbox, Skydrive and Facebook, it's easy to pass along. I see that the current price is now down to $2,350.00. When I become more proficient at using it, I will link a short film here. I'll keep you posted.

Regards

Posted by Dino Everette (Member # 1378) on January 18, 2014, 09:33 PM:

I have been using the retro 8 unit for a few months now and it is really crazy simple to use...The only possible things to look out for would be the calibration between the light source and mirror,, and the level of the light source. Because the unit is software driven these things can cause some weird issues. When I first got mine I played around with it to see what types of results I would get based on all sorts of variations. As long as everything is calibrated the way it states in the instructions you are good to go..It's easy, you get great results and as long as the film isn't damaged or brittle it will go through nice and smooth since there are no sprockets..

Oh and in regards to processing time. The unit runs at a very slow speed during transfer but the processing is lightning fast.

Posted by Andy Goldsmith (Member # 3999) on January 19, 2014, 05:19 AM:

Hi David The Retro has indeed come down in price,although now I've noticed you have to buy the software separately at $161 USD

Posted by David Singer (Member # 3953) on January 19, 2014, 12:07 PM:

Thanks Andy, I did not notice hat the software is now a separate charge, which actually makes it slightly more expensive then what I paid for it in late October (there's a 2 month shipping lead time).

Posted by David A Cooper (Member # 4233) on April 07, 2014, 10:20 PM:

Received my Retro-8 about 3 weeks ago and have run about 45 small reels through it already. Very impressed with the stability and quality it produces. Since you remember these old 8mm films being played on a loud projector in the basement the film jumping around and pulsating the results of the Retro-8 are rock solid. There are independent controls for luminance and contrast as well as color and framing so you can get a really good transfer. The problem now I am having is that I want to edit the films and eventually burn them to DVD. The transfers can be converted to Photo JPEG and imported into a non-linear system. I was wondering if anyone else that has the Retro-8 has been using Final Cut Pro? I have never worked with this codec before and want to know the best work flow process. I hope I don't get beat up too much for taking this off topic to NLE but I do think it is related to the Retro-8 subject. The ability to clean up the ends of transfer and re-organize and add titles to a project can really enhance the 8mm experience much greater when you can produce DVD copies of 8mm films to the family in a neat and organized way. If there are anyone else that has the Retro-8 that has worked in Final Cut Pro with the Photo JPEG codec at 17fs I would love to hear from you and discuss your work flow since I am having a lot of trouble with it.

Posted by Dino Everette (Member # 1378) on April 08, 2014, 12:20 AM:

David I have in Avid and in Adobe Premiere and it is very easy and the files integrate perfectly so I have to imagine final cut would be the same.

Posted by David A Cooper (Member # 4233) on April 08, 2014, 09:11 AM:

"David I have in Avid and in Adobe Premiere and it is very easy and the files integrate perfectly so I have to imagine final cut would be the same."

Dino - When you import into Avid (or Premier) are you taking the Photo JPEG version as a .MOV. I would think so, the other option on the Retro-8 software creates individual JPEG stills (hundreds of them). In FCP there are many options of the format for your sequence or timeline but none offer 17fps. They seem to import just fine and I can play the clip in the browser but when I edit it into the timeline it requires rendering. It always ends in a general error and never completes the rendering. Also, the clips shouldn't have to be rendered either. Of course the trick here is to make sure the sequence settings match the incoming video format. If anyone familiar with FCP could comment that would be very helpful.

Posted by David Foster (Member # 3527) on November 03, 2015, 02:16 PM:

David, I am interested in whether you came to any conclusions regarding workflow in Final Cut Pro. I too am a novice with Final Cut, and I also use a retro-8.
If you haven't sorted this out, I'd be happy to bounce some ideas around. I have FCPX, and am still getting to grips with their terminology (where are the bins and why would they get rid of that term!) However, I think it's worth persisting with. Happy to become part of the problem solving team. Kind regards, David Foster.

UBB.classic^TM 6.3.1.2