|
Author
|
Topic: Review Wolverine Reels2Digital MovieMaker 8mm film digitizer
|
Dino Motti
Junior
Posts: 14
From: Birmingham, UK
Registered: Apr 2018
|
posted April 21, 2018 04:23 AM
quote:
UPDATE: reply from Winaid:
quote:
Good day,
1. this one is home use one , not profeesional
2. for the format can not change, it is only can be MP4, so the quality of video will be compressed
3. by not can not change the effect of vidoe out put format
Disappointing...
Disappointing indeed, but as someone said, if they sent us the source code we could try to make the change ourselves... I was wondering if the frames are saved as invisible files, I do not see the machine having such a large internal cache to be able to store them elsewhere.
I still am not an expert of how a MPEG/MP4 file is produced, I know the compression operates on the relation between previous frames and successive frames, to reduce the amount of new information to record and just create a set of instructions on the changes that occur between frames. This makes me think that there must be either a "working file" that is produced looking at the previous frame only, with no predictive compression, or the frames are stored as invisible/temp files and assembled at a later stage.
I truly hope the second case is true so there can be hope to reverse engineer the compression and operate a true frame by frame uncompressed video from the stills.
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dino Motti
Junior
Posts: 14
From: Birmingham, UK
Registered: Apr 2018
|
posted April 21, 2018 05:45 AM
It should have some sort of feedback of the sort "job done" before moving to the next frame scanning, but from using it I noticed no lag whatsoever, so the processing time may well be much less than the time gap, so it ALWAYS manages to fit that into the time available... the guys at winait did not give me the impression of having built an extremely complex device... which also reassures me as it means there are very simple levers to tweak it, like a timer, a saving routine, etc etc... probably also seeing how the card drive I connected and seeing whether there is a way to connect a USB out or something like that, at that point one could monitor the drive in real time or make a raid version of it that does not involve the processing.
I would honestly first try extracting the card halfway a scan and see if there are some invisible files, I would do it myself, but the scanner is with my father atm.
| IP: Logged
|
|
Berend De Meyer
Expert Film Handler
Posts: 140
From: Leek, The Netherlands
Registered: Apr 2017
|
posted April 21, 2018 05:56 AM
I've been reading - Synalyze HEX Editor - the .BIN file for the latest firmware for the Somikon.
The chip seems to be a Novatek NT96650. The firmware version is 2017.10.17 PL11P-D (German)
EDIT: Seems to me, that this chip is terrible crippled by the use of the firmware in our decks.
quote:
NT96650BG is a high image quality, high performance, power saving and cost effective digital still
camera (DSC) and digital video camera (DV) controller with excellent digital still image capturing and
video streaming capabilities. It is targeted for the application of VGA to 50M pixel DSC/DV resolutions.
It can be easily adapted to many high speed CMOS and conventional CCD image sensors with on
chip programmable interface timing approach. The controller provides sophisticated video processing
methods with built-in hardware acceleration pipeline. This is essential for achieving high performance
for per-shot, shot-to-shot, and continuous shooting pictures. The controller provides flexible
mechanism for auto white balance, auto exposure and auto-focusing in order to better tradeoff
hardware and software efforts over the performance. Embedded H.264 video CODEC supports video
recording up to full-HD 1080p30. The HDMI 1.3 Tx is also equipped for HDTV output. Rich storage
interfaces are supported to make it ideal for the storage of still pictures and video streaming data. The
USB2.0 high speed interface can upload/download the audio/video data efficiently to/from PC
Found a PDF with additional info's on the net:
https://dashcamtalk.com/cams/mobius/Novatek%20NT96650.pdf
Perhaps the more tech savy members here will be able get some more info's about the chip, writing JPG and converting to the MP4 file.
EDIT: Seems that the chip is terrible crippeled by the use of the firmware for our decks.
--------------------
Cheers | “I am an advocate of the "if it ain't broken, don't fix it" modus operandi!”
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Berend De Meyer
Expert Film Handler
Posts: 140
From: Leek, The Netherlands
Registered: Apr 2017
|
posted April 21, 2018 07:52 AM
Mark - thanks for your feedback about the SD card!
No, I can't find any reference for updating the firmware.
Pere Pasqual - post #260 - has already tried to successfully hack the firmware for bitrate and fps:
quote:
Hi Kurt,
The thing is that my modifications, although uploaded later, where done *before* the Somikon firmware was released. So now my firmwares are mostly unnecessary, as what most of people was demanding was 1080p resolution and higher bitrate. Once the Somikon firmware was proven compatible with the original Wolverine, both goals were accomplished without further "hacking"... :/
Anyway, I'm sharing them so people can choose mainly between different capture resolutions.
The original bitrate of the Wolverine was about half the new one, and yeah, compression artifacts were highly noticeable. The current bitrate is a very high one, so I'm sure no one would ever notice any improvement going from near 10000 to 20000. Also note that bitrate will unavoidably decrease with lower frame rate - you need a less amount of bits to store the information since you have less frames to store. So, all in all, near 10000 bits for such a low frame rate is such a big amount of "space" to encode the information.
https://www.goprawn.com/forum/novatek-cams/2056-novatek-command-line-tools - post #18
I really don't have any clue what hacks are needed to get the scanner to save JPG files on the SD in stead of only the MP4...
[ April 21, 2018, 10:03 AM: Message edited by: Berend De Meyer ]
--------------------
Cheers | “I am an advocate of the "if it ain't broken, don't fix it" modus operandi!”
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mike Spice
Master Film Handler
Posts: 421
From: none of your business
Registered: Jun 2017
|
posted April 24, 2018 09:03 AM
Werner do keep us posted, a 12v motor can't draw more than a few milliamps, so should be easy enough to put a pot on it.
The PSU is 12v 0.5amp
I think a variable pot would make more sense than a fixed value resistance, for different reel sizes/hub sizes.
I really do think if the motor can be turned down to just about keep up with the scan speed, the frame jitter will vanish completely.
I am so far proving this by turning the take up motor off, and letting the film drop in to a clean plastic box.
Perfect scans time after time.
This week alone I have scanned 72 50ft (over 3000 ft) reels and all came out great using this method.
I have done it with a 200ft but not really what I want to do, and A 400FT would be out of the question, to drop in a box.
Turning the take up motor down to just about take up, would be something worth trying for sure.
[ April 24, 2018, 11:45 AM: Message edited by: Mike Spice ]
| IP: Logged
|
|
Kev Morrison
Film Handler
Posts: 76
From: Land of the Mouse, USA
Registered: Feb 2018
|
posted April 24, 2018 09:45 AM
Mike Spicer,
Since you stated a while back that you were interested in my following project…
A few days, I successfully completed my first 400 ft (eight 50 ft reels spliced together) Super 8 to digital conversion with my Wolverine Pro.
Setup:
- After cleaning all of my films with Filmguard (none of which had ever been shown in a projector before), I edited & spliced together the reels using my Kodak Universal Splicer and original Kodak Presstapes. I used Pec Pad wipes to wipe off any excess Filmguard from the film ends before I applied the splices. Smart move, because I suspect that the splices may not have held otherwise.
- I had a digital timer ready to keep track as to when the end of a 50 ft reel of film (and subsequent splice) was about to occur, so I would be present to take action if a splice either jammed or came apart in the light table (see below). 28 minutes was a good base time to use for unedited reels.
- After reading some concerns in this forum regarding how loosely the Wolverine takeup reel was in winding on the scanned film, I used a 600 ft reel to take up the film from my 400 ft input film reel. Surprisingly, I think the Pro did a decent job in firmly winding the film onto the takeup reel.
- Prior to starting my run, I did some testing to determine what Wolverine Pro scan settings I would use. I had my family members watch the digitized sample films, and we all concluded that overall, the standard settings looked best for our purposes.
- I kept a licensed Mike Spicer film catching box handy just in case the takeup reel malfunctioned, and I could drop the scanned film into the box.
- Lastly, I placed the Wolverine unit on a homemade “ramp” that had about a 30 degree grade, with the left side of the unit on the high side of the ramp. Why? Two reasons: 1) I figured that it may help the takeup reel in taking up the scanned film as the reel filled, and, 2) If dust or whatever started to accumulate on the light table, the raised angle may help in moving it off instead of staying in place.
Did this idea help? I dunno.
Processing:
- The entire reel was successfully scanned. We reviewed the digitized film, and it looked pretty good. I may attempt to experiment in enhancing a copy of this digitized film, but for now, we’re grateful to have a copy of our movies that we now can share with the family.
- All of my Kodak Presstape splices held well and had no problem going through the light table and scanning, however, I noticed that starting at the splice for the third reel, the spliced film was starting to encounter some problems threading its way through the rollers after the light table and to the takeup reel. It appears that these particular splices make the film a bit inflexible and more difficult to weave through the rollers, and since the takeup reel’s motor doesn’t exert that much tension to pull the spliced film areas through without hesitation, the takeup process starts to “stall” to the takeup reel.
So – I lightly coaxed these areas through with my fingers without a problem. I’d think that for those folks who have used another method of splicing instead of Kodak Presstapes (ex., cement, other types of splice tape), you may not encounter any problems in the splices.
- By the time that the scanning reached the splice for the 7th 50 ft reel, it appeared that the takeup reel may have been starting to get a bit slow – maybe it was just my perception that it was. In any event, I completed the entire 400 ft digital conversion just fine, but I would not be comfortable attempting a 600 ft scan with my machine unless I was either dumping the scanned film into a box, or perhaps not threading the digitized film through all of the Wolverine’s takeup rollers.
I have five more 400 ft reels to splice together and scan. It’s a slow and time consuming process, but it’s worth the effort. In the future after I complete this project, I may consider using a good quality Super 8 projector and a quality telecine converter with my Sony HD camcorder to see if I can produce even higher quality copies of our movies.
And, I’ve already informed my family & friends that now want me to perform the same conversion process for all of their ancient movies that they can either, 1) Pay me to have their movies converted, or, 2) That, after I've finished converting my films, I’ll be more than happy to sell my collection of viewer/editors, Wolverine, splicers, etc. to them so they can do it….
The silence is deafening. HA!
[ September 24, 2018, 08:11 PM: Message edited by: Kev Morrison ]
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ken Abruzzo
Junior
Posts: 12
From: Winter Garden, FL, USA
Registered: Nov 2017
|
posted April 25, 2018 08:29 AM
Kev,
I have the Pro model and yes, it does seem to slow down as a 400 foot reel gets closer to the end. Also, good call on using a 600 foot reel as take up. I've found that it does wind it rather loosely and what fits on the supply reel doesn't always fit on the take up reel.
I had similar experiences with splices. Most would go through without a hitch. Some though did get stuck and needed help. I've had some stock that was really finicky about going through and I found that skipping one of the pegs sometimes helped. Also had some stock that my grandfather had used bargain bin stuff and it was so worn that the machine didn't want to take it. I was able to get it to go through backwards.
I've found that the low sharp setting works better. If only I had discovered that earlier on....... I will eventually go back and rescan everything (with better framing settings too). For now, I was just glad to get it all done and onto DVD. We had a lot of footage. I finished my project and it came in at about 14,000 feet (19 at 200', 4 at 300', 16 at 400' and the rest at 50'). I've since fixed some of my initial editing mistakes and gotten everything where it belongs.
I now have a bunch of neighbors and family friends that want me to scan their old footage.
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
Kev Morrison
Film Handler
Posts: 76
From: Land of the Mouse, USA
Registered: Feb 2018
|
posted April 25, 2018 10:01 AM
Ken,
I have the Pro model and yes, it does seem to slow down as a 400 foot reel gets closer to the end. Also, good call on using a 600 foot reel as take up. I've found that it does wind it rather loosely and what fits on the supply reel doesn't always fit on the take up reel.
*********************
KM - I’m now thinking that we may be seeing a bit of an optical illusion when we sense a “slow down” as a film reel becomes full. When the takeup reel has little film on it, it will appear to rotate a bit faster to take up the scanned film as needed, however, as the reel becomes full (and the circumference of the roll of scanned film is much larger), the reel will not appear to rotate as fast to take up the film as needed. I think. Or maybe the weight of the film on the takeup reel actually does slow down the rotation. Maybe I need another cup of coffee.
******************
I had similar experiences with splices. Most would go through without a hitch. Some though did get stuck and needed help. I've had some stock that was really finicky about going through and I found that skipping one of the pegs sometimes helped. Also had some stock that my grandfather had used bargain bin stuff and it was so worn that the machine didn't want to take it. I was able to get it to go through backwards.
*********************
KM - In this case, the Kodak Presstape splice tape makes the splice and surrounding film rigid (and long) enough that it has some difficulty weaving its way through the Wolverine's serpentine path of rollers (after the scan table) and up onto the takeup reel. Note that the splices all went through the scan at the light table flawlessly – the issue is with the splice “running the gauntlet” afterwards. I cleaned my film with Filmguard, and use Pledge to “lube” the Wolverine rollers, but I’m still not surprised at this minor glitch. Maybe I’ll experiment with threading the film through the Wolverine rollers differently so I omit a roller or two, and that may solve the “stalling” problem with the glitches.
*******************
I've found that the low sharp setting works better. If only I had discovered that earlier on....... I will eventually go back and rescan everything (with better framing settings too). For now, I was just glad to get it all done and onto DVD. We had a lot of footage. I finished my project and it came in at about 14,000 feet (19 at 200', 4 at 300', 16 at 400' and the rest at 50'). I've since fixed some of my initial editing mistakes and gotten everything where it belongs.
********************
KM - I’m going to tinker with my settings before I proceed with my next batch. The good thing about having our movies spliced together is that we’re ready to go for another scan.
But – 14k FEET? Man – I knew I should have taken more movies of the family! ![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
| IP: Logged
|
|
Ken Abruzzo
Junior
Posts: 12
From: Winter Garden, FL, USA
Registered: Nov 2017
|
posted April 25, 2018 11:14 AM
Mike, yup, DVD. Sent out a bunch of disks to family members. Surprisingly, I didn't notice any real drop off in quality. Maybe it's just my eyes. I tried saving hi-def files to my cloud drive and viewing them on my TV. Comparing the files and the DVD on the same screen, I really don't see a difference. I have yet to try creating a blu-ray disk of the same footage. That would be the true test.
I use Cyberlink's Powerdirector to create the movie. I drop in music clips (used recordings of my dad singing for my parents wedding/honeymoon footage). I use the crop and stabilizer tools in PD as needed. Then clean it up with Colordirector (denoise, sharpness, etc).
Kev,
I had the same thought about an optical illusion with it slowing down. I still think it is slowing down a bit from the weight though.
It's been a while since I did the scanning. I know I had some splices that were a different brand and seemed thicker. Those sometimes had trouble making it through the gate. Since I switched to the new version of the Kodak press tapes (white package), I wasn't having trouble. I know what you mean about the film being more rigid. I just can't remember if it was older splices (the other brand) or if it even had something to do with 400' reels (as more weight was on the take-up). Something to keep an eye on for the future.
Hmm....... Hadn't thought about "lubing" the rollers. Something to experiment with (assuming I remember that when I break it out again). LOL!
Definitely try to tinker with the sharpness settings. I liked the end result better.
Yes, 14k feet. Some of it was crap though so I probably won't bother with it when I get around to redoing the project with better framing.
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
![[Razz]](tongue.gif)
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
Printer-friendly view of this topic
