[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Eclair Cameras: RESPONSE: DIY Telecine: Software

yes, it's by all means possible .. heck, anyone with a jk printer or workprinter already knows this. but the main consideration is staying away from video camera technology and sticking with digital slr technology.

the IDEAL scenerio accoriding to my own findings/limited experience, would be to(if feasable/affordable) use a medium format digital camera back($10-50k), and optically(talking about low light loss and high quality lenses) take a 16mm frame of film and enlarge it to the maximum width of the medium format processor, and capture your images accoridngly just as you would with a digital SLR with a much smaller sensor. why? because the SIZE of the digital image with which you originate allows you to completely digitally butcher it(compositing, etc.) prior to reduection to output sizehd, sd, dv, etc.) and not suffer any real visable effects. and naturally, going back out to film from an originating digital image of that size, passed through the film printer's processor would be as good as it could ever possibly be. remember, you an ALWAYS go downin size and quality, but never up. so if you were capturing 24 bit RGB images on an area the size of a baseball collector card by way if optical enlargment, the amount of detail would ablow your mind and allow compositing at the most professional level. you could pn and scan a small area, and still have enough image integrety to composit and output with flying colors.

if i had the money i would definatly go that route ... i plan on graduating to it one day reardless. but for now, a good digital slr camera with a 25mm or greater wide sensor with 24bit color raw image processing will work just fine ... prividing your enlarging lens(from 16mm frame size to maximum usable width/area on sensor) is a good lens that does not degregate the light being passed through the film, and providing the light itself it properly matched to the sensor, and properly spaced and diffused with the frame of film itself, and also having the ability to control such contrast/settings. yep, no need for a telecine with these tools. just time. lots of time for an entire film ... perhaps a week.

A van Roy wrote:

Reading all the subs on digitizing over the last week
or so, I just had to try an experiment...

I took pictures using my digital still cam of a room,
panning the cam by a couple of degrees between each
shot. I then converted these images to .BMP format,
then made the series into an .AVI using BMP-zu-AVI
(freeware program available from www.e314.de). What
you get is a nice smooth pan of a room, at whatever
resolution you camera happens to record at (I used a
basic 1280x960). You can then use Studio or similar to
make an MPEG2 file suitable for DVD.

So the upshot is, if one were to make a device
incorporating a cine movement and digicam (as
mentioned on the list), you could make top-notch .AVIs
from your film for use in DVD (or back to film if high
enough res) making which would require hardly any
extra investment.

It took a while to get a few seconds of 'footage'

Worth a play?


Films zijn zilver
Video's zijn rost
(Als je vragen moet, dan begrijp je niet)

Do you Yahoo!?
Protect your identity with Yahoo! Mail AddressGuard

eric m jarvies
cabo san lucas, baja california sur.  mexico

This email was sent to: elroro@propagandaindustries.org

EASY UNSUBSCRIBE click here: http://topica.com/u/?a84xYK.bdbHPA.ZWxyb3Jv
Or send an email to: EclairACL-unsubscribe@topica.com

TOPICA - Start your own email discussion group. FREE!