Version 2 DIY 35mm Movie Film to Digital Video Transfer Device Telecine | 4K 

Thanks for watching!

Thanks so much!

Good idea!

Many thanks!

Not sure - 16mm cameras have very little space behind the gate for a lamp system. Also, most Bolex cameras only use 100 foot spools of film. I did create a 16mm system based on Arri 16 camera components - there are 3 videos posted on the site. I decided to remove the camera components and use them in a unique configuration that allowed 1200 feet rolls and more space.

Please subscribe - I'm in the beginning stages of a 16mm transfer system.

Thank you very much!

Hello, thanks for your comments! I'm still working on the HD restored version which I plan on posting on this channel this year. You can rent an SD version on Amazon - it's titled Death on Saturn's Moon - not my idea, but the distributor at the time wanted that. The restored version will by slightly re-edited with additional scenes and effects. When I post the film, I'll also post the DVD supplements that were included. There are no official DVDs available for sale anymore, but you might find one used on Amazon or eBay - there's a bunch of behind-the-scenes stuff on the DVD. Be sure to get the the DVD titled "Ascension", as it's the only one with extra material and the only one I ever approved. Thanks!

That's true. I have tons of footage processed by Duart, and they normally only put 3 rolls on a flat. I was surprised however to find out that many times the last reel I shot was only a short end, so it fits within the mag. Duart usually put about 70 feet of leader on the flat, but the 1000' mags actually hold a bit more than 1000' so it usually fits. Because everything runs so slow, you can get away with using the 1000' mag on a 2C body - something you shouldn't do when shooting.

I'd like to offer the stock footage, I'll have to look into Artgrid, thank you.

I use Adobe After Effects. Just import the sequential raw files as a movie (sequence). You can then adjust the raw levels, crop and so forth as in photoshop. Because it can be computer intensive, I generally then export an "in the ballpark" 444 Quicktime movie that I can final correct in Davinci Resolve.

Thanks for watching!

Unfortunately, I don't have a way to do optical sound yet. Thanks!

@@FreshGroundPictures Anytime.

Thank you!

Interesting - what system did you get? I've thought about 2 perf, but converting the Arri 2C is a bit complicated. To transfer the footage on a 4 perf system at 2 film frames per digital shot would be easy, but you'd have to have some way of cutting out each frame and then numbering it in the correct sequential order. Might be able to do that as a script in Photoshop...

I'm strictly using the fully electronic shutter of the S5.

I also have a similar setup scanning Super 8 film using mirrorless camera with electronic shutter mode. I probably had burnt no less than half a million "shot" as of now. NONE issue found so far.

Hello - no I can't do sound from a print. I'm thinking about doing a 16mm system, maybe using the gate and movement from an Arri 16s. The 16S body has rollers behind the pressure plate, making it difficult to put in a light source without major modification. The 16m would work better, but the prices have really gone up in recent years. My idea would be to use the film movement and synchronize film platters for feed and take up. If I can find enough parts I'm thinking of building a couple and selling some. It would be interesting to see how much difference there would be in image quality between a cropped high-quality 16x9 frame out of a standard 16 image as opposed to a Super 16 image. There are so many standard 16 cameras out there, but it's so expensive to have them converted.

@@FreshGroundPictures yeah everything is too expensive lately. I was wanting to convert a regular 16mm ACL to Ultra 16. However the acls have gotten too expensive.

Super 16 was important when doing optical blow-ups to 35mm, but I'm not sure it gives you as much with digital tools available now. The only cameras that can be converted without compromise are the Aaton and Arri SR. To convert an ACL correctly requires recentering and retiming the mirror and losing a few degrees on the shutter. Even then, the gates are not properly done, as most are just cut outs, and still have the full guide on the Super 16 side. I had an ACL converted years ago, but still had issues with slight flicker in the extended frame because the mirror was not recentered. There was a conversion kit someone made with a new Super 16 gate and mirror linkage, but I think they're all gone. At any rate, maybe Regular 16 is good enough - these cameras were designed for that format and perform brilliantly with it.

@@FreshGroundPictures good points. Thank you.

Thanks! Very interesting. I'd like to be able to find a macro lens that had a bit more enlargement so that I didn't have to use a close-up lens. I spent a lot of time trying to figure out what would work, but new lenses come out all the time...

How much does a switch cost? A few $ maybe? And it's available everywhere. Not an issue - at all.

@@Nantawat_Kittiwarakul Since 2014, and still making improvements today, I've been working on such machines, I released the "Gugusse Roller" in 2019, it is my invention which I published as a free DIY project. In an older model (Gugusse 16mm) I used such micro switches and as cheap as they may be, as easy as it is to replace them, having a piece that breaks while you're trying to scan is no fun, so yes, it is an issue.

​@@Nantawat_Kittiwarakul But don't read me wrong, I'm impressed with the stability of the picture. If I had an old 35mm arriflex camera sitting somewhere I would probably have done the same..

Yes - you need to purchase a remote switch/cable for your digital camera and then take it apart so that the contact points in the switch run through the momentary switch attached to the film camera inching knob. I bought a cheap $14 off-brand lumix remote, but it should work with any camera and remote shutter combo.

Yes, 16mm is on the agenda - hopefully this Spring.

This video and its samples is posted in 4K. As to the lamp, it's a tricky compromise. The current setup has 2 festoon style holders. The LEDs are not top quality, but they supply very broad, very bright light that can be directionally pointed to get the most even spread across the frame. I have ordered some other bulbs, including xenons which supply very high color quality but also produce more heat and don't have the same spread. The white balance on these bulbs is closer to 3200K (as opposed to the LEDS which are around 6000K) which means the camera balance would have to compensate more to eliminate the orange mask. I plan on doing some experimentation with different bulbs, but it's a matter of brightness (allowing a stop of around 5.6 on the camera), heat, beam and color reproduction.

@@FreshGroundPictures Funny, a 2160p option is not availablee to me, is that a premium feature perhaps?

Thanks!

Noise reduction is a very subjective thing. The older 500 speed stock is surprisingly grainy. The 50 speed daylight stock has very fine grain. I guess I tend to be old school where grain was viewed as a defect, but now many people watch digital images which are usually very clean so grain is seen more as an artistic expression. The newer grain reduction software works so much better than the old real-time grain reduction on Ranks and Spirit transfer machines, which softened the picture and added smear if too heavily applied. I guess to each his own...

@@FreshGroundPictures I’d love to know how a analog Degrain worked on the Rank’s and Spirit’s ... There is a lab and transfer here in Stockholm still, they process all motion picture film for Scandinavia. But I don’t know which Telecine they have.

Honestly, I didn't think about renting it out. It's a bit bulky to ship, and the setup has to be just right. Let me give it some thought...

@@FreshGroundPictures Probably easier to have people ship you the film, but I guess you didn't build it to become a full time film transfer service?

@@johanperjus616 I work for a company that does this stuff professionally. There are services out there, but it does cost some money and take time depending on the season (we get very busy). Anyone interested, pm me :)

I generally run it at 1-2 frames per second. Mechanically it could go much higher, but the digital camera I'm using cannot take full-rez raw photos any faster. Maybe jpegs...

I don't claim to capture the full range of film exposure, especially highlights. I think most scanning systems will have some loss. The Arriscan system has the ability to do 2 passes on each frame, one for shadows, one for highlights. Converting film exposure to digital information creates a whole different animal. I'm happy if the digital scan captures the "essence" of the film image.

@@FreshGroundPictures thx, how hard would it be to do 2 passes? auto RAW bracketing with HDR compositing maybe?

@@robertulrich3964 That might work - the easiest way would be to either do 2 exposures of each frame and blend it in post, or even better workwise is to blend the raw files in camera. I know the Lumix S5 can do this, but I'm not sure it can be automated to run with a single remote shutter activation. Either way, it would be a compromise on processing time either between frames or in post. Interesting...

@@FreshGroundPictures i made a free after effects project that will HDR merge images/video if you'd like to try it. i also checked and indeed the S1 has built in iso bracketing!

@@robertulrich3964 That's great! I'm busy with other things at the moment, but if you send me a link I'd like to try it.

It depends on a couple things... Please email me - click on "about" on the RU-vid page. Thank you.

Thank you very much!

First off, it's not designed to compete with an Arri scan or Scanity that do multiple passes to capture highlights and shadows. It's a fraction of the price. Also, the scans I've shown are from Academy 35mm frames. As far as your comments on 16mm and Super 16mm, I've shot and scanned thousands of feet of each, and 35mm, on many systems and I think your comments there are way off. 4K from 16mm is a stretch even with extensive digital cleanup.

@@FreshGroundPictures 4K is just a digital resolution. Meanwhile optically, in the very center of your system is a $10 diopter lens… At least get a proper lens and probably also read about what diffused light does to the scanning/printing potential of a negative. It’s a cool hobby project though, I didn’t mean to be harsh. All the best.

@@deepseadiver8191 Interesting though that Scanity chose a diffuse led light globe for their system to reduce scratches and dirt.

@@FreshGroundPictures It’s scanning as the name suggests. I thought you said you were not comparing yourself to them, are you?

It’s a ridiculous argument on many levels. Thanks for watching.