In theory most of the reel should have faded in much the same way, so you could possiby come up with a set of adjustments that will work fairly well for the whole reel, or more likely, a set that will work for the live action segments, and another that will work for the animated sequences.
Wet Gate is a process. In simplitisc terms the film goes through a chamber filled with liquid, this minimises some scratches at the expense of a slight loss of contrast. The gate is quite literally 'wet'.
You can get similar results by using multiple passes of filmguard (it takes 4 or 5) to work as a pseudo wetgate, the filmguard liquid coats the film and does a similar job. A true wetgate is better though.
I am currently saving up for a real wetgate for my system, it is about $500, but is worth it. Currently I use the filmguard method if a 'wetgate' transfer is required.
As for log vs lin, 8bit vs 10bit, it is a complicated issue, but this intro from QVO isn't a bad place to start.
http://www.qvolabs.com/Digital_Images_ColorSpace_Log_vs_Linear.html
I will be back home next week and will take a look at your pluge test and run through all the various comb filters I have here.
What software and OS are you using to capture with the PCIe 750?
16 bits per channel linear (i.e. 48bit), is barely enough to get the full range of film, 10bit or 12bit will do if logarithmic.
Mike, you have a PM.
No commercial scanning company will touch it, and if they did it would likely be confiscated.
I can't do 4K but it would cost me about USD$6000 to upgrade my current rig to 2736x2192 @ 48bit colour, which is about 6MP per frame.
But with a new gate and a few other adjustments I could do 2K now.
Couple of Reel3 images, focus was off, just grabbed these before running out the door for work.
https://www.dropbox.com/s/ima3lv5uw2kkvrx/sotsreel3b.png
https://www.dropbox.com/s/btgtyo3ceso60bv/sotsreel3a.png
https://www.dropbox.com/s/m5liichhchmqwjm/sotsreel3.png
I'll check JP and upload that scene if you like.
BTW, have you considered the MUSE release of JP?
jimjimmyjones85 said:
I am very glad to see the progress you are making. I am excited about your progress and the movement you are having.
and I thought only my doctor was interested :D
The matlab code isn't particularly speedy, but there is nothing specific to matlab as far as the math goes. It should be possible to recode it in any language and get much much faster results.You would want to do this if intending to deal with that amount of data.
Matlab is great for theorising until something works, and then get it re-written in something else a little more swift once you have the concept proven.
Images from Reel1:
https://www.dropbox.com/sh/7taojpt745e7t6l/fUe-ItbBgF
That is compressed.
1920x1080 = 2073600 pixels per frame
16 bit colour per pixel for RGB = 48bits per pixel total.
2073600 pixels x 48 bits = 99532800 bits
99532800 bits /8 = 12441600 bytes
=12150 kilobytes
= approx 12MB per frame uncompressed.
At 24fps for film, 1hr of footage = 60x60 seconds = 3600seconds
3600 seconds x 24 frames per second =86400 frames per hour.
86400 x 12MB = 1036800
= 1037GB per hour uncompressed.
So around two thousand gigabytes for a 2hr movie.
So with lagarith you end up with around 300GB per hour or so, with MSU about 200GB per hour, depending on how much grain there is etc. So around 300-500GB for a typical feature film.
Halve those numbers for 8bit RGB (24bit colour), cartoons compress better than action films etc. etc.
I am running on no sleep at all, so any or all of the above math could be wrong, but the lagarith compressed sample clip is around 100MB for less than 3 seconds, so it would come out at around 150GB per hour, and I think it is 8bit from memory, so it sounds about right.
The Keep!
Just make sure you have lots of HDD space, at 1080P, 16bit per channel colour, 1 minute of footage weighs in at about 3 gigabytes, you can do the math from there :)
With your print, 1080P will be more than it holds, so I'd work in that resolution.
Remember it is not a scope print, (from memory it is 1.37:1) so the actual resolution you will be working with will be more like 1450 x 1080 or thereabouts.
I'd be aiming for a 720P release, but work in 1080P (i.e. 1080 lines).
You can always output then in 1080P if you want, but I don't think the data is there.
Doctor M said:
I can agree with that logic.
Most sources say a 4k scan is 100% of the detail of a full size print. I'd think a 16mm has half that.
A 16mm or 35mm negative can have more than 4K of data, but a print never really does.
A good 16mm print is lucky to have 1080P worth of *real* data, and the dynamic range tends to be crushed as well. A reduction print is lucky to offer anything much above SD resolutions and dynamic range.
However, you want to work at higher than your delivery resolution whenever possible.
i.e. if you want to deliver a 720P 8bit print, then work in at least 1080P 10bit when doing your edits/correction etc.
If you want to deliver a 1080P print, then ideally you would do all of the editing work in 4K. Want to deliver in SD, then work in 720P.
Everything you do to it causes some loss, stabilising, colour correcting etc. so you want to work in the highest resolution/bit depth you can to avoid data loss and have the ability to work at a sub-pixel level.
Then for the final output you render at the lower resolution.
That DTS experience LD was also released on DVD in Japan.
Confirmed that the VHD is *not* time compressed, but does have burned in sub-titles.
SilverWook said:
You have a VHD player? *faints*
I did a transfer of the pan and scan CLV a while back so reave would have something else to patch his HBO restoration with. (I didn't keep a copy for myself though.) The same time compressed master was used for both.
Yes, I did some 3D VHD transfers a while back and had to buy a VHD player to use.
I can check the runtime of it tonight. It does come on 3 Sides, so it most likely is not time compressed.
I'll post some VHD shots if you like.
The Derran ANH was taken from a French negative that was in reasonable shape. It has great colour and good detail levels, better than many 16mm reduction dupes.
The CHC ESB isn't as good a quality.
Puggo's transfers are a good representation of how most 16mm dupe prints of Star Wars look. If you could find a 16mm ANH that was taken from a negative rather than a dupe of a print, then it would be amazingly better quality.
Here is the PAL test pattern via a Pioneer DVR-550 DVD recorder.
It does the best job so far I think, for PAL anyway.
SilverWook said:
AntcuFaalb said:
lpd said:
Hoping someone from ot.com is on this.
http://www.ebay.com/itm/Star-Wars-Episode-VI-Return-of-the-Jedi-Rare-Super-8mm-Scope-Feature-Film-/400454509077?pt=US_Film&hash=item5d3cf2e215
I spoke with poita and he decided not to bid on it after being told by the seller that it's terribly blue-shifted and is a "blue mess" during the Ewok battle scenes.
Shocking, as I somehow thought Derann prints were immune to that sort of thing. As Jaxxon was watching the auction, I'll pass that info along. :)
As this was the same seller as that recent Star Wars print, I wonder if they've got the elusive Empire Super 8? (Not released by Derann.)
BTW, did anyone here get this one?
http://www.ebay.com/itm/MAKING-STAR-WARS-16mm-film-print-GREAT-COLOR-2-Reels-RARE-/290890548214
Derran did from time to time sell 'seconds' cheaply, this print is one of those, the final reel is literally a blue mess. The owner of the print didn't know that either when he bought it, the seller who sold it to him was also unaware.
Many Derran prints are never watched, they are collected and put on the shelf.
He doesn't have the super8 ESB, I can get a hold of one though, but it is around a grand. I'm trying to put together a way to do it. I'm thinking of maybe seeing if a bunch of people want to go in on it and be first to get a hold of the test scans and give feedback and be along for the journey so to speak.
If 20 people bought a $50 share each then we could get it, or if some people put in I could cover the shortfall, I'll start up a thread for it, I'd hate to see the opportunity pass. I've seen the ESB print in question and it is gorgeous.