[Tig] Print Transfers

Rob Lingelbach caltech
Fri Feb 28 23:43:11 GMT 2003

On Fri, Feb 28, 2003 at 05:22:15PM -0600, Pete Jannotta wrote:
> I cut my
> colorist teeth transferring prints in the 70's and I don't see a reason to
> go back, unless you like giving up picture information.

Yes print does give up some detail, but it can add some other
things, including film artifacts like grain, builtin compression
of whites a la the previous discussion, and sometimes it also
gives a slightly more silvery aspect to the image.

I did some tests of print vs. negative over the years and found
it difficult to match the curve of print; it was possible, but it
did introduce more noise that I had been used to seeing, as apart
from grain, which latter at the time was desirable.  These were
our considerations, we weren't interested in detail so much as we
were interested in an aesthetic.

And print isn't necessarily the best medium for, example, a car
commercial where you need to get as much detail as possible from
a shot of the grille... 

I was hoping to hear from the IP proponents here [: because
sometimes I think IP can look incredible.  The first time I saw
an IP transfer that knocked me out was of the movie "Lonesome
Dove" for US television, some years ago, a multipart movie.  The
flesh tones were a lot more natural than negative or print can do
I thought.  A lot is due to the colorist, and I have a feeling
the colorist behind that movie is still a part of the tig..  IP
can be so difficult to deal with in telecine due to that orange
mask but when it's done right it's beautiful.


Rob Lingelbach    unix system administrator    caltech at calarts.edu
No two lines which are vertical can be parallel.

More information about the Tig mailing list