[Tig] Using an optical printer as a scanner?

[adam berk]

Just thought of something else that may be helpful.  Check out  
moviestuff.tv   I've seen some REALLY impressive transfers done with  
this guy's Sniper product.  It's basically a modified projector with  
a camera that points into the gate.  Every time the projector  
advances a frame it sends a "mouse click" to the computer you'd have  
hooked up to it.  The software interprets this "mouse click" and  
captures a frame from the video camera.  It's a frame-by-frame  
process just like the JK optical printer.  Although, I actually think  
this Moviestuff.tv thing goes faster.  I've heard that some people  
can get them up to 9fps or so.  You could easily hookup your own  
camera, like for instance, a Canon XL-H1 with HD-SDI output.  That  
way, you could be capturing uncompressed 8-bit 1080p.

Oh, also...check out framediscreet.com -- those guys have one of  
these moviestuff.tv machines and their transfers look pretty damn good.

The problem with this type of setup is of course filtering for the  
orange mask on negative film.  If you could get that part figured  
out, you'd be set.


thanks so much,

Adam Berk
BluMedia Projekt and Creative Technology
Smoke/Flame artist and C>me development team
T. +13303103950
E. adam at blumediaprojekt.com

www.blumediaprojekt.com
www.creativetechnology.com



On May 3, 2007, at 5:34 PM, Steven Bradford wrote:

> Thanks to Yuri Neyman (Gamma & Density) for support in 2007.
> Guide to TIG Posting is at
> http://tig.colorist.org/wiki3/index.php/Guide_to_TIG_Etiquette
>  ====
>
>
>
>  I had posted this over at CML before realizing that this group is
> likely going to give me a better, or at least more informed and
> interesting response!
>
> I had been intending to buy a J-K Digital Printer
>  http://www.jkcamera.com/digital_printer.htm this month as a way  
> for my
> visual fx students to make hi resolution scans of Super16 so they'd
> have very large file size image sequences to get experience working
> with,  and the problems entailed etc. This is a slow printer that  
> uses a
> digital SLR in place of the bolex in the the basic JK optical setup
> that's been around for a long time. I liked it because it was under  
> 10k
> dollars but was a ready to go all in one solution that results in
>  large full res files, depending on the DSLR used.
>
>  But they don't respond to emails, and when I tracked them down today,
> I gathered he's not making them anymore. He hinted that he might
> eventually if enough orders build up, but he didn't seem too  
> enthused by
> that idea.
>
>
>  So now I'm looking for alternates. I know there are wonderful  
> solutions
> out there but I'm not looking to spend a few  hundred thousand  
> dollars,
> I'd have to plan years in advance to make  that happen, so if that's
> your suggestion, I'll ignore it. ;-) I'm  wondering how difficult it
> would be to do this on our own, with a used  optical printer and a  
> DSLR
> with a macro lens. There seem to be a lot  of them (optical printers)
> just sitting around out there. I just don't  know how involved or
> difficult the automation neccesary would be to  synchronize the taking
> camera, and the optical printer and for  recording off to a  
> computer and
> hard drive. (Though simply recording  to compact flash is an  
> acceptable
> option and might be faster.) Speed is not a concern. Our volume is  
> low,
> this is just to scan in short shots, not whole feature films.
>
>  Steven Bradford
>  Director, School of Film
>  Collins College
>  Tempe Arizona
>
> _______________________________________________
> No personal abuse; absolutely no advertising or marketing on the  
> main TIG mailinglist.  Emergency
> tig contact address is rob (at) calarts.edu
> Tig mailing list
> Tig at tig.colorist.org
> http://tig.colorist.org/mailman/listinfo/tig