[Tig] Regular 8mm Film That No Longer Measures 8mm Wide

Andreas Widerøe andreas at filmtek.no
Tue Dec 6 08:26:36 GMT 2011

Hi John,
As far as I know 8mm film is really 7.9mm wide and the image area for Reg8
is much smaller. During scanning I don't think there's too much to do except
try to keep the film/image as stable as possible while the film runs through
the gate. There are a few tricks that may help, but they are different for
each scanner. I've probably scanned hundreds of kilometres of 8mm film and
I've yet to see the imagearea being severely distorted due to shrinkage on
these small formats.

We sometimes receive Reg8 films that have been badly split/cut. In other
words: Not according to specs. These less wide films would drift sideways
(in and out if the split is like a wave) during scanning.

I think a bigger problem during scanning would be to keep the image stable,
atleast if the Millenium II has sprocket rollers for the sync pulse (not
sure about this). Shrunken film will jump on the sprockets which will lead
to an unstable image. However, today unstable images can be corrected with
an image stabilizaion tool on a computer.

Perhaps the guys at Cintel have some input here?

Perhaps a better approach would be to get a 2K scan (correct aspect ratio)
and correct each frame using a software tool like DaVinci Revival or
similare. I think there are a few scanners out there that can do 2K from
Reg8 now. That would also be about the theoretical limit (line pairs per mm)
of the best filmstocks for format. I imagen the GoldenEye scanner would do a
good job here.

good luck!

PS! No affiliation btw.

Best regards,
Andreas Widerøe

Filmtek AS <post at filmtek.no>
Filmshooting | Com - http://www.filmshooting.com
Tel: (+47) 38 17 99 16
Mob: (+47) 90 92 61 21
-----Original Message-----
From: tig-bounces at colorist.org [mailto:tig-bounces at colorist.org] On Behalf
Of Rob Lingelbach
Sent: 6. desember 2011 04:02
To: John A. Mozzer
Cc: tig at colorist.org
Subject: Re: [Tig] Regular 8mm Film That No Longer Measures 8mm Wide

Sohonet http://www.sohonet.co.uk sponsors the TIG.
Support from Nucoda www.imagesystems.tv
Support from Blackmagic Design http://www.blackmagic-design.com/ ====

I need to look at this further.  May I post the message from me in the
meantime, referring back to you?

Hang on a sec. what do you mean the topic appears on the tig but the text
does not?   Oh, I see.   please forgive me and the TIG for this error.  It
looks like certain email programs are confusing the TIG's filtering.  Here I
go, posting it for now.

On Dec 5, 2011, at 6:46 PM, John A. Mozzer wrote:

> I'm confused again.  My topic appears on TIG, but the text of my email
(below) does not.
> http://tig.colorist.org/pipermail/tig/2011-December/019700.html
> -------- Original Message --------
> Subject:	Regular 8mm Film That No Longer Measures 8mm Wide
> Date:	Sun, 04 Dec 2011 18:08:09 -0800
> From:	John A. Mozzer <jamworks at earthlink.net>
> To:	tig at colorist.org
> Currently, I am having HD scans done of some of my dad's regular 8mm 
> films on the Millennium II (natively at 1920 x 1980, overscanned, 
> pillarboxed.)
> Some of the film has shrunk to the point where it no longer measures 8mm
wide. I am concerned about whether this may result in a distorted image
(i.e., faces and objects looking thin.) How should the transfer service
account for the film being shrunk?  Is there a mathematical method to adjust
for shrinkage and/or a possible distorted image?  Or does such an adjustment
have to be done visually, subjectively?
> John A. Mozzer
> Los Angeles, CA
> Hobbyist; not affiliated with any business


More information about the Tig mailing list