Thank you for sharing the technical side of transferring your film to video. Repairing the wolverine could be another service repair project. Regards John
This reminds me about transferring old videotapes from different odd formats, to find equipment that can really do it. As they say, magnetic tapes do deteriorate over time, though I have DAT tapes that can be played back ok from 1987. I put my hopes on the high coercivity that will make them last.
I’ve ordered a Magnasonic FS-81 film scanner and I’m going to try the “crop in computer “ technique. This will be my second purchase of the Magnasonic scanner. It was a good scanner and didn’t seem to be plagued with the motor or film jamming issues as much as the Wolverine units. It also scans in 1080p like the Wolverine pro unit. I bought one a couple of years ago and did some film but wasn’t as happy with the results that I had when compared to my old captures with my Argus variable speed projector and Sony 3 chip camcorder. But I’m going to experiment a bit more this time. I’m going to try cropping the image in iMovie on my Mac and do some exposure and colour adjustments. The thing I liked least when scanning films on these were that the auto exposure couldn’t be shut off. I could adjust the exposure itself but it always shifts on the capture. It also lacked detail in dark areas where my projector/camcorder did a much better job. However it did have its good points and beats setting up projector , camcorder in a dark room. I have a lot of film that my dad filmed almost 60 years ago. He passed away last December and these films are so much more important to preserve. Your footage looks very good Dave. Thanks for posting the episodes. That’s how I actually subscribed to your channel was by RUclips searching these scanners.
I'm not a technical person at all, and I'm amazed at what you do.... thanks for sharing, at least luddites like myself have a bit of a clue of how it can be done. I wish I could hire you to transver my old vhs videos - done in the 80s, now I'm in a remote argentinian town and I was told I should just put them in the garbage... I'll hold on to them for a while in case I can go back to Canada one day...
Great video tutorial. my question is , when you crop ( framing) , would it be helpful if I used the title and action safe zone lines to do this or is the on screen boarders ok. and what was your final delivery, DVD, BluRay or ??
I used to work as an A/V technician at a event equipment rental company. And one of my favorites tasks during slow periods (spring time in particular) was to digitize 8mm. and super 8mm. films for customers. I can’t remember the specific model numbers, but I used Elmo Transvideo Telecine projectors to do it. They were very time consuming, because you had to constantly adjust the iris and color balance manually. Especially when I received large reels of multiple 3 minute films from various lighting conditions. (Sometimes even during a 3 minute film.) And then there was the constant cue tip swiping and (dry, low pressure) air blasts to keep the footage as clean as possible. 😅 I would transfer the films directly to video DVD, or to DVD-RAM discs using “high end” Panasonic DVR machines. The DVD-RAM discs would then usually be transferred to our own media server for the customer to download their films from, or to USB sticks that we sent by mail. It was tedious work, but I still enjoyed it! 😄
Great video, I like these frame by frame scanners over a live projected transfer. I can't believe that's how they used to transfer blockbuster movies to VHS back in the early 80s.
Actually they used a rank cinetel flying spot scanner to transfer movies to video. The film ran through at normal speed over a crt that had what looked like a white raster. The spot passed through the film and was red out by 3 photo multiplier tubes. Telecine projectors were used into the 80s by tv stations that needed to run film content because the rank machine was close to half million to buy so it was at only a few facilities that specialized in film scanning.
@@12voltvids I noticed that some low budget 80s movies had used telecine transfer as you could see a little portion of the right hand burn in the film when the reel was about to change and the colors were saturated.
@@reel_images Perhaps some b grade movies where they were not expecting high sale numbers so they went to an independent lab, or hired an old telecine in a TV station. We had an RCA TK27 telecine camera, with an Athena 4000 mk IV 16mm projector at the local station I worked at between 80 and 82 when I was going to broadcast school. We used to get clients with Bollywood films on 16mm they wanted transferred to 3/4" video, and I spent many days working in the control room transferring film down to 3/4.
@@12voltvids I love your channel, I've learned and built confidence from your videos. As well fixed electronics from watching your channel. That's so cool you did that kind of work, I'll bet you never thought 40 years later you'd have a youtube channel broadcasting with out recording on a magnetic tape, talking about transferring film to a digital format?
This is excellent, I know of someone many years ago who wanted to transfer super 8 film to VHS, all the did was play the super 8 film via a projector onto a white wall and filmed it onto a VHS machine via video camera, it even picked up their commentary, they didn't want to spend the money to transfer it properly. LOL
was considering getting one of these. i would hate to spend the money only for the motor to go bad. any chance you'll crack it open to see if the motor can be replaced?
At some point I will, once I am done with this project. Remember mine has been used professionally for the past 3 years. The average person will not use it anywhere as much as I have. My unit probably has 1200 hours or more on it. The average consumer with films has a perhaps 100 of the little 50 foot reels. I don't know if the motor jammed or failed but it did take out a fuse resistor on the board. I have read however in forums by others that are using it commercially that this is a known issue. These units are explicitly not warrantied for commercial use, but as a business expense if it breaks I will just buy another one because this thing paid for itself the first large order I got. At 80.00 for a 400 foot reel,, it only took 5 reels to pay for it, and I am on 342 now.
Use a 3 volt power supply or 2 aa batteries to apply power to the loading motor to eject the mechanism. The contacts on the motor are accessible. I just did a video showing how to remove a tape from an 8mm camcorder.
Is it a digital zoom? I used the little brother to this unit and it seemed the camera physically moved closer and further away from the light bed. If that's true, then you'd really want to zoom as tight to the frame edge as possible to capture as much detail from the film as possible. Maybe I'm wrong.
Hey, nice video. Glad I found your channel as we seem to have some similar interests. I also really appreciate folks who have experience in fixing old electronics. I just got the reflecta film scanner and have been scanning old 8mm/Super 8 reels which I think are interesting and uploading them to my channel. I don’t know this for sure but the reflecta and the wolverine look so similar in design it makes me think that the name has been changed for European/ US market. I see that in this video, you have the wolverine movie maker pro which can take the larger reels. I am going to import one from the states as I have some larger reels which the reflecta/wolverine can’t take unless you are excellent at modifying which I am not...🙁 I’d value your input on some of my videos to see if I have got the time period broadly correct. Keep up the good work.
Is there a reason not to purposefully leave the speed a bit high? I feel like cars and people move weirdly slow as it is and if it was sped up it'd feel more natural. That said I'm only assuming, maybe it looks weirder.
I set it to the rate the film was shot, which in this case was 16FPS. If I let it run at 20 the complaints would be that it is running too fast. Many projectors, especially the dual 8mm / Super 8 only ran at 18, so standard 8 always looked fast, but the correct speed is what the camera ran at, and in the case of these films they are mostly 16. There is a parade film coming up that was shot at 18, and it will be run at 18. The cars look slow because most people drove much slower back then, for starters all the old cars had manual steering, and were big land yachts that didn't handle well. My father inlaw marked all his films with the speed of the camera. I actually have the old camera. It can shoot at 12, 16, 24, 32 and 48 frames. Now, about the camera. It was a Revere 8, variable shutter. So even though it did have standard speeds if the disk wasn't set exact, it could run faster of slower. So even though it doesn't have an 18 or 20 frame setting, if the dial was bumped, then it could run faster or slower which would make the speed slightly off on playback. The intended speed was 16 though, and all the reels are marked as such.
What from the dirt on the film. Yes they could be removed in software. I am putting zero effort into these films. I am scanning them as they come out of the box, speed correcting and cropping and that is it. I use the compressed air on the scanner between rolls to blow out dust but if dirt comes off the film during scanning I am not bothering to remove it. When I scan films for paying customers I wipe the film down with a cloth before loading it to get most of the dust off first.
Great to see your techniques with the wolverine, I have a couple I use for my business in Australia. I've found using Neat Video (in a scene by scene basis) is really good in my process, as it eliminates the compression artifacts and grain, and can be tweaked to finite levels. Also, I always use an external monitor whilst scanning so you can see when dust has shown up in the gate. There's nothing worse than having it scan a 400ft reel, and then finding a huge blotch in the frame when editing ;). Also just wondering, prior to when the motor on your unit died, were you starting to get a loud humming noise for the first few seconds after turning it on? My first machine is starting to do this and I am wondering if it's a telltale sign of it being on the way out. Pretty happy with the unit overall for the price, just needs a bit of tweaking once captured. Much better than my ten year old Moviestuff Telecine.
That's why you always want to clean the film before any actual scanning. It takes a couple of minutes to do so. That would allow you to spot any bad splices too.
@@marianogueira3738 Yeah I always do, with Filmguard. But sometimes things still get in there, ie damaged sprocket holes, deteriorated older film etc..
@@creativesharts Filmguard is good stuff. I usually clean my film using an old projector (it rewinds fast) and a piece of fiber cloth. Sometimes I use one of those hand rewinders. Yeah, I spotted that area with dust too. He says these are his personal recordings and he doesn't care much about dust. You can even see all the shit that has accumulated in the first post (minute 01:04).
Blotches are heartbreaking. Rescanning an entire 200 or 400 ft reel makes you want to cry. I use those PC compressed air cans to blow dust off the lens area and a vinal cloth to wipe off the lens just in case.
What the machine or the editing software? The machine is pretty basic. It just outputs 1 speed as film could have been shot at any speed from 9 to 48 fps. The scanner is just a took to get on digital. In the computer you can set it to what you want. I could have set my time base to whatever I want. I aet the output to 30. The incoming file is 20. I am sure they picked that number because it is easy to do the math to gey to the speed you want. 18÷20=0.9, 16÷20=0.8, 24÷20=1.2. I found for a 24 frame sound film I had to tweak to 1.21 to keep sound sync but that could have been the sound projector I used for the sound playback being slightly off.
I am sure I could replace it, but as to if I bother, I haven't decided yet, as it is not necessary. Drop the film off the desk into a box is easier, and faster.
Of course I could. In the pc I can correct highlights, black level, peek white, color balance and saturation. I didn't for the RUclips releases. What you see is exactly what came off the scanner.
The aspect ratio off the scanner is 4:3. I over scan the image, meaning I need to crop the resulting image. The project is set in premiere to 1440x1080 using square pixels which is a 4:3 frame size. Had I been using a 0.9 pixel the result would have been a wide screen picture. The old HDV cameras dis just this. They shot a 16x9 image, but used rectangular pixels to squeeze the image down to a 1440x1080 pixel count, and then expanded it back to 16:9. If using square pixels the aspect would be 16:9 and resolution would be 1920x1080 referred to as full HD. The aspect is correct as it is rendered out. In the first few I posted I did not uncheck that uniform scale box, and the resulting picture rendered out too wide. I may go mach and re-render these, but then again perhaps best I leave them, because I will have all the loonies screaming duplicate upload and writing letters to everyone but santa clause. It appears these films have ruffled one of my nut job viewers feathers, as my business line has been ringing off the hook starting very early in the morning and when the voicemail kicks in, just silence, or a recording is played. He signed in again with some new names, and found his name banned almost immediately. Now I know how celebrities feel when they get stalkers.
The Wolverine scans at 20 fps. I am wondering why you edited in Premier at 30 fps then reduced? Why not edit at 20 fps and reduce to 80% for super 8? I am trying to get my head around the speed differences, everyone says different things.
@@12voltvids Thanks for that, hadn't thought of that. Still can't make sense of the reduction though, 30 fps reduced by 90% (super 8, 18 fps) works out to be 27 fps, what am I missing here please? Edit, just calculated that 60% reduction gives 18 fps and 53.33% gives 16 fps right?
@@Kimble221 it works the exact same way telecine works. Repeated frames it's all progressive frames so no motion blur as with 3:2 pull down from 24p to 60i of old tv. So for example on 8mm which is 16 frames each frame is displayed twice for 7 frames and the the 8th once repeat. For super 8 it's 8 double frames then a single, repeat. Playing at normal speed you don't see this but if you go frame by frame you will step through 2 frames for each film frame. When you adjust speed to 80 or 85% the time line gets longer as the time increases.
@@Kimble221 The scanner outputs a fixed rate of 20 frames. That's the source. That is what you calculate to. 90% of 20 frames is 18 and 80% is 16. 121% gets you to 24 frames for super 8 sound. If course you have to take the sound off seperately with a sound projector and sync it up. The output rate from premiere is irrelevant.
Наука
Thank you for sharing the technical side of transferring your film to video.
Repairing the wolverine could be another service repair project.
Regards John
This reminds me about transferring old videotapes from different odd formats, to find equipment that can really do it. As they say, magnetic tapes do deteriorate over time, though I have DAT tapes that can be played back ok from 1987. I put my hopes on the high coercivity that will make them last.
I’ve ordered a Magnasonic FS-81 film scanner and I’m going to try the “crop in computer “ technique. This will be my second purchase of the Magnasonic scanner. It was a good scanner and didn’t seem to be plagued with the motor or film jamming issues as much as the Wolverine units. It also scans in 1080p like the Wolverine pro unit. I bought one a couple of years ago and did some film but wasn’t as happy with the results that I had when compared to my old captures with my Argus variable speed projector and Sony 3 chip camcorder. But I’m going to experiment a bit more this time.
I’m going to try cropping the image in iMovie on my Mac and do some exposure and colour adjustments. The thing I liked least when scanning films on these were that the auto exposure couldn’t be shut off. I could adjust the exposure itself but it always shifts on the capture. It also lacked detail in dark areas where my projector/camcorder did a much better job. However it did have its good points and beats setting up projector , camcorder in a dark room. I have a lot of film that my dad filmed almost 60 years ago. He passed away last December and these films are so much more important to preserve. Your footage looks very good Dave. Thanks for posting the episodes. That’s how I actually subscribed to your channel was by RUclips searching these scanners.
I'm not a technical person at all, and I'm amazed at what you do.... thanks for sharing, at least luddites like myself have a bit of a clue of how it can be done. I wish I could hire you to transver my old vhs videos - done in the 80s, now I'm in a remote argentinian town and I was told I should just put them in the garbage... I'll hold on to them for a while in case I can go back to Canada one day...
Great video tutorial. my question is , when you crop ( framing) , would it be helpful if I used the title and action safe zone lines to do this or is the on screen boarders ok. and what was your final delivery, DVD, BluRay or ??
Thanks for the demo. I am wondering if I should get one...
I used to work as an A/V technician at a event equipment rental company. And one of my favorites tasks during slow periods (spring time in particular) was to digitize 8mm. and super 8mm. films for customers. I can’t remember the specific model numbers, but I used Elmo Transvideo Telecine projectors to do it.
They were very time consuming, because you had to constantly adjust the iris and color balance manually. Especially when I received large reels of multiple 3 minute films from various lighting conditions. (Sometimes even during a 3 minute film.)
And then there was the constant cue tip swiping and (dry, low pressure) air blasts to keep the footage as clean as possible. 😅
I would transfer the films directly to video DVD, or to DVD-RAM discs using “high end” Panasonic DVR machines.
The DVD-RAM discs would then usually be transferred to our own media server for the customer to download their films from, or to USB sticks that we sent by mail.
It was tedious work, but I still enjoyed it! 😄
I used Elmo projectors as well into my professional cameras back in the 80s and 90s. I did thousands of rolls of film. First to VHS, then dvd.
12voltvids It’s kinda’ weird when you both miss AND hate working with those old Elmos’ eh? 😆
Very interesting. Thanks for sharing this.
Great video, I like these frame by frame scanners over a live projected transfer. I can't believe that's how they used to transfer blockbuster movies to VHS back in the early 80s.
Actually they used a rank cinetel flying spot scanner to transfer movies to video. The film ran through at normal speed over a crt that had what looked like a white raster. The spot passed through the film and was red out by 3 photo multiplier tubes. Telecine projectors were used into the 80s by tv stations that needed to run film content because the rank machine was close to half million to buy so it was at only a few facilities that specialized in film scanning.
@@12voltvids I noticed that some low budget 80s movies had used telecine transfer as you could see a little portion of the right hand burn in the film when the reel was about to change and the colors were saturated.
@@reel_images Perhaps some b grade movies where they were not expecting high sale numbers so they went to an independent lab, or hired an old telecine in a TV station. We had an RCA TK27 telecine camera, with an Athena 4000 mk IV 16mm projector at the local station I worked at between 80 and 82 when I was going to broadcast school. We used to get clients with Bollywood films on 16mm they wanted transferred to 3/4" video, and I spent many days working in the control room transferring film down to 3/4.
@@12voltvids I love your channel, I've learned and built confidence from your videos. As well fixed electronics from watching your channel.
That's so cool you did that kind of work, I'll bet you never thought 40 years later you'd have a youtube channel broadcasting with out recording on a magnetic tape, talking about transferring film to a digital format?
This is excellent, I know of someone many years ago who wanted to transfer super 8 film to VHS, all the did was play the super 8 film via a projector onto a white wall and filmed it onto a VHS machine via video camera, it even picked up their commentary, they didn't want to spend the money to transfer it properly. LOL
do you apply any filters eg for color correction against aging? Or filterning dust or stabilize the vertical jitter from the recording camera?
No filters. WYSIWYG. This is what comes off the scanner.
Very interesting.. good video, wonder if you could get another motor to replace that take up motor? Or something similar.
I might look at it when this session is done.
was considering getting one of these. i would hate to spend the money only for the motor to go bad. any chance you'll crack it open to see if the motor can be replaced?
At some point I will, once I am done with this project. Remember mine has been used professionally for the past 3 years. The average person will not use it anywhere as much as I have. My unit probably has 1200 hours or more on it. The average consumer with films has a perhaps 100 of the little 50 foot reels.
I don't know if the motor jammed or failed but it did take out a fuse resistor on the board.
I have read however in forums by others that are using it commercially that this is a known issue.
These units are explicitly not warrantied for commercial use, but as a business expense if it breaks I will just buy another one because this thing paid for itself the first large order I got. At 80.00 for a 400 foot reel,, it only took 5 reels to pay for it, and I am on 342 now.
do you know how can i eject the jammed tape manually from ccd-tr81?which gear i am supposed to be rotating?
Use a 3 volt power supply or 2 aa batteries to apply power to the loading motor to eject the mechanism. The contacts on the motor are accessible. I just did a video showing how to remove a tape from an 8mm camcorder.
How do you compensate for frame jitter ??
My dad wanted me to do that to his old family films do you have one of them that you would recommend
This one is great.
Is it a digital zoom? I used the little brother to this unit and it seemed the camera physically moved closer and further away from the light bed. If that's true, then you'd really want to zoom as tight to the frame edge as possible to capture as much detail from the film as possible. Maybe I'm wrong.
Hey, nice video.
Glad I found your channel as we seem to have some similar interests. I also really appreciate folks who have experience in fixing old electronics.
I just got the reflecta film scanner and have been scanning old 8mm/Super 8 reels which I think are interesting and uploading them to my channel. I don’t know this for sure but the reflecta and the wolverine look so similar in design it makes me think that the name has been changed for European/ US market.
I see that in this video, you have the wolverine movie maker pro which can take the larger reels. I am going to import one from the states as I have some larger reels which the reflecta/wolverine can’t take unless you are excellent at modifying which I am not...🙁
I’d value your input on some of my videos to see if I have got the time period broadly correct.
Keep up the good work.
That looks like the standard wolverine. It scans 1024x720p correct? The pro model does it at 1440x1080.
12voltvids Yes, and the pro allows you to use reels bigger than 5 inches 👍🏻
Is there a reason not to purposefully leave the speed a bit high? I feel like cars and people move weirdly slow as it is and if it was sped up it'd feel more natural. That said I'm only assuming, maybe it looks weirder.
I set it to the rate the film was shot, which in this case was 16FPS. If I let it run at 20 the complaints would be that it is running too fast. Many projectors, especially the dual 8mm / Super 8 only ran at 18, so standard 8 always looked fast, but the correct speed is what the camera ran at, and in the case of these films they are mostly 16. There is a parade film coming up that was shot at 18, and it will be run at 18. The cars look slow because most people drove much slower back then, for starters all the old cars had manual steering, and were big land yachts that didn't handle well. My father inlaw marked all his films with the speed of the camera. I actually have the old camera. It can shoot at 12, 16, 24, 32 and 48 frames. Now, about the camera. It was a Revere 8, variable shutter. So even though it did have standard speeds if the disk wasn't set exact, it could run faster of slower. So even though it doesn't have an 18 or 20 frame setting, if the dial was bumped, then it could run faster or slower which would make the speed slightly off on playback. The intended speed was 16 though, and all the reels are marked as such.
Do they have a settings in the software to take out those spots
What from the dirt on the film. Yes they could be removed in software. I am putting zero effort into these films. I am scanning them as they come out of the box, speed correcting and cropping and that is it. I use the compressed air on the scanner between rolls to blow out dust but if dirt comes off the film during scanning I am not bothering to remove it. When I scan films for paying customers I wipe the film down with a cloth before loading it to get most of the dust off first.
12voltvids does that take along time if you had to remove that dirt spots
Great to see your techniques with the wolverine, I have a couple I use for my business in Australia. I've found using Neat Video (in a scene by scene basis) is really good in my process, as it eliminates the compression artifacts and grain, and can be tweaked to finite levels. Also, I always use an external monitor whilst scanning so you can see when dust has shown up in the gate. There's nothing worse than having it scan a 400ft reel, and then finding a huge blotch in the frame when editing ;). Also just wondering, prior to when the motor on your unit died, were you starting to get a loud humming noise for the first few seconds after turning it on? My first machine is starting to do this and I am wondering if it's a telltale sign of it being on the way out. Pretty happy with the unit overall for the price, just needs a bit of tweaking once captured. Much better than my ten year old Moviestuff Telecine.
That's why you always want to clean the film before any actual scanning. It takes a couple of minutes to do so. That would allow you to spot any bad splices too.
@@marianogueira3738 Yeah I always do, with Filmguard. But sometimes things still get in there, ie damaged sprocket holes, deteriorated older film etc..
@@marianogueira3738 You can even see some dust at the 2min 58 point of this video at the top left of the scan
@@creativesharts Filmguard is good stuff. I usually clean my film using an old projector (it rewinds fast) and a piece of fiber cloth. Sometimes I use one of those hand rewinders. Yeah, I spotted that area with dust too. He says these are his personal recordings and he doesn't care much about dust. You can even see all the shit that has accumulated in the first post (minute 01:04).
Blotches are heartbreaking. Rescanning an entire 200 or 400 ft reel makes you want to cry. I use those PC compressed air cans to blow dust off the lens area and a vinal cloth to wipe off the lens just in case.
Nice. But I don't understand why the software doesn't let you enter the speed in frames per second.
What the machine or the editing software?
The machine is pretty basic. It just outputs 1 speed as film could have been shot at any speed from 9 to 48 fps. The scanner is just a took to get on digital. In the computer you can set it to what you want. I could have set my time base to whatever I want. I aet the output to 30. The incoming file is 20. I am sure they picked that number because it is easy to do the math to gey to the speed you want. 18÷20=0.9, 16÷20=0.8, 24÷20=1.2. I found for a 24 frame sound film I had to tweak to 1.21 to keep sound sync but that could have been the sound projector I used for the sound playback being slightly off.
Interesting
Are you going to be able to repair the take-up motor? Thanks.
I am sure I could replace it, but as to if I bother, I haven't decided yet, as it is not necessary. Drop the film off the desk into a box is easier, and faster.
@@12voltvids With your experience & knowledge, you should go for it... Keep it up, the film looks great.
@@Truth_Warrior Well my own equipment is usually the last to get worked on.
@@12voltvids LOL. I know exactly what you mean.
Could you enhance colors?
Of course I could. In the pc I can correct highlights, black level, peek white, color balance and saturation. I didn't for the RUclips releases. What you see is exactly what came off the scanner.
4:53 I assume you choose these numbers in order to keep the proper aspect ratio, and not just to "fill the screen" ?
The aspect ratio off the scanner is 4:3. I over scan the image, meaning I need to crop the resulting image. The project is set in premiere to 1440x1080 using square pixels which is a 4:3 frame size. Had I been using a 0.9 pixel the result would have been a wide screen picture. The old HDV cameras dis just this. They shot a 16x9 image, but used rectangular pixels to squeeze the image down to a 1440x1080 pixel count, and then expanded it back to 16:9.
If using square pixels the aspect would be 16:9 and resolution would be 1920x1080 referred to as full HD. The aspect is correct as it is rendered out. In the first few I posted I did not uncheck that uniform scale box, and the resulting picture rendered out too wide. I may go mach and re-render these, but then again perhaps best I leave them, because I will have all the loonies screaming duplicate upload and writing letters to everyone but santa clause. It appears these films have ruffled one of my nut job viewers feathers, as my business line has been ringing off the hook starting very early in the morning and when the voicemail kicks in, just silence, or a recording is played.
He signed in again with some new names, and found his name banned almost immediately. Now I know how celebrities feel when they get stalkers.
@@12voltvids I once heard that's how you know you made it as a celebrity. Once you have stalkers.
Welcome to stardom 😂😂
This adobe premier is a powerful tool
Save your motor-rewind manually. Also the film looks rich in color but a Neat Video plug-in would filter out the scratches.
Let fix that motor ! :)
The Wolverine scans at 20 fps. I am wondering why you edited in Premier at 30 fps then reduced? Why not edit at 20 fps and reduce to 80% for super 8? I am trying to get my head around the speed differences, everyone says different things.
I do speed correct to 16 frames on 8mm and 18 on super 8 but I always output at 30 frames because not every device can play non standard frame rates.
@@12voltvids Thanks for that, hadn't thought of that. Still can't make sense of the reduction though, 30 fps reduced by 90% (super 8, 18 fps) works out to be 27 fps, what am I missing here please? Edit, just calculated that 60% reduction gives 18 fps and 53.33% gives 16 fps right?
@@Kimble221 it works the exact same way telecine works. Repeated frames it's all progressive frames so no motion blur as with 3:2 pull down from 24p to 60i of old tv.
So for example on 8mm which is 16 frames each frame is displayed twice for 7 frames and the the 8th once repeat. For super 8 it's 8 double frames then a single, repeat. Playing at normal speed you don't see this but if you go frame by frame you will step through 2 frames for each film frame. When you adjust speed to 80 or 85% the time line gets longer as the time increases.
@@12voltvids I REALLY appreciate you helping me here. Last question, how did you calculate 90% for 18 frames and 80% for 16 frames? What is the maths?
@@Kimble221
The scanner outputs a fixed rate of 20 frames. That's the source. That is what you calculate to. 90% of 20 frames is 18 and 80% is 16. 121% gets you to 24 frames for super 8 sound. If course you have to take the sound off seperately with a sound projector and sync it up. The output rate from premiere is irrelevant.
That scanner is fine. You only have to use it once per roll of film.