Это видео недоступно.
Сожалеем об этом.
Wolverine MovieMaker Pro 8mm & Super 8 Digital 1080p Converter - Full Review
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 16 авг 2024
- In this video, I give an overview and some tips on how to use the Wolverine MovieMaker Pro. This device will allow you to convert your 8mm and Super 8 film reels into 1080p digital files.
My Reviewed Products On Amazon:
www.amazon.com...
Video Example:
• 1960s Christmas In Ame...
My Instagram:
/ james__gambino
END MUSIC (GAMBINO THEME) CREATED BY:
David Smith
Sound Cloud:
/ smittyville
Disclaimer:
As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases at no additional cost to you. Some of the above links may be affiliate links.
I saw a video showing to NOT zoom with the Wolverine and do the crop later in post editing. This makes a huge difference. The video with the digital zoom of the converter is riddled with compression artifacts. The video with no zoom is virtually artifact free.
The Wolverine converter works ok when it works. After a number of conversions of 50ft reels went on to larger reels. After a while slipage started and gear could be heard skipping and complete stopping. After checking out more on-line sources this seems to be an on-going issue with the Wolverine's.
This was a very helpful review, and many of the comments were spot on as well. We have several boxes of old movies that need to get out of the box, and if we're going to dedicate a lot of time we at least need the end result worth the effort. Going to give it a try and use post editing options if necessary. Thank you for the information!
The main reason for doing it yourself is to avoid possible loss of your precious memories via the mail.
Good point.👍🏼
Exactly!!!! I'm fine with lower quality, just never want the original films out of my possession 😉
I ordered mine. I have 8mm films on 7" reels. If anyone has 7" reels make sure you buy the one with the fold down supply reel arm. The manual for the one that take 7" reels says 1080P at 20 frames per second. This is not a normal standard. 1080P is wide so I may use a digital video editor to crop it to 480 and if needed 30 FPS. Some of the used ones on ebay may be missing parts so make sure to read the listing carefully.
i have been using my MovieMaker for year now and compared to other methods of capturing the old films it does and amazing job. I use PowerDirector resize the frames after capturing. My customers are more than satisfied with the end result. Films affected by Vinegar Syndrome (distinctive smell) are a problem as the film gets brittle, curls & snaps so don't recommend the machine be used for this purpose. The time factor isn't really an issue when you get such good images.
Is this vinegar syndrome something you can identify from experience? Or is it easily identified? I’ve never been around these types of films, but my wife’s family has SO MANY of these films, and I want to restore them (at least some) for/by Xmas. But I’m TERRIFIED of any of them breaking off.
Did you use software to edit the digitized film on a computer. ? I have some with blank sections among the good ones.
I digitized 40 old 8 mm films, some super 8 also. The wolverine worked well. Most of the super 8 movies were not very well lit, but the was the original photographer's fault. I xferred all to my computer so maybe there is some software to lighten it up.
A good, clear, concise review, thank you. I have an earlier version of the Wolverine that only takes 200 ft spools and it's interesting to see that modifications have been made to the gate - your machine appears to have two sprung film pressure pads whereas mine only has the one, above the claw mechanism. You also have three film edge guides under which you have to place the film as you thread it through the gate - whereas mine only has two. The layout of the film rollers (that don't roll, unfortunately) has also been changed, and this might mean that the MP4 image stability has improved. I hope it has, as my machine transfers Normal-8 ok, but Super-8 transfers are full of the jitters.
It's great to hear wolverine has made upgrades on their product from previous versions. I ended up converting over about three and a half hours of my Grandfather's film reels that spaned from the 50s through the early 80s. Sent it out to all of my family members on thumb drives so they can now enjoy the past. Technology is a wonderful thing. Take care and have a great day. 😁
This machine does film transfer the proper way - it pulls each frame into position, photographs it, and moves on. It uses a sharp lens, an even light source, and takes its time.
What I don't understand is why the MP4 files it makes are so heavily compressed, adding compression artifacts to the inevitable grain and damage on such old footage. There must be someone out there who can work on the PCB to get the Wolverine to output MP4s at, say, 15 Mbps rather than the ludicrously low 1.5 it's set at. SD cards are cheaper than Kornflakes these days.
I own one, it works very nicely, but at 2 FPS it takes a LONG time to get through a reel of movie film. The other thing is that the compression ratio is a bit too high. I wish you could select a higher bit rate for less compression noise.
Likely a result of a lack of processing power in the unit. If you could select a higher bit rate (lower compression rate) you would certainly increase that 2 FPS scan rate. I for one would be willing to make that sacrifice in order to get a resulting video without all the artifacts but really would rather see them build a unit with adequate processing power and pay more for it. There's a huge gap in the market place from a $400 dollar unit to a $9000 unit that shouldn't exist.
Thank you. Considering this unit.
Sorry for the loss of your grandfather. I think he'd be proud of your for this effort. I think Wolverine needs to hire someone who understands more about digital video and film frame rates. Their software produces needlessly low-quality output and the frame rate would be easy to fix in the machine.
The main drawback on this unit is the low data rate of the completed video file. You end up with a video that is loaded with compression artifacts due to both motion in frame and the film grain which is also perceived as motion. That's pretty much what you can expect to get for 300 bucks. The problem is the next best option is the Moviestuff Retroscan Universal which goes for around $9000 new. There's really nothing in-between as far as I can tell. Wolverine needs to make an updated version of this unit that allows for a PC interface with a much higher data rate option when encoding. There's a large gap in the marketplace for someone to step in and produce a quality unit at an affordable price. I would have no problem shelling out $1000 for a 1080p camera equipped unit that could produce a 10Mbs video file using my PC for the heavy lifting, but I am not spending $300 on a unit that produces digital compression artifacts on a scale like this, nor can I afford to shell out $9000 for a home unit and I have no intention of getting into the video conversion business.
Most people can’t afford the $1000.00 model you wish they would make. For many, even the $400.00for this pro model is too much.
@@RJMEL24 I think you missed my point. I said there should be a product somewhere between this $300 unit and the $9000 Retroscan unit. That doesn't mean they should stop producing this Movie Maker Pro. If you can't afford $1000 then you're more than welcome to buy this unit. I won't because I don't see any point in spending money and time with the end result being a digital artifact filled mess, but I would be more than happy to spend hundreds more on a premium model from Wolverine that could stream the data to a PC through a USB port at a bitrate that would allow for a clean image. It wouldn't be hard to produce. All the mechanics can stay as they are, so there would be almost no retooling on their part. Even the 3.53 megapixel image sensor is fine as is. Just the electronics would require changing. All they need to do is provide a USB interface to allow the user to use a PC for the encoding workload. Their electronics is providing an h.264 MP4 file with a low bitrate. With my PC I could encode an h.264 or even an h.265 file at up to 25Mbs if I felt like it.
@@niknikktm Thanks for your reply. This model might not be totally adequate for someone like yourself who more than most seems to understand the technology involved to a higher degree than most casual users (myself included) who merely want to preserve old family movies and images of lost family members and events. This may be the only affordable device that can accomplish this considering the much much higher cost of sending their movie films to a professional firm to perform this task. I just last week purchased the Wolverine Pro after anguishing for the last two years of what I considered a high cost for this unit ($400). I am a retired 75 year old on a fixed income and $400 is a lot for me as it probably is for many other senior citizens who probably represent the majority ownership of these old films. My children helped by sending me Amazon gift cards and I started by scanning some 1970 era 50’ reels. I am not completely satisfied with my first results of scanning these two Super8 reels using the default settings. The digital MP4 movie is overexposed and one was overexposed and a bit grainy. I am not sure if that is result of the quality of the film being scanned (50 years old) or if I have to 1) Play with the settings to get a better output: 2) Purchase or download free video editing software to enhance the downloaded file. Any suggestions there? I think the video editing software may well be the solution, but I fear the learning curve for how to use these programs may well be steep as well. Although, as I stated, I am 75, I am quite capable of learning new programs. I worked in IT and Engineering for many years and am quite savvy learning and using new software.
Since the most time consuming part of all this is the time it takes to scan each film using the device, would you recommend just getting on with scanning all my film first while downloading and learning how to use movie editing software IF that is the only way to improve the outputted movie quality? And what movie editing software (free or $$) would you recommend? You appear to understand this more than neophytes like myself.
@@RJMEL24 The issue seems to be not with editing software but rather the encoding process built into the unit. When you encode video data the data is compressed. The quality of the video is a direct result of the amount of compression used. The more you compress the data, the lower the bitrate and the lower the video quality. At some point the compression causes noticeable digital artifacts in the image. This all boils down to the processing power available and I would be confident in assuming that the lack of processing power in this unit is the culprit. Once the original scan has been compressed too much, there's nothing any editing software can do about it. As far as software for encoding or transcoding video, there's an application called Handbrake that is free and performs all of the basic functions needed to get the job done and is easy to use.
As far as my original post I was just trying to point out that there is a huge gap in the marketplace between a $400 dollar unit and a $9000 unit that shouldn't exist. Someone needs to come out with a product to fill that gap that will provide an artifact free result. Kodak recently released the Kodak Reelz scanner that uses an 8MP sensor as opposed to this units 3.53MP sensor, but it too compresses the hell out of the video and produces an artifact filled image from what I've seen demonstrated on youtube thus far.
@@niknikktm Thank you for this explanation. I am great-full for your responses and totally understand what you have said. I will continue on with my scanning and download the free editing software you recommended to maybe see if I can’t improve somewhat on the final scanned files. Have a good day and a Happy Holiday.
The quality is not to bad and
It is certainly ok to play around with it a bit, but it is not suitable for archiving
I just ordered one for my dads Vietnam films. Hope I don't mess them up.
I wish you luck in your conversion. 🤞🏼
@@thegreatgambino thanks. I was scared to send it off and don't know what on there. Apparently this stuff is rare now.
@@miduv82 After you convert it so you have it yourself, you can send the originals to a professional lab. That is what I am going to do with my footage of the May 18, 1980, Mt. St. Helen. eruption. Because that is marketable footage, I will not send off my only copy.
I learned the hard way with some 1940s negatives to not do this if I could not find someone local who did it in their own lab/shop versus sending it away. I lost all those precious family negative and had no idea who might even have the original prints so they are lost forever.
Got one. It sucks. Look at all the extra grain it adds in his samples! And the speed will be off even at 20 frames per second. This stuff originally had a speed of 18 frames per second. Mine is the model below this and does not offer 20fps.So when I capture at 30fps, I have to bring it into an edit system and slow the speed down to 60% for it to look like normal playback. Save your money and buy a nice projector. Project your film on a white surface and film it with a dslr camera right off the wall. Turn on your projector without any film and color balance to the white projector light on the wall. Then set the exposure on your camera so the white light is exposed properly and not blown out. This will ensure your film will be captured at the right exposure.
For under exposed films in one reel? How to make match ?
Thanks for the video , great job !!! 😃👍
Your welcome. 📽😊👍🏼
I am getting a lot of "knocking"...I adjusted the plate and it runs for a minute then strted to make noise and stop. what is wrong? 8mm / Wolverine 8 thanks
울버린에서 언제쯤 실시간으로 영상, 사운드까지 변환하는 장비가 나올까요? 1920- 1080, 8mm. 16mm. 4000$ ㅡ5000$ 정도면 좋습니다
I was wondering how many 500’ spools you can fit on a 32Gb card. I didn’t see any reference in their user manual. Thanks!
I'm not 100% sure. I transferred one file at a time during my conversions to PC. 🎞 🖥
Thank you for your detailed presentation.
What type of files end up on the SD card re each image scan?
Individual frame images?
Or
A video clip made from each of the frames?
Or an option of both?
What size file is a single frame?
Ya, but NO SOUND included!!!! When will they make the one for Super 8 mm SOUND?! Eugene
That's a good question.
The Best way to sync sound movies?
The film advances but does not appear on the screen. Can you please help?
Is it possible that it's not lined up correctly? Also, try changing the film type to see if it comes up. Good luck. 🤞🏼👍🏼
Noob question, can I record digitized movies from the SD card to my PC and then to a DVD in the PC's DVD record drive?
Yes, you can copy the files over to the PC hard drive and then use software to write to a DVD. 👍🏼
You should make your own movie theaters with that man 👍
Grazie, Grazie, Grazie veramente tanto, dall'italia. Mi hai risolto un problema che mi stava facendo impazzire. Grazie
Are you satisfied with the stability of the image and the degree of compression, whether the grain is transmitted and whether there are many artifacts?
Personally I am very satisfied with the quality and output of the product. Most of the film's I converted were my grandfather's from the 50s and 60s. Unfortunately, I was unable to view from an actual projector for comparison.
Does it come with any kind of tray adapter for slide viewing? I can't find a machine that does both!
It does not come with a tray adapter.
Was is the difference between the Wolverine 8 and the Wolverine PRO? Thanks
The Pro can scan in 1080 resolution and takes reels of up to 9 inches. The regular version can scan only up to 720 resolution and takes reels 3 to 5 inches. Hope this helps.
It have very bad scanning quality! it 320p native and 1080 interpolated. Also have graing on picture. I use after direct beam transfer from projector to camera with frame sync option
why there are not ones that can do 16 mm _ 35mm
Scan to 1080p or up to 4K?
Good clear review but this looks like a toy. Although the transfer looks acceptable, the issue of the framing slipping is not. And that rewind business is a complete joke.
Hi there, did you do any post corrections to your example of the sample footage at the end, or is that pretty much the file you got, thanks!
I do not 100% remember but I believe it was left it as is.
What do I do with 8mm that has sound
That's cool man .
Thanks for this, btw is Super Single 8mm compatible with this?
I'm not familiar with single 8 film. If it's similar to Super 8, it should work. I ran both 8mm and super 8mm.
@@thegreatgambino thanks so much for letting me know , appreciate it 😊
I need to obtain a reel of a movie to use to test the movie maker that I just purchased. Please advise where I can find such. Thanks.
People sell them on ebay for some reason
Dieses Gerät lässt das Bild des Films wackeln. Das Auge wird schnell müde. Dies ist bereits in diesem Video zu sehen, in dem das Endergebnis gezeigt wird.
I got a similar one but it doesn't have an audio converter option - How can I transfer the audio? do I need a different machine? if so do u recommend any?
Audio on 8mm? lol
Is there a software package to edit the digitized film on a computer? What did you use. ?
I used Adobe Premiere.
Great video. Thanks. I have Super 8 with sound. Does it record from the sound strip on the film?
I believe this unit is only capable of converting video.
Where did you get this i wsnt to get one
They sell them on Amazon.
Does this convert sound that is on the original super 8 film?
No
I wonder if the new Kodak converter will capture sound track ? If not, I will need to run tape film on the original machine and use microphone hookup to capture the sound.
Thanks for the review. I will be using this to convert people's 8mm and Super 8mm Reels of film for my business.
How did it work?
@@getout116 It worked great! I use frame adjustment to make sure it is centered and got to be sure it threads through well for a better picture.
@@DragonAgentProd1 --- I was thinking this might be a good service to offer. Target the niche tightly for just 8 mm, be honest, do good work in post, charge 50-75% less. I mean that's just off the top of my head. Could you really start a business with just this machine and some web skills? It would still have to be worth your while. I saw a company was charging 30 cents a foot. for a 7" reel that would be $120. I'd gladly do it for substantially less.
@@NorthTonawanda1 Typically I charge $25 per 3” reel, $35 per 5” reel and $45 per 7” reel. It helps my clients to save money.
Ma il sonoro?
Non Si Parla di Audio.
The quality is poor compared to just projecting the films & videoing them with a camcorder.
I had great results from the 3 reels it digitised. But then the SD Card stopped working. And guess what. No help or reaction from support.
A very expensive experience. Be warned.
Would have like to have seen BEFORE using this machine and the AFTER results , which you do NOT show.
I'm not sure what you mean by before and after results. I have given some video Test footage toward the end of the video. I will link another video in the description if you would like. What did you mean by before results?
This is a very bad device. you can find this device under many brand names. It scratches the film with the rollers and has no normal tape path.
The scan quality is also very poor. high image noise. There is no color correction and removal of scratches and damages. Wasted money.
Then pay $9000.00 for professional model. Most people don’t have that kind of money and only want to preserve parents and grandparents old movies before the film itself disintegrates .
@@RJMEL24 Then better hire someone to professional digitizing. So many companies can transfer film to digital use for example LASERGRAFICS or MILLER HM film scanner. I use them couple time and result was very different.
@@oleggritsev I agree, but cost is prohibitive and so so many reports of damaged or lost original film from many of these video companies creates cause to do it yourself to protect important family artifacts. If you may (or may not) remember watching film back in the day on a projector was not great to begin with. It had jitter and missed frames and the quality was never great. The old adage “shit in/shit out” applies.
@@oleggritsev --- SOME PEOPLE DON'T WAN'T TO PAY $120 per reel for amateur home movies. What, do you own stock in Legacy Box or somehting, jeesh.
@@NorthTonawanda1 I upgrade my Wolverine with new camera sensor module and now i can get up to 6K for 8MM film. It is a lot and not needed so much quality. Also i improoved video compression in software. Now it looks like professional.
if you have to rewind it by hand then I would personally consider it a piece of junk
"This "review" brought to you by Wolverine Scanners"
Lol nah just plain old me.😁
@@thegreatgambino they didnt send you a free unit in exchange for a review?
@@timothy790110 no I payed for this one. My dad sent me a bunch of old films from my Grandfather. This option was cheaper than having someone do it here in LA.😊👍🏼
Hey dude I want to do my films as soon as possible as frame by frame I will 100 years old and the films will not be finished hahahahahah
It's definitely time consuming.