On Jul 17, 2013, at 9:58 AM, Rick Prelinger wrote:
> We scan around 350,000 frames a day on our Muller scanner. A two-shift
> operation working with fully-assembled small gauge reels would typically run
> over a million frames/day per scanner.
Scanning speed is usually related to resolution,
also, the magic lantern firmware hack (http://www.magiclantern.fm/) allows
customizable FPS in video mode (ie: w/o shutter), that might provide a
workaround
On Wed, Jul 17, 2013 at 1:00 PM, Francisco Torres wrote:
> Whatever happened to shooting from the side of a fridge? (like Guy Madiin)
>
>
Whatever happened to shooting from the side of a fridge? (like Guy Madiin)
On Wed, Jul 17, 2013 at 10:58 AM, Rick Prelinger wrote:
> We scan around 350,000 frames a day on our Muller scanner. A two-shift
> operation working with fully-assembled small gauge reels would typically
> run over a mi
We scan around 350,000 frames a day on our Muller scanner. A two-shift
operation working with fully-assembled small gauge reels would typically run
over a million frames/day per scanner.
The AEO-Light software Matt uses to read and convert optical tracks is great,
but it's far from real-time a
Well, there's nothing wrong with a mechanical shutter... it just needs to be
a shutter designed for the job like, say, a rotating disc shutter as
used for motion picture work
--scott
___
FrameWorks mailing list
FrameWorks@jonasmekasfilms.com
https
On Wed, Jul 17, 2013 at 3:40 PM, George, Sherman wrote:
Seems like the way to solve the mirror problem is with a Sony NEX camera.
The NEX has a mechanical shutter, too, and is rated for 100,000 shutter
activations. Presence or absence of a mirror box is not the issue per se.
To my knowledge, th
Seems like the way to solve the mirror problem is with a Sony NEX camera.
Sherman George
On Jul 17, 2013, at 6:25 AM, Scott Dorsey wrote:
> The jitter issue is less severe than it might have been, since the edges of
> the frame can be located digitally and each frame recentered individually.
> W
The jitter issue is less severe than it might have been, since the edges of
the frame can be located digitally and each frame recentered individually.
With film that has shrunk at all this becomes important anyway.
But... the issue of wearing out the shutter is a very serious one that I
had not th
The idea of using the collection in Jordan as a guinea pig is troubling.
re: Florian's last point, a lot of it seems to be small gauge.
On Wed, Jul 17, 2013 at 8:51 AM, Florian Cramer wrote:
> I do have some questions:
> - The construction is not fundamentally different from other
> frame-by-fr
I do have some questions:
- The construction is not fundamentally different from other frame-by-frame
scanners such Müller HM73, Moviestuff or Richard Tuohy's $1000-$3000 DIY
telecine machine.
- The use of a digital SLR camera instead of an industrial video camera
will produce better image quality,
This is an amazing open source scanner project by Maththew Epler.
Watch the presentation video here, i.e. http://mepler.com/Kinograph
Here is his thesis presentation where he details his work and amazing
antedote whereby the King of Jordan injects $10K in startup funds due
to the discovery of hist
11 matches
Mail list logo