Special effects question on frame steadiness

A New Dawn <anewdawn.TakeThisOut@6url.com> wrote:
>
>Here is a question for the total techies... In the film MARCH OF THE
>PENGUINS the filmmaker talked about the only special effects in the
>whole film being the fact that he had a post house use some type of
>frame steadier because he was sometimes shooting in 60-80 mile an hour
>winds and the camera was being shaken around constantly.
>
>I will be shooting a feature film in B/W Super 8mm and wonder if they
>could do this to a transfer of my film if the film isn't as steady as I
>would like it to be?

Not really. You can do optical stabilization in the digital domain if
you have made a high resolution transfer of the original film. BUT,
it's very expensive and you have to start out with a very sharp image
to begin with.

>I will be shooting with a CANON DS8, so it will be steadier than
>shooting out of the typical plastic Kodak carts but if the film gets
>picked up by a distributor for a theatrical run, I think the blown up
>image could be too unstable.

For the most part, that will probably be lack of steadiness in just
the vertical direction, but remember that this is also going to be
accompanied by some blur as well.

>What type of software solutions exist at the high end? If a distributor
>picked up the tab for a 35mm blow up, how much more for an "image
>steadier" (if that is the term, I do not know what it would technically
>be called) or other post methods to make sure it doesn't jump around
>too much.

These days, prices on digital intermediates are dropping like a rock,
but I don't know how easy scanning Super-8 is. For 16->35, the price
of a DI isn't all that much more than a simple blowup. But the problem
is that this stuff is constantly in flux and will either be cheaper
or unavailable by the time you want to get the blowup done.

>All responses welcome!
>A.N.D.

Personally, I will urge you to shoot 16mm instead. It looks better, and
because short ends are available, it may often be cheaper. And you are
not at the mercy of the limited number of labs supporting Super-8. And,
of course, you will come out of your first edit with at least a rough
16mm workprint that you can ship around to festivals with no blowup costs.
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."
 >> Stay informed about: Special effects question on frame steadiness 

If a distributor gets seasick watching the movie, he's not going to pick it
up and spend a fortune fixing that. I suggest you invest in a tripod. You
can get a good one for less than $50.

Lincoln

"A New Dawn" <anewdawn.DeleteThis@6url.com> wrote in message
news:1134590477.919185.199040@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com...
> Hi group,
>
> Here is a question for the total techies... In the film MARCH OF THE
> PENGUINS the filmmaker talked about the only special effects in the
> whole film being the fact that he had a post house use some type of
> frame steadier because he was sometimes shooting in 60-80 mile an hour
> winds and the camera was being shaken around constantly.
>
> I will be shooting a feature film in B/W Super 8mm and wonder if they
> could do this to a transfer of my film if the film isn't as steady as I
> would like it to be?
>
> I will be shooting with a CANON DS8, so it will be steadier than
> shooting out of the typical plastic Kodak carts but if the film gets
> picked up by a distributor for a theatrical run, I think the blown up
> image could be too unstable.
>
> What type of software solutions exist at the high end? If a distributor
> picked up the tab for a 35mm blow up, how much more for an "image
> steadier" (if that is the term, I do not know what it would technically
> be called) or other post methods to make sure it doesn't jump around
> too much.
>
> All responses welcome!
> A.N.D.
>
 >> Stay informed about: Special effects question on frame steadiness 

Lincoln Spector <notmyreal DeleteThis @address.com> wrote:
>If a distributor gets seasick watching the movie, he's not going to pick it
>up and spend a fortune fixing that. I suggest you invest in a tripod. You
>can get a good one for less than $50.

His worry isn't that, his worry is the fact that these cameras are not
pin-registered so the frame is not always properly centered, and because
of the staggeringly enormous blowup ratio to put the tiny frame on the
screen, a fraction of a mil in registration error turns into massive
seasickness in the front row.
--scott

--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."
 >> Stay informed about: Special effects question on frame steadiness 

Not to mention that even blowing up super 16mm can be a stretch at times.

JT




Scott Dorsey wrote:
>
> Lincoln Spector <notmyreal RemoveThis @address.com> wrote:
> >If a distributor gets seasick watching the movie, he's not going to pick it
> >up and spend a fortune fixing that. I suggest you invest in a tripod. You
> >can get a good one for less than $50.
>
> His worry isn't that, his worry is the fact that these cameras are not
> pin-registered so the frame is not always properly centered, and because
> of the staggeringly enormous blowup ratio to put the tiny frame on the
> screen, a fraction of a mil in registration error turns into massive
> seasickness in the front row.
> --scott
>
> --
> "C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."
 >> Stay informed about: Special effects question on frame steadiness 

"A New Dawn" <anewdawn.DeleteThis@6url.com> wrote in message
news:1134590477.919185.199040@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com...
> Hi group,
>
> Here is a question for the total techies... In the film MARCH OF THE
> PENGUINS the filmmaker talked about the only special effects in the
> whole film being the fact that he had a post house use some type of
> frame steadier because he was sometimes shooting in 60-80 mile an hour
> winds and the camera was being shaken around constantly.
>
> I will be shooting a feature film in B/W Super 8mm and wonder if they
> could do this to a transfer of my film if the film isn't as steady as I
> would like it to be?
>
> I will be shooting with a CANON DS8, so it will be steadier than
> shooting out of the typical plastic Kodak carts but if the film gets
> picked up by a distributor for a theatrical run, I think the blown up
> image could be too unstable.
>
> What type of software solutions exist at the high end? If a distributor
> picked up the tab for a 35mm blow up, how much more for an "image
> steadier" (if that is the term, I do not know what it would technically
> be called) or other post methods to make sure it doesn't jump around
> too much.
>
> All responses welcome!
> A.N.D.

Blowing up S8 to 35 for projection will cost a ton of money, not to mention
shredding what meager resolution you would have. Unless your movie was the
best indie ever, I doubt a studio or distrubitor would invest the money on
it. Your baseline needs to be at least S16 to have any hope of retaining
image integrity after blow up, not to mention retaining visual production
value for client. Additionally, frame stabilization in post is a whole
different bucket-o-cash. Save yourself the agony and shoot S16 or even
Mini-DV... if your story is strong enough, these mediums will get your "neg"
close enough to warrent blow-up costs down the road.

Good luck!
 >> Stay informed about: Special effects question on frame steadiness 

If I keep the camera physically moving, smoothly, then any registration
issues might not be as noticeable.

The problem, I am fearing, is when I want to keep the camera locked
down on a tripod.

Scott Dorsey, very knowledgeable, claims jitter might be more
noticeable in the vertical direction. I assume this is because most
cameras have a gate that puts consistent pressure on the side of the
film.

If there is a +/- .01mm difference in the size of the film perf, I
assume this is where the vertical stability issue would be noticed.

16mm, with the same tolerance of +/- .01mm in the size of the perf,
could be twice as steady as DS8 because of double the actual frame size
for the same size film perf that determines stability. All things being
equal...

I have a friend that is going to let me run some FOMAPAN through my
CANON DS8 for free and do a quick test.

I hope it is a steady camera. I really want to use DS8!

A.N.D.
 >> Stay informed about: Special effects question on frame steadiness 

A blow up from 8mm to 35mm is going to look shakey unless you preprocess
it digitally before you go up to 35mm. 8mm is unsteady since you only
have sprockets down one side and the film neg is tiny.
There is a motion stabiliser bundled with Adobe after fx 6.0
professional (and above). It's a fairly basic peice of kit but will set
you back a bit unless you rip a copy.
The juddering that he was talking about won't be as apparent if you
shoot with a wide angle lens. He would have been shooting with a long
lens in a high wind which could be intolerably shakey.

D





A New Dawn wrote:

> Hi group,
>
> Here is a question for the total techies... In the film MARCH OF THE
> PENGUINS the filmmaker talked about the only special effects in the
> whole film being the fact that he had a post house use some type of
> frame steadier because he was sometimes shooting in 60-80 mile an hour
> winds and the camera was being shaken around constantly.
>
> I will be shooting a feature film in B/W Super 8mm and wonder if they
> could do this to a transfer of my film if the film isn't as steady as I
> would like it to be?
>
> I will be shooting with a CANON DS8, so it will be steadier than
> shooting out of the typical plastic Kodak carts but if the film gets
> picked up by a distributor for a theatrical run, I think the blown up
> image could be too unstable.
>
> What type of software solutions exist at the high end? If a distributor
> picked up the tab for a 35mm blow up, how much more for an "image
> steadier" (if that is the term, I do not know what it would technically
> be called) or other post methods to make sure it doesn't jump around
> too much.
>
> All responses welcome!
> A.N.D.
>
 >> Stay informed about: Special effects question on frame steadiness 

Scott Dorsey wrote:
> A New Dawn <anewdawn.RemoveThis@6url.com> wrote:
> >Scott Dorsey wrote:
> >>
> >> Yes, but straight 16mm will almost certainly cost you less than Super-8
> >> today.
> >
> >A friend of mine says John Schwind can hook me up with some UN54 DS8
> >negative for $23 for 100 feet. That will mean a run time close to 11
> >minutes for $23 and then take it to Yale Film and Video and have them
> >develop it and do a telecine. I'll get four times the run time for the
> >same price until I hit telecine.
>
> Right, but you're stuck with a reversal original with no edge numbering.


UN54 is a B/W negative film stock. I heard it is pretty good.


> Your telecine costs are going to be much higher than for 16mm, unless
> you do something nasty like go the film chain route. And once you have
> done the transfer, since there is no edge numbering, there is no way to
> generate an EDL and conform the original.
>
> You either have to edit the camera original directly on a viewer (no
> fun), or you have to blow it up to a 16mm interneg, transfer the interneg,
> edit the transfer, generate the EDL, conform the interneg, and then print
> off the interneg.
>
> Of course, if you just want to go to video, that's fine, but it defeats
> much of the purpose.

Yup, just to video. Shop the film around on DVD and see if a
distributor would pick up the cost of a DI to 35mm blow up. Which also
might allow some work with the steady issue, if one exists.

David Mullen even suggested a 24P HD transfer to 35mm as a cheaper
alternative.

Either way that would be after the film got picked up for distribution.

Yes, I know, I am living in a romantic fantasy land...

But that is the hope, the plan!

A.N.D.
 >> Stay informed about: Special effects question on frame steadiness