G'day all, I'm now into cine "capture" and find I'm ending up with a framerate of 16.67, which I'd like to keep. Movie Studio can't export H264 at that, but can VPX 14?
Thanks!
Ray, thanks for checking.
John, it's Super 8 being shot with a camcorder off a screen. I'm using a variable voltage power supply to change the projector speed, with an LED bulb powered from a separate supply. I'm capturing it straight into MagicYUV on my laptop via Composite. My understanding is the 16.67 fps comes from the slowed-down 18fps cine when using a 50fps shutter speed on your camcorder (screen shooting). When you slow down the projector speed to stop the flickering, you end up with a 16.67 fps rate (after the duplicated frames are removed).
This guy explains it:
https://www.avforums.com/threads/cine-film-to-dvd.109732/post-9480117
I've since read that exporting at 50fps will achieve the "same" result as a 16.67 export, so I'm currently experimenting with that:
@AAProds It's a few years now since I did all my Standard and Super 8 off a screen. 16.67 x 3 = 50.01 hence the match.
Most projectors had a three bladed shutter so each frame was shown three times. It was still only 18 fps but 18x3 i.e 54 "flashes" avoided flickering as it fools our eyes/brain.
But will you have to remove frames when editing unless you don't mind splices showing plus the loss of focus from adjacent frames as they go through your projector gate? Whether you then need to "stretch" the video out to be equivalent to the original 18 will probably depend on your audio source and synchronisation. Slowing down narration from 18 to 16.67 is likely to be very noticeable.
Hi Al,
...it's Super 8 being shot with a camcorder off a screen.
This is the second worst method, the worst being off a wall.
I have two different video transfer kits. So one up from project on a screen is something like this:
Mine is buried away in a box somewhere.
Next, and much better is:
I use it to record the image with audio to help line up the audio with the video with the following capture method:
The Wolverine, 1080p.
I purchased this as I calculated how much it would cost to send my films out for capture vs the cost of the machine - 2000CAD+ to send out, 500CAD for the machine. Also, there was no guarantee as to the resolution. It seems that most commercial transfers are done at 720, definitely not what I wanted.
Each frame is scanned and a 20 fps video file created.
If you have a lot to do, that is the way to go.
I adjust the speed in VPX to 18 fps in a 29.97 project and ith works very will. I will post a couple of examples tonight.
John CB
Thanks Eric, I haven't tackled sound yet but I think I'm going to have to adjust the speed for the video so I will be able make the sound "sound normal". 😉
Thanks John, I've since received my latest gadget, a 2" 16mm projector lens which allows me to video the film directly, aiming straight at the lens. The quality is quite good.
The critical issue is framerates, and hence why I asked about 16.67 because that is the only speed at which there are no duplicated or blended frames after AVISynthing the captured video 25fps capture inserts dupes/blends). Any change requires insertion/removal of frames and hence is not perfectly smooth flow, not that it is really noticeable.
I've since read that non-standard framerates are a no-no ie no 16.67, and the frame-by-frame capturing is the only way to properly do this, so I look forward to seeing yours.
Hi Al,
I sneaked in a couple minutes between washing dishes and getting back to painting the garage.
For sound, as I mentioned, I recorded using the camera/transfer box setup which records audio to the camera, but I plugged in the line-out from the projector to my computer and recorded into SF Audio Cleaning Lab as well as the camera. I could have used VPX/MEP/MMS but I preferred ACL for this exercise.
Then, I imported the camera - video with audio - and the recorded audio from ACL into a project and used the audio alignment command. Then I sliced and diced the video into scenes, did the same with the Wolverine video (after changing the Speed to 18 from 20). Then I matched up the scenes and finally adjusted the video/audio to match each scene from the Wolverine. The problem is that the film projector speed is almost never quite perfect, so some stretching/shrinking was required.
More later. Off to the garage.
John CB
Hi Al,
Here is a link to a piece of a video that is underway. Filmed in 1977, I still had not seen any films that I had taken with the new Super8Sound camera. These were some of the first. I spliced the films in Africa to make a 40 film and added a tiny bit of narration (unfortunately) at the time. My projector allows for dubbing audio.
As of posting this, YT indicates another half hour before the HD version is processed.
Some of the clips have Neat Video applied to get rid of some dust. I find that I am removing too much detail at the same time in some cases, Some clips have exposure adjustments.
Audio needs work, as do transitions.
There is one part that is to blue and another part of the same sequence that is correct. I have not been able to correct this and will create a post about it to see if anyone has any brilliant ideas.
I forgot to mention, but recording from the projector line out to the computer or at least to the camera is necessary to avoid the projector noise.
I have lost many of the sequences filmed with the camera and the Optek Transfer System due to a disk crash and the files had not yet been backed up. I have a bunch to do again.
In any event, it is fairly easy to get the audio closely aligned to the video as the scene changes and breaks in the sound are usually quite obvious.
John CB
Excellent stuff John, I'll be interested to see if I can get close that quality.
I see the frame pattern 1,2,2,3,3,4,5,5,6,6,7,8,8,9,9,10,11,11,12 but I guess that is the nature of the beast, changing the frame rate.
Magical memories, for sure.
Edited: added "the" before frame rate.
Hi Al
. . . I see the frame pattern . . . .
Did you turn on the Interpolate intermediate images option in the Speed effect, or in the right click the video object Video object properties, Video section ?
John EB
John, I was using Virtual Dub.
Edit: In MMS, ticking "intermediate images" doesn't have any effect.
Hi
. . . . I was using Virtual Dub . . . .
😕
Does the Smart Bob filter work on progressive video ?
John EB
John, I don't have a smart bob, but field bob doesn't do anything.
Hi John.
The dust bunnies is where ProDad's Hide actually does a very good job as it is basically the same as the clone tool in a photo editing package but tracks the areas in individual areas. You can add as many precise spots as needed and it will clone a patch of sky (or similar) with a close match near it. The problem at least for my system is the amount of processing power needed. It takes hours just do a thirty second clip on my machine and sometimes needs adjustment to get best results. The more frames you make it look ahead and behind the frame being repaired, the more accurate the result but the longer the processing time becomes.
If you need a better quality from the film you may have to consider one of the AI plugins.
I think you have done a good job with the audio considering the source.
Ray.
Hi Al.
I was only referring to the removal of dust bunnies for John. To clone and remove portions of the frame you can get the Hide program to look ahead and behind the current frame being processed to find the best match of the problem area, the more frames it can look ahead and behind the better the results tend to be. It does not 'blur' the area but replaces it from another uneffected area to blend into the frame. It deals with multiple individual small areas much better than single larger areas,
Looking at my previous post now I realise I didn't include what to use it for 😳🙄.
Ray.
Hi John EB,
Did you turn on the Interpolate intermediate images option in the Speed effect, or in the right click the video object Video object properties, Video section ?
No. With fast moving objects in the video, the result is a shadow.
No interpolation:
With interpolation on the created frame:
I seem to recall that in another discussion about this, I mentioned that there was some kind of a conflict if Mercalli stabilization was also used.
For anyone interested, the two buildings in the background are the Hotel Ivoire, one of the most luxurious in Abidjan at the time. There was an indoor ice skating rink.
Hi Al,
In my case, the project is set to 29.97 fps. The original video was 20 fps, changed to 18 fps under Speed. A project of 24 or 25 fps would probably be more suitable, obviously with less frames having to be created. In any event, is the creation of frames really obvious?
The important thing in this exercise was to show the quality of the scanned film. I will show another example with the scanned film vs the camera shot film using the Optex Transfer System.
Hi Ray,
I don't have proDAD's Hide. Neat Video has a dust removal feature that does not require identifying the dust and is quite fast and flexible.
NV before dust and hair removal:
There was not a lot of dust in this image.
Dust removal default on:
Still a bit of the hair showing and the dust speck is smaller.
Increased amount from the default of 150 to 280 just removes the last remnants of both:
Here is another frame with more dust:
In NV with dust removal off:
In NV with dust removal on at 280 as before:
In NV with dust removal at Aggressive:
Final result.
Side by side comparison. Compare them to see how much detail is lost due to the cleaning process:
Note that I did not go into other cleaning aspects like Spatial and Sharpening in Neat Video - I kept to the basics except for Temporal filter, I set the radius to 5, and adjusted for Repeated frame rate to 40% (33 or 40 is about right for the number of created frames that I have).
John CB
Hi John.
I didn't realize how badly the original footage was contaminated. That's not all lens dust bunnies is it? Almost impossible to physically clean with that age of stock as well I'd imagine. I'm assuming some of that contamination is magnetic particles coming off the sound track. In which case you are probably doing the best you can. Good luck re-running what you have lost 🤞. I do sympathise. I had to bake my 10" tapes to prevent the oxide from sticking to the wrong side of the tapes when I digitised mine and with open reel magnetic tape you only really get one shot at it as the 'repair' often doesn't last more than one pass through.
Ray.
In my case, the project is set to 29.97 fps. The original video was 20 fps, changed to 18 fps under Speed. A project of 24 or 25 fps would probably be more suitable, obviously with less frames having to be created. In any event, is the creation of frames really obvious?
John, I agree, not really obvious, but preferable to have none. I find Super 8 very jittery anyway so am trying to reduce that.
Bit of thread drift now, on the left, my attempt shooting with my HV20 directly at the lens vs a professional capture on the right (process unknown, I suspect a frame grabber).
Hi Ray,
I did not clean the film before digitizing which probably could have reduced the amount of dust and hair significantly. I was worried about losing emulsion from the film and adding scratches. I had decided if any of the more important (to me) films had too much dust and the NV process wasn't all that acceptable, that I would make another pass after cleaning the film. Big job. It was important to get that first pass. Now I just need more hours in a day.
The old cleaning fluid that I had. evaporated in the can. I purchased a bottle of PEC-12 which does the same thing. I have felt pads on my Goko film editor that clean film, just apply a couple of drops of liquid. Trouble is, they have become dirty and are no longer replaceable, as far as I have found, so I used an anti-static cloth from Ilford for the one film that I cleaned several years ago. Process to be reviewed for degredation.
Hi Al,
Do you have a lot of film to do?
In your image, you have a straightening problem with your camera that you will have to resolve. The image looks like is has had some smoothing done. what is the resolution of the professional image on the right?
You are probably well-equipped to manage the process. I used a spreadsheet with a few sheets, one for the digitized filename with information about the film contents, the file for the audio, and the file for the camera-shot video with audio, etc. Another is just a link to the camera-recorded filename and the new name so that I could follow what I had done (before losing half of the files). Another tab is for Reg8 files. There is some colour-coding - but for what (probably noting that the file has been imported into a project)? I have to get back to these projects before I forget everything. Another winter project.
OT, I put on the Magix wish list a way to export the filenames of files used in a project/movie. This would still be nice to have. They are listed in Project/Movie settings, so why not have a way to get them to another format, like for databasing.
John CB
@browj2 Hi John.
My third job was working for a London film screen advertising company and part of that job was repairing 35mm film and negatives. Mainly from sprocket damage but also section replacement and occasional proper editing of new negative material. While cleaning new film stock (under a couple of years old) was practical with little to no risk using high grade isopropyl alcohol, cleaning older stock was always a concern. It was quite easy to take one or two frames from a film to test before proceeding. No-one ever notices one missing frame if they don't know where the cut is and even easier at a sudden camera angle change. If you had to work with isopropyl alcohol you had to drink a pint of milk afterwards under union rules. No idea if it helped or not.
If the film condition was very poor the film was cleaned in automated ultrasonic baths using gentler cleaners where the film was run through a batch of sealed units and dried before being wound back onto a spool. Studio Film Labs in Wardour Street had a 300 metre set of tanks for that process and the film was never touched by hand before the process was finished. That was where we sent the really bad condition stock. I would never recommend touching the emulsion side with anything. As you say, the binding would be precarious at best. Amazon still sells smaller cans of isopropyl alcohol for such cleaning although it could be too strong for use on old film. As for cleaning pads, you could try looking for digital camera sensor cleaning materials. They are the gentlest materials I know of for cleaning.
In those days, archive film sat in metal cans sealed with tape after sitting it in a hermetically sealed room so that the air inside the can was as good as they could get it before closing the cans. Storage was everything.
I wish you all the best with your endeavours. What are your plans for future preservation or are you not concerned with 50 years from now? The only good news is that YouTube announced in May this year that they will not longer be deleting user accounts that have been inactive for two years. That could always change though.
I like @AAProds conversion. For me it adds authenticity to show the edges and wonky-ness. The same for seeing the actual film grain. If over processed the images begin to look like they were taken by an early digital bridge or compact camera. It tells me the video's origin.
Ray.
In your image, you have a straightening problem with your camera that you will have to resolve. The image looks like is has had some smoothing done. what is the resolution of the professional image on the right?
John, yes, bit of a half-@rsed job! I flipped it (it shoots upside down when straight through the lens) but didn't SPR it. I adjusted the colours and applied a light Neat Video to it. Still working on the process.
As for the pro job, it came back to me as a 720x576 MPEG 2.
For me it adds authenticity to show the edges and wonky-ness.
Ray, a fellow on another forum includes the sprocket holes going past as well! Now that's really rubbing it in. No doubt about what that video was from.