FX1 to Film. Stunning results

Steve Shovlar

Steve Shovlar

DVXuser Sponsor
Taken from
http://www.sonyhdvinfo.com/showthread.php?t=1085
Posted by maheelrp

I have transferred several clips from FX1 to 35 mm film. Those clips were as follows.
From HDR-FX1 Sony HDV Info.com Forum
Kerr Cook’s
shottransove.4.m2t - a fast zoom out
car25side.4.m2t - shot from a moving vehicle

From DV info.net forum
Kaku Ito’s
bikepassngby.m2t - zoom out and a pan folloing a moving motorbike
day0dbf6.2.m2t - 2 children running towards the camera
eevgap.m2t - zoom out from a billboard to a wide shot of a street

horses.m2t - (I am not sure who shot this) merry-go-round with horses move up and down on the foreground while the background passes by

all of these shots contained lot of movement. On most of the shots the entire frame contained movement.

I de-interlaced the clips using our proprietary software, which works as a plug in for AE. I did not try any 24p conversion since my aim was to evaluate resolution on the film transfer. (I will be using a PAL camera anyway, since I am in the PAL region). Then I cropped the frame to get Cinemascope aspect ratio and stretched it vertically to fill the full 35 mm frame. Transfer was done using our proprietary film recorder on to FUJI 250D negative.

The print was viewed at the lab’s screening room, which has a 14’ screen. The screening room was designed to view the rushes at short throw, which would clearly show any defect on the print, that would not be noticeable on a long throw projection in a theater.

That was the best film transfer I have done. I have transferred quite a lot of advertisements, done using Sony DXC D35PL and D50P cameras with either Canon or Fujinon lenses, 2 feature films using Sony DSR 570 and D50P, footage from my own good old Sony VX 1000 (I still use that) and Panasonic DVX 100 (not the 100a) and Canon XL1s. But all these were no match for the resolution of FX1. Even after the cropping and stretching for the Cinemascope AR, the resolution was very much above these SD cameras. The technicians at the lab were simply shocked. I did not see any pixelization on these clips. Although little softening is noticed during the zooms, it is well hidden behind the crash zooms. I noticed it because I was looking for it.

I think I owe something to the people who shot these test footages. Please email me your addresses. I will send you sample frames from your footages. (If possible I will try to send you a copy of the entire 30-second film out.)

I am going to purchase the Cam.

Thanks every one.

----------------

So there you go! The FX1 has proved itself with a stunning result on transfer to film. Now where Brad Pitts number, got a small job for him........ ;)
 
Re: FX1 to Film. Stunning results

Well . . . two points.

I wouldn't go by an unillustrated testimonial on a website.

Also, "resolution" isn't everything. It's only part of the equation. Gamma curves, color rendering, etc., all play just as much of a role.
 
Re: FX1 to Film. Stunning results

[quote author=LoveHD link=board=sony;num=1105207471;start=0#2 date=01/08/05 at 16:42:36]http://www.filmlook.com/process.html[/quote]


Huh? I don't get what that has to do with blowing footage up to film. Maybe I missed it, but it seemed that site specialized in converting your footage to have the "film" look.
 
Re: FX1 to Film. Stunning results

"Gamma curves, color rendering, etc., all play just as much of a role."

The blow up isn't just to connect your camcorder to a filmrecorder.
The site gives you a clue scharky.
 
Re: FX1 to Film. Stunning results

I'm starting to think you might be Sergej, LoveHD.

In any case, all the posting above talks about it resolution. My point is that resolution alone does not equal better quality.
 
Re: FX1 to Film. Stunning results

I agree with you there LoveHD, but why would you send your footage out to a company when you could just do that yourself. i still don't get what you're refereing to by that link. When blowing up to film it is not a good idea to apply film looks to your footage, such as grain. You want to make the footage look how you want, but when transfered to film, many of those characteristics will be inherited by being on film. Adding grain to your footage before going to film will just reduce the resolution. Now, if you want the "film transfered to video" look, that is what that site specializes in. I'm just not quite sure what stance you are making LoveHD.
 
Re: FX1 to Film. Stunning results

[quote author=scharky link=board=sony;num=1105207471;start=0#6 date=01/09/05 at 12:46:30] When blowing up to film it is not a good idea to apply film looks to your footage, such as grain. You want to make the footage look how you want, but when transfered to film, many of those characteristics will be inherited by being on film. Adding grain to your footage before going to film will just reduce the resolution. Now, if you want the "film transfered to video" look, that is what that site specializes in. I'm just not quite sure what stance you are making LoveHD.[/quote]

You don't need grain pattern. What you need is motion characteristics and altering gray scale, color and contrast to get film density curve.
 
Re: FX1 to Film. Stunning results

[quote author=LoveHD link=board=sony;num=1105207471;start=0#7 date=01/09/05 at 18:01:39]

You don't need grain pattern. What you need is motion characteristics and altering gray scale, color and contrast to get film density curve.
[/quote]
yes but I still don't get the meaning of your post? Are you saying that the FX1 needs to go through this process before you blow up to film? I really don't think that you need a professional organization to alter your footage in that way. Besides from this website they are obviously editing the footage for video viewing, not in preparation for a film printing. Get a "film density curve" is a subjective thing. Who is to say what gamma curve film has? Film can have as little or as great (relatively) latitude as you want. It can have crushed blacks and blown out highlights, or extra detail in the blacks and have been flashed to preserve highlits. Film is, whatever you want it to look like. If it is lit badly, it will look bad and amaturish. There really is no such thing as a cure all film setting that will git to all standards. I personally would like to have full control over my final footage, rather than send it somewhere to have their interpretation of what film looks like.
So after all this, I still don't see what that website has anything to do with the first poster. I guess I'm just a little lost as to what you were getting at with the post of the website.
 
Re: FX1 to Film. Stunning results

Taken from the same site the same discussion:

'I also have transfered the DVX100 25p (the PAL version does not have 24p)footage and yes it is better than the 50i. Specially with "Thin Line Detail" to cancel the vertical blur introduced by the camera to soften the inlaced image.'

So the "stunning results" with the FX1 50i compared to the DVX100 is maybe not that stunning...?
 
Re: FX1 to Film. Stunning results

Scharky, the link was just an answere to this.

[quote author=David Jimerson link=board=sony;num=1105207471;start=0#1 date=01/08/05 at 12:57:55]Well . . . two points.
Also, "resolution" isn't everything. It's only part of the equation. Gamma curves, color rendering, etc., all play just as much of a role.[/quote]

Da Vinci can do magic.
2kplus.jpg
 
Re: FX1 to Film. Stunning results

[quote author=xray link=board=sony;num=1105207471;start=0#10 date=01/09/05 at 19:25:53]Taken from the same site the same discussion:

'I also have transfered the DVX100 25p (the PAL version does not have 24p)footage and yes it is better than the 50i. Specially with "Thin Line Detail" to cancel the vertical blur introduced by the camera to soften the inlaced image.'

So the "stunning results" with the FX1 50i compared to the DVX100 is maybe not that stunning...?
[/quote]

This one is from the same discussion:
<<<--That was the best film transfer I have done. I have transferred quite a lot of advertisements, done using Sony DXC D35PL and D50P cameras with either Canon or Fujinon lenses, 2 feature films using Sony DSR 570 and D50P, footage from my own good old Sony VX 1000 (I still use that) and Panasonic DVX 100 (not the 100a) and Canon XL1s. But all these were no match for the resolution of FX1. Even after the cropping and stretching for the Cinemascope AR, the resolution was very much above these SD cameras. The technicians at the lab were simply shocked. I did not see any pixelization on these clips. Although little softening is noticed during the zooms, it is well hidden behind the crash zooms. I noticed it because I was looking for it.

-->>>
 
Re: FX1 to Film. Stunning results

That part whas already in the post from Steve --> Look above at the start of the topic, I tried to ad something new here.
 
Re: FX1 to Film. Stunning results

[quote author=LoveHD link=board=sony;num=1105207471;start=0#11 date=01/09/05 at 19:54:05]Scharky, the link was just an answere to this.


Da Vinci can do magic.
2kplus.jpg
[/quote]


You're *really* assuming a lot of things that weren't in that post above.

All he talked about was *resolution* -- not about any of this other stuff.

"Smart Travels with Rudy Maxa" on PBS HD has MUCH better resolution than any DVD I play, but it doesn't look a THING like film. The DVDs do.

So . . . resolution isn't everything.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top