Jump to content

george_siougas

Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    2

  • Joined

  • Last visited

 Content Type 

Posts posted by george_siougas

    8mm Film to DVD transfer (Do it yourself)

    in Video

    Posted

    <p>Thank you for your answer! Before I asked all these I had made my test:<br>

    a) my projector has variable speed control (Canon Cine Projector S-400)<br>

    b) my camcorder, well actually DSLR (Canon 550D in Europe or T2i in America), has full manual settings (not only for shutter speed)<br>

    Projecting at a wall and capturing gave me very good results (camera at 1/60 and projector at around 20fps) with absolutely no flicker. Isn't that enough as flickering testing is concerned? Or maybe using a more quality method than the wall projection will show me any flicker left? Oh, by the way, I had the camera connected to a TV for better (than its LCD screen) testing of the (absense of) flicker.<br>

    I used the original projector's lamp, but I imagine you are saying that the "wall method" doesn't shuffer from hot spot, am I right?<br>

    I also eventually think that the 1st method (aerial transfer) should be better quality than the flat screen; but is it so much more difficult? I've heard of the need of at least 10-12x optical zoom. My DSLR's lens is a Canon EF-S 15-85 (which is actually a 24-135, since 550D/T2i is a crop camera with an 1.6x factor). Would it be enough?<br>

    Which of all the methods (1st, 2nd, 3rd, wall, macro-reverse lens) is better to the hot spot problem, in case I don' want to modify the projector? To the overall quality?<br>

    Could you please give me a macro-reverse lens example? I've only found macro-reverse rings in ebay to put your lens in your camera the other way round... Could this work with my lens above?<br>

    Thank you very much again, it's not that I'm bored to test myself all of the above... It's because I'm trying not to spend a lot of money only to find out that a specific method is crap and have to spend again... Thanks and I'm hoping for an answer from you again wich hopefully will help other members as well!</p>

    8mm Film to DVD transfer (Do it yourself)

    in Video

    Posted

    <p>Dear friends,<br>

    I would like to transfer my father's old 8mm films to DVD and I don't know which method to use... I can understand that the cheaper is to project to a piece of paper but I hate the keystone effect.. I prefer to use a kind of a telecine device but I don't know which is better: the ones with a flat screen or the ones with a condenser lens?<br>

    I've read mixed comments about them but I can understand that the flat screen type is easier to align, but the condenser lens type gives better quality transfer since it provides an aerial capture. Just to be clear to what I've found in the market:<br>

    Condenser lens type:<br>

    <img src="http://i.ebayimg.com/00/s/MTYwMFgxNjAw/$(KGrHqJ,!gwE9VfU7gVbBPctk-R+OQ~~60_12.JPG" alt="" width="500" height="500" /></p>

    <p>Flat screen type:<br>

    <img src="http://i.ebayimg.com/00/$(KGrHqUOKm4E5BdJF4qtBOU)(qvudQ~~48_12.JPG" alt="" width="500" height="436" /></p>

    <p>I also couldn't clarify which is better to the hot spot problem... Are there any other advantages between the two I should take into account?</p>

    <p>I've also found some telecine boxes, but are very used.. Are they better?:<br>

    <img src="http://i.ebayimg.com/00/s/MTIwMFgxNjAw/$(KGrHqR,!i4E8W!qnkOQBPPYM6lwug~~60_12.JPG" alt="" width="500" height="375" /><br>

    While on the subject of the new / used devices, I would really like the flat screen type of the above photo, since it is the only which is new. Their site is:<br>

    <a href="http://www.sharplesmedia.com/">http://www.sharplesmedia.com/</a><br>

    Their advertisment is very good with a lot of (and only...) advantages!<br>

    They say "anti-glare", but is the condenser lens type better in this respect?<br>

    They say "without hot spots and image washout"; is it or not the condenser lens better to these? I think the condenser lens type would give lesser image washout being an aerial capture; as for the hot spots, I really don't know as I said above...<br>

    They also say "First Surface (Front Surface) Mirror"; OK, I already know that this is good!<br>

    Anyway, since whatever I buy will cost me a lot of money (shipping to Greece costs a lot), I would like any opinion about any other disadvantages of each type/method I can't imagine...<br>

    Thank you all in advance!</p>

×
×
  • Create New...