Hello Everyone.

Thanks for your comments.

The resolution of Super8 film stock is said to be around 1300 lines (per frame), so a 1000 line 8mm CCD is, if anything slightly too low in resolution (given that 8mm is the films width, not a frame's height), but then cost is prohibitive, and the TI part's price is reasonable. As a point of interest, when doing digital work for 35mm film (i.e. what the latest block-buster was more than likely filmed on), then resolutions of between 2048x1536 and 3656x2664 are often used. 1000 horizontal pixels for 8mm stock seems good enough to me.

I considered scanning on a per line basis, but decided against it due to mechanical concerns. It is easier to build a film transport that can advance one frame and then hold still whilst the 3-pass scan occurs. I did not fancy trying to advance the film 8um, then performing the 3-pass scan, then advancing the film a further 8um and not expect any skew or missed lines. If any skew (rotation really) does occur, as no doubt it will, then I rather it happen uniformly over a whole frame rather than non-uniformly across hundreds of 8um lines. Scanning a whole frame at once eliminates any problems regarding missed lines.

A conventional telecine machine for 8mm film that will 'scan' at NTSC resolution (approx 480 lines per frame) straight into a computer uncompressed can cost around $10,000 (!)

Cheaper machines are avaiable but essentially consist of a projector pointing at a mirror aiming the light into a video camera. These machines run in real-time and record onto VHS (250 lines)/S-VHS (450 lines)/miniDV (525 lines).

The lower resolutions, lower dynamic ranges and nasty side-effects of non-matching frame rates, signal compositing, evil 4:1:1 sampling and MPEG type data compression are all good reasons why I am staying away from conventional video technology based intermidiate processes. The idea is to get the images from film into the computer with as little loss in quality that cost will allow.

As far as speed is concerned, if the machine takes less time than it takes to send a Super8/Pro8mm cartridge to a telecine house and get it back again (about a week unless you want to pay extra) only to have the result stored on one of the above video formats at a fraction of the films original resolution and contrast ratios, then I am happy!

In case there is any danger of getting into a video vs film argument here, I will just say that both technologies have their place. A browse through any video or film forum on the Internet will show you that these kind of arguments are as bad as 8052 vs PIC 'wars' on our beloved forum here!.. Also try doing effects work with miniDV, it wont take long before you're looking for another format, and unless you're loaded, DigiBeta is a no-go area.

Thanks,

Matt.