MovieChat Forums > Formats > Scanning Super 8mm Movie Film to Digital

Scanning Super 8mm Movie Film to Digital


Anybody doing this themselves? If so, what do you use? I've been reading the $1,500 Reflecta scanner is one of the highest quality ways to do this, but it has a guide or pulley that goes right through the center of the film frame, putting a scratch right through the center of the picture area. Is there a home scanner, made by film leader Kodak or another company, that is gentler on the film?

I've been paying a company in Chandler, AZ called Video Conversion experts to do this. They use a $30,000+ scanner that can scan as high as 4K and it's sprocketless so very gently glides the film along on rollers. I've been having them scan my film at only 1080p, because, to my eyes, 1080p already mercilessly shows all the detail, including grain, that I remember seeing
in the film when it was projected.

Their scanner has an "auto color" feature which automatically adjusts for changes in brightness and color on the fly. It does a great job when the film was perfectly exposed and the color balance was set perfectly in the camera to begin with. However, sometimes I intentionally underexposed to make day seem night or did weird color effects, which their scanner attempts to compensate for when I don't want it to. This results in dark shots being way too bright revealing horrendous grain and colors looking flat or otherwise different than I remember them looking on projection. I want more shot-by-shot control.

With Super 8 seemingly making a comeback as a viable filmmaking alternative to digital HD, I thought maybe now the time has finally come for more home scanning products. Thanks in advance for any info.

reply

IIRC this has come up before, and at the time the two main options to buying a turnkey film scanner were a home-made scanner (http://kinograph.cc/) and a technique that uses a flatbed scanner and software (http://www.jiminger.com/s8/).

If you're going to pay to have your film scanned, you may, at least in theory get more detail from 720p than you will from a SD film chain. That's a good choice if you can afford it. 1080p is OK as long as you have the storage capacity, and it doesn't cost more than 720p to scan. But even the best Super8 film stock isn't going to be able to offer enough resolution to "fill" a full-HD sensor, so I wouldn't spend extra for only a bigger file.

I don't know how you plan on showing it, but I'd suggest 720p at most for streaming video if you're paying for a pro streaming service. You can put it up on YouTube at 1080p, of course. But any difference seen will be entropy not resolution. Might as well save the Internet bandwidth.

reply

Thanks Speed. 720 is not an option at VCE, only 480p, 1080p, 2k and 4k. I have their scans delivered to me as a 1080p .AVI file. I always send them a 1 TB USB external hard drive with most of that 1 TB space free, so space is not an issue. From that, I've been down-converting to 480p, editing it, putting it on DVD with music and uploading an SD MPEG-2 version on youtube. It looks great on DVD. It turns to soup on youtube because they add compression (Flash .FLV?) to cram as many videos as possible onto their servers. It's OK for small-screen and mobile device internet sharing. When I get into HD editing, I'll re-edit the native 1080p files and burn them to blu-ray as well as upload 720p versions to youtube, thanks.

I'll check out those "turkey" scanners you mentioned, thanks, and yes, I believe you mentioned them when I brought this up last year. I was hoping the technology has evolved a bit more. Hopefully these scanners don't cost a mint, do what I require and don't destroy the film in the process of scanning it.

The ability to do shot-by-shot color and brightness correction would be great. What would be really stellar is some kind of frame-line detection to keep every frame perfectly aligned despite bad splices and torn sprocket holes. This is my dream of course, wishful thinking. Even VCE's $30k scanner doesn't do this. I'm sometimes looking at part of 2 frames as the film is trying to re-align itself in their scanner. I'm not as concerned about speed as I am quality. Hell, a scanner can slowly churn frame-by-frame, day and night, until the film is scanned. I waited 30+ years to see these movies again, what's a few more months.

reply

Hmmm... It's been a while since I looked into it, but IIRC YouTube does do something objectionable if you don't upload in an advanced compression format. I always transcode to their suggested format, an H.264 MP4 file, and it looks great.

Here's something handy:

https://www.videomaker.com/article/c12/17034-encoding-youtube-videos-at-the-highest-quality

FWIW, I have a copy of Sorenson Squeeze Pro, and it ain't worth what they want for it. VideoReDo now has a pro product that I prefer for transcoding.

I'm surprised that those homebrew projects haven't grown. Maybe Kodak's re-release of their inexpensive Super 8 camera will help stimulate development. I hope that film schools are buying them like crazy. How can anyone be a "real" filmmaker without ever using a rotating shutter camera?

reply

"A real filmmaker": That's right! I love it!

What's IRC stand for, BTW lol?

reply

IIRC == "if I recall correctly"

reply

LOL thanks.

I just got the latest 1,300-foot film scan back from VCE and it looks great! Frame misalignment is an ever-present issue whenever there was a splice (and I did A LOT of splicing on my shots to edit them into a more coherent sequence) and torn sprocket holes (which, due to wear and tear from frequent projection, is a reality), but at least the frames don't jitter and roll like they would in a projector.

One thing I noticed and feel is interesting to mention is VCE's scanner holds black level on the slower Kodachrome 40 film stock much better than it does on the faster Ektachrome 160 film stock. The faster Ektachrome 160 Type A (daylight color balanced) looks OK. In Ektachrome 160 type G, which was sort of an all-purpose neutral color-balanced film stock, forget it--blacks in the scanner's Auto Color become blue! And oohh--talk about grain in the E160 (the K40 actually looks pretty good)! Consider this a word of warning to you kids thinking about embarking on making a feature film in Super 8! Of course these film stocks are reversal, meaning the original film in the camera IS the final projection print. Newer negative Super 8 film stocks from Kodak, in addition to their wider exposure latitude characteristics, benefit from Kodak's fine T-grain technology.

I felt like a true artist back then shooting movies on FILM!

reply

I took a peek at their website, and see that they'll let you spend a whole lot of money on film transfer if you want to! But it's good to have options. Is suppose that getting good registration on single-perf film is always going to be a challenge.

Have you checked out the http://www.pro8mm.com/ website? I'm blown away by their wide selection of remanufactured cameras for sale and for rent, and lots of support with accessories, film stock and processing. I really like that they have kits to rent! Now if I can find an excuse to do it...

reply

I did check out Pro8mm before I checked out VCE, and they get even more in-depth with film scanning, doing the shoy-by-shot color and brightness-correction I talked about...for a price. Pro8 is even pricier than VCE. Pro8's 1080p scan price starts at I believe about $.55 a foot, one-light, even before any color and brightness-correction is factored in, whereas VCE offers an Auto Color 1080p scan at around $.35 a foot. No brainer--VCE is cheaper for similar quality.

Plus VCE offers once every 3-4 month 60-70% off specials to previous customers, which I am, so this is clearly how I'm going to have to peace-meal my 7,000 feet of film out, maybe 1,000 feet per 60-70% off special, every 3-4 months, to get all this film scanned.

With regards to image quality, I'm now experimenting with color and brightness-correction filters in my editing software to see how much can be done after film scan to restore the look of the film. VCE's Auto Color seems to lock onto highlights, so when there ARE NO highlights, it seems to me I can drastically darken the image, tweak the contrast, subtract blue and add red to restore film that was shot in dim yellow-orange incandescent to its original warm look and get rid of the blue in the blacks.

reply