3 ms·
Wow, thanks so much for doing this. And in 4K too! It's a shame there isn't any govt org that is working on digitising (and making public) all these old govt fi
by wingworks 3y ago
Wow, thanks so much for doing this. And in 4K too!
It's a shame there isn't any govt org that is working on digitising (and making public) all these old govt films.
- midoridensha 3y agoIs there really any point to digitizing 16mm film to 4k, instead of 1080p? The initial quality of 16mm film is so bad, I don't see how 1080p is really limiting.
- acidburnNSA 3y agoI figured that since the scanners had that option, I'd just take it for starters and find out myself if the FHD version I'd process looked worse or not. It wasn't that much more expensive. I also got the ProRes lossless format (345 GB) rather than having them compress it for a similar reason. I compressed it with ffmpeg on my computer and am pretty sure it looks fine with h264. If I do more of the I may still ask for ProRes, compress myself, and then discard the ProRes files if it works ok.
- wingworks 3y agoidk, I like it. Even from 16mm source I feel there is a meaningful difference.
- acidburnNSA 3y agoWe'll have to run an ABX test for video!
- acidburnNSA 3y agoMy pleasure! I think there are just so many obscure ones that they wait for people who care to come along and fund them. I guess it works ok, as long as we come before the films degrade.