Where is Diego, Film is his Forte'
I don't know if you mean this Diego
, but I'll try to do the best anyway!
Timberoz wrote:You almost need to modify one of those old super 8 film editors/viewers. The ones that had the handwind cranks & build in screens. They used a lower powered lamp & would be perfect as you would not toast your celluloid.
Not really. The Francois's approach is right, it is just that he need to remove the lamp from their original place, to re-allocate it strategically.
To Francois: you must search on eBay for a dichroical mirror to be able to filter the infra-red spectrum from your lamp. The mirror must be mounted at 45ª of the normal of your film-gate, to be able to place the lamp at 90ª of the film-gate. The infra-red spectrum will pass through the mirror but will not be reflected, and you'll be able to do stop-motion without any risks.
You'll need a real nice dichroical mirror, as in example a spare from a Durst photographic magnifier. That's your second best choice, now, what is the first best choice?
That's the first best choice; a lot better than lamp re-allocation. Just replace the dichroic reflector by a LED pack and you'll be done! ...but don't use any kind of editor/viewer/moviola... those are low precission mechanisms, and their fresnel crystals are pretty bad compared to a projector assembly.
About projector assemblies, you have two main ways, between a few others:
1) Direct Coupling
2) Mirror/Condenser Coupling
....I think you know of what I'm talking about: the first choice is a specially adapted lens to couple your camera directly to the film-gate; and the second one uses the stock lens for your projector and camera but the image is projected over a mirror (plated on their primary surface) which is at 45ª of the lens normal, then you have a condenser lens at 90ª of the projection lens, on which you'll point your camera.
Both are very good solutions, by far better than any editor/viewer/moviola device, and capable of about two times better resolution. I mean, if you uses good lenses (Angenieux, Zeiss, etc.) and a careful assembly, you can grab images up to 2048X2048 pixels with great detail. But on any case, you can grab images of about 1024x1024 pixels without problems.
Timberoz wrote:The only issue with doing it by a hand crank would be frame registration.
Forget hand crank!
...That's a real pain, and will not work as expected. You could go better projecting the reel at real-time on a translucid paper of about 1 meter x 1 meter, and grabbing it with a DV camera, even if the projection speed is uncorrected!
...There are ways to fix the periodical fade of an uncorrected projector mechanism (24fps), but there is no way to obtain more resolution from a viewer screen!
Where is a "Live" Onion skin option for capture *Nudge* Maybe if we ask Diego nicely he could write a plug in for RT
*Cracks the Whip* NOW what is happening with that, My O2+ is still waiting for a useful existence or I am threatening it with retirement
I really hope to be able to do it this year; that should be a real great thing for me as programmer and hobbyist, since at some point I was really interested to join both fields, even if it also means the custom design/programming of some parallel port device to control a given step-motor mechanism. As always, time and money is a tiranic force... but who knows... I hope this year finances will go better, and then I'll be able to program again. That's my real wish!