[Frameworks] Digital Master to 16mm/35mm --› Scan back to Digital

[jimmyschaus1]

I've had success filming off computer monitors with 16mm and super 8.  For
stuff with motion you should look into adjusting your shutter speed/angle
to avoid flicker, depending on the refresh rate of your monitor...but that
could also be an interesting thing to experiment with.  You could also
experiment with different blending modes in your editing software to
combine the 4k and 16mm...could be especially crazy if there's some flicker
in there.  But I digress :)

On Sat, Feb 4, 2023 at 10:57 AM <janis at janislionel.com> wrote:

> Hello
>
> I have an experimental music video project which only operates with
> analogue/optical effects. It was all filmed with digital cameras high iso -
> so its veeeeery grainy (purposely so, see sample still). Now I would like
> to perform a final step over: Print it on 16mm (or 35mm film) and then scan
> it back in 2k or 4k
>
> There are three ways I imagine this can happen, tho have no previous
> experience:
> - 16mm print out and scan back to digital: quite expensive to do, even for
> 4min.
> - 35mm print out and scan back to digital: probably cheaper - though maybe
> the resolution is too good / the grain no present enough. Then again: Maybe
> this is just the necessary amount of information/sharpness needed to render
> the digital grain/artefacts clearly
> - Use a Bolex or Krasnogorsk and film the digital master from a screen or
> projector, develop the film and scan back to digital (?): does this give
> you adequate quality? *I'm especially interested in this technique since
> its the cheapest but also because i imagine the 'sloppiness' of the
> bolex/krasnogorsk adds a movement/breathing that could be quite interesting
> for e.g. the shots that were filmed on a gimbal*.
>
> Questions:
>
> - has any of you experience with filming from a screen / projector? If
> yes, I'd appreciate some tips regarding technique.
> - I guess in all the cases above it would make sense to have a digital
> master that is rather a little more overexposed than underexposed?
> - ho do overexposures end up on the film negative/scan back? does it get
> more organic or does it stay rather digital in its aesthetic?
>
> I hope I could express myself understandably.
>
> Best
> Janis
> --
> Frameworks mailing list
> Frameworks at film-gallery.org
> https://mail.film-gallery.org/mailman/listinfo/frameworks_film-gallery.org
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://film-gallery.org/pipermail/frameworks_film-gallery.org/attachments/20230204/0a81ca3c/attachment.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: Screenshot 2023-02-04 at 16.53.21.jpeg
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 80561 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://film-gallery.org/pipermail/frameworks_film-gallery.org/attachments/20230204/0a81ca3c/attachment.jpeg>