[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Rank Filters / VTR London

> Reply to ,	
> (  From: J P Martins <fm77 at dial.pipex.com>
>    Subject: Re: P.S. Rank Filters
>    Date: Wed, 01 Nov 95 18:15:16 +0100 (GMT)	
>  >> Have used the MNR11 a lot, coupled, dowstream to an URSA GOLD
> and DV
>      8:8:8 (all options throughout the path).
>     Run a comparison: client had underexposed 16mm footage (25fps)
> graded
>     and transfered at VTR (London). They used URSA GOLD, POGLE and
> latest
>      Accom DNR.
>      NO FUCKING COMPARISON! (sorry for the French!). I was able to
> really )
> I was a bit suprised at reading the above for a number of reasons.
> Firstly, the VTR group runs 6 telecines but the 2 Golds here at VTR
> Ltd run with
> Pogle / 4:4:4 DCP's and fully optioned Digital Vision Noise 
> which can
> be switched, along with K Scope, to any point in the signal path.
> We only use the Accom DNR's on the remaining 4 machines which are
> all Rank 4:2:2
> vintage and, whilst these produce excellent pictures, they are 
> going to
> produce
> as clean a signal as a Gold especially on underexposed 16mm neg. In
> the same way
> the Accom is not going to hit the same spec as the DVNR or for that
> matter the
> MNR11.
> Secondly, we all know that what a client says or demands in one
> facility is not
> going
> to be the same as to another, therefore without knowing exactly 
> was being
> demanded
> from the colourist during the session, it strikes me as wrong to
> demean their
> work in
> such a loud manner.
> Those of us at the pointed end of working with major clients know
> that it is
> much
> easier to match grade or improve the look of someone else's work 
> that it's
> much
> harder to create images from scratch to a demanding clients
> satisfaction.
> Thirdly, I did'nt realize that we were all in to direct slagging 
> on this
> Forum even in
> support of favoured bits of kit. If that is the case though we 
> produce
> huge lists
> of comments about other companies or grading systems which clients
> complain
> about to us every day, but that seems very unproductive to me.
> Last comment on this subject:  If J P Martins looks at the latest
> Meat Loaf,
> Maddona or
> George Michael promos, all 'Posted here at VTR Ltd in the last 
> or so, then
> you
> can see that our systems produce excellent results.
> Now just a comment on the filter issue, we have modified our
> machines to accepte
> the
> 4" camera sets and use them on about 25% of bookings, but we also
> find that
> using
> materials like cling film and vaseline can be very interesting! The
> other great
> aesthetic
> tool we use is K Scope, very useful if you can get it in your 
> Sorry about the length of this but it had to be said.
> Seamus.	
> ----- 
> The telecine mailing list is automated with SmartList v.3.10.
> It is available as a digest... questions to rob at xyzoom.alegria.com.

Dearest Seamus:

I can only speak from my experience which consisted in this: the 
client came over with some D1 rushes which were transfered at your 
place by someone else, I was presented with some 2,000 feet of thin 
16mm neg and was asked to grade it to my best. Once spooled to the 
relevant bit, I put my hands to work and graded the stuff. This done, 
the client then asked to wipe your stuff in. No french this time, 
mate! But what a difference!
We are talking about noise suppression capabilities of the MNR11, not 
about VTR, Seamus or the guy who did it.
But please try to understand that I'm only a little human beeing, 
quite sincere and reasonably inteligent to be able to see visual 
diferences. I'm quite sure you are a lot more capable than myself, 
and perhaps one day I will be lucky enough to ever reach your heels,