Excellent lighting is a good technique. It's also a good idea to work closely with the
lab that will be doing the transfer to get the best image you can.

quote:

---

Originally posted by certified instigator

. It's also a good idea to work closely with the
lab that will be doing the transfer to get the best image you can.

---

well friend tell me the whole procedure please that how can we work in labs .i mean what is the process called?????can i know the details??????can you explain the transfer to get best image?you mean grabbing the movie from Digital to Editing maching should be at high machine?the system should have best video editing cards??

Thanks for the reply

adeel akhter

because im confused that when its 1k then after tyransfer will it not get expand like apixle based images.????

adeel akhter

I'm sorry, adeel, but I'm not a technician - I don't know all the details.
That's why I suggested you speak to the people at the lab who will
be doing the 35mm transfer. I've transfered SD to 35mm with excellent
results, but I don't know all the details of what happened in the lab.

I can, however, tell you the whole procedure when working with the
lab. It's really simple. What I did was go to the lab that was going to
do the 35mm transfer, tell them the camera I was using and we
talked about the proper settings and lighting that would give me
the best transfer. I did a couple of very short tests - 30 seconds
each - and we came up with the best setting for my camera.

=============================================
The aim of an argument or discussion should not be victory, but progress.
Joseph Joubert, essayist (1754-1824)

thanks for reply certified instigator.hmm well look slike i will have to visit US labs..unluckyly we have so old labs here like of 100 years back.i think lighting is an option which is in my hands.

adeel akhter

hi certified instigator i posted on few othe forums too from one i got this reply

If you are targetting cinema, go for a HD camera that will give you PROGRESSIVE frames, not INTERLACED. If u use interlaced, you will have to de-interlace it, which does result in a loss of detail. Forget about the 1K, you can still convert HD to films without any visible loss.i replied back but couldnt get the answers of

things like what is

PROGRESSIVE frames???? and what is meant by INTERLACED and If u use interlaced, you will have to de-interlace ''

can you please guide me this or provide me links on filmmaking.net where topics related to this subject are posted

adeel akhter

Since you will be shooting HD, there is no need to worry.
All HD is "progressive" scanning.

http://www.canopus.com/canopus/technology/progressivevsinterlaced.php

Since you don't have any labs that can do the transfer, then
you just need to light your HD video as professionally as
you can. Even a 1k transfer to 35mm will look great as long
as you light it well.

Have you considered hiring an experienced director of
photography to handle the lighting?

=============================================
The aim of an argument or discussion should not be victory, but progress.
Joseph Joubert, essayist (1754-1824)

thanks for the replt.well experienced direcotr of photography..........well the chances are 50,50....all depends upton the budget.............but personally i am interested in having DOP........................,,thanks for the links its good site.

so i think shooting on HD , editing and then transfering to 35 mm staright away will be a simple procedure..no ups and downs.........and no great loss of quality too which i was worried about that what will happen when 1k data changes to 35mm for showing at cinema wher

adeel akhter