I was given a 1940s projector and about 2 dozen reels of home movies from 1936-1960s. I want to try recording the picture from the wall instead of sending them in to be digitized (about $1300 for all)Two issues: the projector has a variable speed knob so there’s no way of knowing what speed it’s running at (fps)Second: I don’t know what the frame rate is of the captured film, did home portable 16mm cameras have a standard rate?When I try to capture with my video camera I get rolling bars and blurred frames because the recording frame rate (I set it to 1/30) is out of sync with the projector. Anyone have any advice?
This is an example of what happens
>>4310994
>>4310992If your phone can do 120fps video capture do test recordings of projected film, playback footage at 30 fps and calculate framerate by counting frames lolShould be able to dial it in that way?
>>4310992buy a small rearscreen projector/build your own from the material and record it that way. DIY telecine.
>telecinethe fuckis it the 1990s?did I travel back in time??either buy a dedicated scanner or jerryrig some DSLR scanning setup or somethingbut whatever you do DO NOT telecinefucking zoomers
>>4311150>buy a dedicated scannerOk.
>>431115016mm scanning is expensive as hell bro. I told you I was quoted $1300 for the whole set, and it’s not even my home movies. But most of the stuff was shot on Kodachrome so it looks beautiful and I want to preserve what I can before vinegar syndrome kicks in
>>4311204Kodak Slide N Scan is 180 bucksIT8 Kodachrome target is another 50 if you want true to life coloursthis being a photoboard I would assume OP has a dSLR or something and if he is at least a little bit resourceful then throwing together a scanning rig is easyrecording of off a screen when he can't even guarantee the framerate is going to be a pain in the ass>>4311258do you even know what a telecine is?you are going to slaughter these reelsbetter to pay the 1300
>>4311264Maybe telecine was the wrong word. I’m using a dslr to record the projection on the wall but there’s no way to sync frame rates when you don’t know what they are
>>4311275yes, that's why you need to scan it then convert it to a normal, progressive video
>>4310992>so there’s no way of knowing what speed it’s running at (fps)its called a laser tachometer and a paint pen or some white tape. you can get it on amazon for like $20 >When I try to capture with my video camera I get rolling bars and blurred frames because the recording frame rate (I set it to 1/30) is out of sync with the projector. Anyone have any advice?assuming your camera has anti-flicker features to keep it from catching flickering from indoor lighting, try running the projector at 60fps assuming you're in the US in hopes that it'll detect the projector flicker and AC lighting induced flicker
>>4311264>scanning 16mm on a 35mm scannerYou would to manually line up every single frame which could take weeks to do a 3 minute video. I did a single scan in my 8100 opticfilm>>431128960fps on the projector would destroy it lol. I figure old home cameras didn’t record past 30fps so the projector would hover somewhere around there[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]Camera-Specific Properties:PhotographerAJImage-Specific Properties:
>>4311312going by the fact that 1300 USD is a lot he will have to spend the timeit's like that every timeeither spend the moneyor the time
>>4310994That is actually a funny video.
>>4311319For me yes, If they were my grandpas movies it would be worth my money but I got these second hand from an estate sale, I’m guessing he’s the kid in these videos. He was 95 when I saw him.I’m mostly interested in the historical aspect of these, his parents were pretty wealthy in these videos and a lot of places they visit are very different now >>4311322After watching almost 4 hours of home movies I feel like this family would’ve been cool to live with lol
I do have some old reels that came bundled with some gear i bought and it would be cool to see what is on them.[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]Camera-Specific Properties:Image-Specific Properties:
>>4311312I didn't realize 16mm frames were so close to each other, I guess it's nice that almost no film gets wasted.Epson Scan (with V600 and V850 that I have at least) can auto-detect frames from 35mm strips. I wonder if it would be smart enough to detect 16mm frames in the same mode. The 35mm holders hold either 3 or 4 6-frame 35mm strips, so best case you'd have 48 16mm frames per cycle. So at least 2 seconds of footage. But it's at least 5 minutes of work (setting up film strips and scanning itself) per holder, so not really viable. And you'd have to cut the film into strips, too, which sucks.I wonder if you could build a dslr scanning rig, have reels attached on both sides of lightbox, and have RPi it something controlling motor attached to one of the reels, and automatically trigger the camera too. You could probably automate cropping and exporting the frames to prores or something too. Would be an involved but pretty cool project to do.
>>4311312>60fps on the projector would destroy it lol.stop being a pussy, other people have done ithttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HB2IfhYkIpI
>>4311322Life looked good back then. This family has 16mm Kodachrome color video of LA, Florida, Hawaii, Gautemala, Mexico, Sweden and, South America all from the 1940-60s. That alone is pretty neat.
