Comments

Eagle Six wrote on 7/25/2016, 4:54 PM
Hi Puck,

No. You can burn 1080 Blu-ray from your 4k project.


Best Regards......George

System Specs......
Corsair Obsidian Series 450D ATX Mid Tower
Asus X99-A II LGA 2011-v3, Intel X99 SATA 6 Gb/s USB 3.1/3.0 ATX Intel Motherboard
Intel Core i7-6800K 15M Broadwell-E, 6 core 3.4 GHz LGA 2011-v3 (overclocked 20%)
64GB Corsair Vengeance LPX DDR4 3200
Corsair Hydro Series H110i GTX 280mm Extreme Performance Liquid CPU Cooler
MSI Radeon R9 390 DirectX 12 8GB Video Card
Corsair RMx Series RM750X 740W 80 Plus Gold power pack
Samsung 970 EVO NVMe M.2 boot drive
Corsair Neutron XT 2.5 480GB SATA III SSD - video work drive
Western Digitial 1TB 7200 RPM SATA - video work drive
Western Digital Black 6TB 7200 RPM SATA 6Bb/s 128MB Cache 3.5 data drive

Bluray Disc burner drive
2x 1080p monitors
Microsoft Window 10 Pro
DaVinci Resolve Studio 16 pb2
SVP13, MVP15, MVP16, SMSP13, MVMS15, MVMSP15, MVMSP16

videoITguy wrote on 7/25/2016, 6:20 PM
4k is a current Blu-ray standard developed by the appropriate committee. However, there is no consumer software that is available to author 4k discs, and further there is no universal way to play such an encoded disc on hardware that does not yet exist.

Note the current generation of Blu-ray players are meant to be compatible in passing 4k stream playback to a 4k equipped monitor, but again there is NOT any available disc media that can be input into the player to take advantage of this.
musicvid10 wrote on 7/26/2016, 4:02 PM
Hi again Puck,
I want to be sure you are clear on the information that was offered in your previous thread before venturing further down this path.

-- You will not turn 8mm film into HD anything, -- not BluRay, 4K, nada. Inflating is another word for "adding air."
-- Your 8mm color film resolves about 90-150 lines of analog resolution, give or take, far below that of Standard Definition video. So DVD resolution is plenty good for your source.
-- Upsampling low-resolution images to HD dimensions is not better, it just makes the film grain larger. No amount of software noise reduction is going to eliminate that. You will not gain detail, resolution, or motion quality by upsampling to some ridiculous factor. No free lunches at this joint.
-- Much better than upsampling your film images, most people will agree that hardware (player) upsampling is MUCH better -- that means capturing your film in Standard Definition, burn to a regular DVD (you've got frame rate issues that need to be dealt with nonetheless), and play on an upsampling player to your large-screen teevee.

You may wish to return to your original topic in the Movie Studio forum, and respond to the advice being offered there, because it is good advice..
--
puck1263 wrote on 7/26/2016, 7:08 PM
Thanks. I wasn't asking just for a super 8mm transfer project.

I was considering updating my iphone, which will shoot 4k. I was just wondering, once I have the footage, what can I do with it. At this point, it looks like wait until the committees decide what to do and then buy updated software, and perhaps hardware.
videoITguy wrote on 7/26/2016, 7:31 PM
Your use of 4k video (particularly simple Iphone) will be limited to edits in VegasPro at near native res and then playing back the edit on a 4k monitor.

Most practical to just allow 4k to be rendered as 1080i and pushed to Blu-ray.
ralph-nelson wrote on 9/1/2016, 12:21 AM
  1. @ Musicvid10: The horizontal dimention of 8mm is about 4mm, Super 8 raises it to around 5mm.  Kodachrome was capable of close to 100 lines per mm.  With a 4x3 aspect ratio 1080 is overkill but 720p might not be.  720dpi divided by 1.6 yields 450 lines res.  Of course you would need a really excellent transfer!
Musicvid wrote on 9/1/2016, 8:14 PM

Ralph,

Not talking about theoretical film resolution here -- by the time the crappy LENS resolution, transport stability, film curvature, base interference, film storage conditions, etc. etc. are figured in, my numbers are indeed quite generous, having been arrived at by Technicolor film labs, where I worked in Cine QC from 1970-1973.


 

Musicvid wrote on 9/1/2016, 9:46 PM

Oh, and welcome to the forums, Ralph. One of the best film archivists in the US hangs out here occasionally, and even his 16mm transfers are SD AVI, I think. 

My very limited experience tells me that very high resolution transfers or frame scanning of such marginal material produces such sharp grain (noise) as to be both visually objectionable and produces cumbersome file sizes when encoded to long-GOP formats. The time it takes to run this stuff through Neat, NLMeans, or even a simple low-level filter before encoding is sufferable, to say the least. Hope this makes some sense.