NetNews Usenet Archive 1992 #26/NN_1992_26.iso/spool/comp/sys/sgi/16161

Text File | 1992-11-09 | 28.3 KB | 751 lines

Newsgroups: comp.sys.sgi
Path: sparky!uunet!think.com!sdd.hp.com!ux1.cso.uiuc.edu!news.iastate.edu!pi.eai.iastate.edu!boylan
From: [e-mail] (Terran Boylan)
Subject: SUMMARY of 35mm film info
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Sender: [e-mail] (USENET News System)
Organization: Engineering Animation, Inc.
Date: Mon, 9 Nov 1992 17:41:55 GMT
Lines: 740

I said that I would post a summary of responses I received for information
on Digital to 35mm movie film transfer.  I received quite a few replies
(13 in all), and thanks to everybody who replied.

FILM TRANSFER COSTS

It looks like there are very few service bureaus that do this kind of
work, and it's pretty expensive.  The two that I got hard information from
are:

Hannaway and Associates (Boulder, CO)
           [phone] ............... $8/frame
RFX (Hollywood, CA)
           [phone] ............... $5/frame
                            (for 70mm)   $10/frame

These prices are just for exposing the film.  Film stock costs, processing,
etc. is left to you.

RENDERING RESOLUTION

My assumption that the CGI community has not reached a consensus as to what
the "practical digital resoultion" of 35mm film is proved to be correct.
The most common answer from people who had actually worked with 35mm film
was about 2K horizontal resolution.


ORIGINAL POST
-------------

Once again I turn to the net as my best source of
information....

Our computer animation company is looking at making
a brief journey over the intimidating wall that separates
film from video.  (From D-1 resolution to 35mm film.)

We have a client that is interested in having us take the
scientific visualization that we have been doing for them
into the film domain.

Our animation/visualization software is proprietary.  Re-writing
the software which is optimized for video resolution to be suitable
for 35mm won't be a big deal.

Getting the digital images transferred to 35mm film, film editing, film/sound
sync, answer prints, film duplication, etc. is outside my area of
comfortable expertise.  (I worked on 16mm film projects in college, but
my experience as a professional has been strictly video.)

So help me out.  I need to know:

  1) Have we as a computer animation community reached any kind
     of consensus regarding "sufficient" image resolution for 35mm
     film?
     -- 720 by 486 (Wasn't the stuff for _Lawnmower Man_ done at D-1 res?)
     -- 1280 by 1024? (Fits on my SGI screen -- hot damn!)
     -- 2560 by 2048? (4 screensize quadrant images)
  2) What is the range of cost/frame for digital to film transfer?
     -- $1/frame?
     -- $200/sec?
     -- 50 cents/foot?
  3) What is involved in doing polarized-light 3-D 35mm film like Pixar
     did at SIGGRAPH with _Knick Knack_?  What was the film production
     end (excluding rendering expenses) of the budget like?

I need to have a good idea before Monday of the cost of mounting
a film production like this.  The final product will be in the
5 to 10 min range.
     -- < $10K ?
     -- $10K to $25K ?
     -- $25K to $100K ?
     -- > $100K ?

I know there's a non-solicitation policy on the net, but if you are
an employee at a company that performs these types of services,
please contact me.  Please include price estimates and/or antecdotal budget
experiences.

Thank you for your time.  I will try to post a summary of whatever
information I receive unless people providing the information
specify that they want me to keep it confidential.

Peace,

Terran J



RESPONSE #1
-------------
From [e-mail]  Wed Nov  4 22:12:02 1992
Received: from vixvax.mgi.com by pi.eai.iastate.edu via SMTP (920330.SGI/920502.SGI.AUTO)
    for boylan id AA19204; Wed, 4 Nov 92 22:12:02 -0600
Received: by vixvax.mgi.com (MX V2.3) id 3492; Wed, 04 Nov 1992 22:17:46 CST
Date: Wed, 04 Nov 1992 22:17:46 CST
From: [e-mail]
Reply-To: [e-mail]
To: boylan
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
Subject: 35mm Film Animation Production

Our company makes film recorders.  The special effects of Terminator II, Hook
and many other film were recorded to 35mm film with our equipment.  2 of
our staff received a technical Academy Award this past spring.

It sounds like you don't want our equipment so much as a bureau that will do the
work of recording images from files you make to the proper film.

Try RFX in Hollywood.

I will forward your NEWs posting to our cine product expert but he only connects
to the computer about once a week.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Jim Teter                     Internet:      [e-mail]
Management Graphics, Inc.             MGI Main:    [phone]
1401 East 79th St.                 MGI FAX:     [phone]
Minneapolis, Minnesota 55425-1128 USA         Desk /vmail: [phone]


RESPONSE #2
-------------
From [e-mail]  Wed Nov  4 18:49:04 1992
Received: from fciad2.bsd.uchicago.edu by pi.eai.iastate.edu via SMTP (920330.SGI/920502.SGI.AUTO)
    for boylan id AA18871; Wed, 4 Nov 92 18:49:04 -0600
Received: by fciad2.bsd.uchicago.edu (/\==/\ Smail3.1.26.7 #26.2)
    id <[e-mail]>; Wed, 4 Nov 92 18:54 CST
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
Date: Wed, 4 Nov 92 18:54 CST
From: [e-mail] (chris williams)
To: boylan
Subject: Re: 35mm Film Animation production
Newsgroups: comp.graphics
In-Reply-To: <[e-mail]>
Organization: FCIA Univ. of Chicago
Cc:

In article <[e-mail]> you write:
>Once again I turn to the net as my best source of
>information....
>
>Our computer animation company is looking at making
>a brief journey over the intimidating wall that separates
>film from video.  (From D-1 resolution to 35mm film.)

   A friend called me this afternoon with the same question, "How do
we get to 35MM for a client." I will be happy to share everything I find
out, and any info in return would be gratefully accepted. Thanks.

                                  Chris Williams
                                     [e-mail]


RESPONSE #3
-------------
From [e-mail]  Wed Nov  4 13:24:57 1992
Received: from apple.com by pi.eai.iastate.edu via SMTP (920330.SGI/920502.SGI.AUTO)
    for boylan id AA17450; Wed, 4 Nov 92 13:24:57 -0600
Received: from kloo.taligent.com by apple.com with SMTP (5.61/7-Aug-1992-eef)
    id AA29597; Wed, 4 Nov 92 11:30:31 -0800
    for [e-mail]
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
Date: Wed, 4 Nov 1992 11:30:37 -0800
To: boylan
From: John Peterson <[e-mail]>

In article <[e-mail]> Terran Boylan,
[e-mail] writes:
>  1) Have we as a computer animation community reached any kind
>     of consensus regarding "sufficient" image resolution for 35mm
>     film?
>     -- 720 by 486 (Wasn't the stuff for _Lawnmower Man_ done at D-1 res?)
>     -- 1280 by 1024? (Fits on my SGI screen -- hot damn!)
>     -- 2560 by 2048? (4 screensize quadrant images)

According to an ex-ILM hand at SIGGRAPH, the number they found was
1700x1100.  Resolutions beyond that didn't produce any improvement.


RESPONSE #4
-------------
From [e-mail]  Wed Nov  4 11:03:08 1992
Received: from usc.edu by pi.eai.iastate.edu via SMTP (920330.SGI/920502.SGI.AUTO)
    for boylan id AA17084; Wed, 4 Nov 92 11:03:08 -0600
Received: from celia.UUCP by usc.edu (5.64+/SMI-3.0DEV3-USC+2.3) from user uucp
    id AA01141; Wed, 4 Nov 92 09:08:46 PST
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
Received: by celia; Wed, 4 Nov 92 08:21:20 -0800
Date: Wed, 4 Nov 92 08:21:20 -0800
From: Will McCown <[e-mail]>
To: boylan
Subject: Re: 35mm Computer Animation
Newsgroups: comp.sys.sgi
In-Reply-To: <[e-mail]>
Organization: Rhythm & Hues, Inc., Hollywood
Cc:

In article <[e-mail]> you write:
>
>So help me out.  I need to know:
>
>  1) Have we as a computer animation community reached any kind
>     of consensus regarding "sufficient" image resolution for 35mm
>     film?
>     -- 720 by 486 (Wasn't the stuff for _Lawnmower Man_ done at D-1 res?)
>     -- 1280 by 1024? (Fits on my SGI screen -- hot damn!)
>     -- 2560 by 2048? (4 screensize quadrant images)
No not really,  It is generally believed that 35mm requires at least
3K-4K across the width of the film.  Most of the "better" work done
to date has been at approximately 2K resolution (Terminator II for example),
we use 2048x1536 for most things here.   When the print stocks catch up
with the current round of resolution improvements then we will probably
have to go to 4096x3072

>  2) What is the range of cost/frame for digital to film transfer?
>     -- $1/frame?
>     -- $200/sec?
>     -- 50 cents/foot?
RFX Inc, charges $5/frame + stock and development costs (typical shots
are a lab minimum charge of about $120 for develop and one print).
You can reach them at [phone].
The Management Graphics Solitare is the current standard film recorder
in the film industry, closely followed by the Celco.  A 35mm setup
will run you about $80K.


>  3) What is involved in doing polarized-light 3-D 35mm film like Pixar
>     did at SIGGRAPH with _Knick Knack_?  What was the film production
>     end (excluding rendering expenses) of the budget like?
I believe all that is necessary is to shoot your scene twice with slightly
different points of view.  The rest is in the projection and glasses.

>I need to have a good idea before Monday of the cost of mounting
>a film production like this.  The final product will be in the
>5 to 10 min range.
>     -- < $10K ?
>     -- $10K to $25K ?
>     -- $25K to $100K ?
>     -- > $100K ?
>
That will depend very strongly upon the amount of computation your images
require, and the amount of man-power required to produce them.  As for the
task of getting the images to film, you should figure at least two if not
three complete transfers to film.  (You will really do a whole bunch of tests
to make sure thing look the way you want them and then hopefully only
shoot each whole scene once, maybe twice if something goes wrong.)

--

Will McCown, Rhythm & Hues, Inc., Hollywood CA. [phone]
INTERNET: celia![e-mail]     or [e-mail]


RESPONSE #5
-------------
From [e-mail]  Wed Nov  4 10:29:35 1992
Received: from grissom.larc.nasa.gov by pi.eai.iastate.edu via SMTP (920330.SGI/920502.SGI.AUTO)
    for boylan id AA16928; Wed, 4 Nov 92 10:29:35 -0600
Received: by grissom.larc.nasa.gov (4.1/server2.4)
    id AA04258; Wed, 4 Nov 92 11:35:07 EST
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
Date: Wed, 4 Nov 92 11:35:07 EST
From: Scott Dorsey <[e-mail]>
To: boylan
Subject: Re: 35mm Computer Animation
Newsgroups: comp.sys.sgi
In-Reply-To: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
Organization: NASA Langley Research Center and Reptile Farm
Cc:

>|>
>|> Our computer animation company is looking at making
>|> a brief journey over the intimidating wall that separates
>|> film from video.  (From D-1 resolution to 35mm film.)
>|>
>|> We have a client that is interested in having us take the
>|> scientific visualization that we have been doing for them
>|> into the film domain.

Well, a couple of cheap and dirty choices:

1. frame by frame shooting straight off the monitor.  Keep the shutter angle
of the camera as wide as possible and use a flatfield lens.  If you keep the
shutter open for 1/30 or longer and use a 120' shutter angle, you will have
no problem with uneven images.  If you don't, you're in trouble.

2. Using a microfilm generator.  These are basically vector CRTs of
extremely high resolution with pin-registered cameras attached.  You won't
get a very wide tonal scale with this, but it's cheap to say the least.  I
used to do this years ago with a Canon unit intended for 16mm perfed
microfilm, but I ran Double-X negative film into instead.

>|>
>|> Our animation/visualization software is proprietary.  Re-writing
>|> the software which is optimized for video resolution to be suitable
>|> for 35mm won't be a big deal.

Yes, but can you write the software required to drive the film recorder?
If you don't mind doing that, there are plenty of choices available.  I
have used the IPI film recorders, and a modified Polaroid unit, attached
to my aging Vax at home for amazing quality.  I have used the new Kodak
machine briefly, but only with quick and dirty 16mm stuff.

>|>
>|> Getting the digital images transferred to 35mm film, film editing, film/sound
>|> sync, answer prints, film duplication, etc. is outside my area of
>|> comfortable expertise.  (I worked on 16mm film projects in college, but
>|> my experience as a professional has been strictly video.)
>|>
>|> So help me out.  I need to know:
>|>
>|>   1) Have we as a computer animation community reached any kind
>|>      of consensus regarding "sufficient" image resolution for 35mm
>|>      film?
>|>      -- 720 by 486 (Wasn't the stuff for _Lawnmower Man_ done at D-1 res?)
>|>      -- 1280 by 1024? (Fits on my SGI screen -- hot damn!)
>|>      -- 2560 by 2048? (4 screensize quadrant images)

35mm 7248 stock will give you about 12,500 x 12,500 resolution, so if you
want something indistinguishable from original material, that's your upper
limit.  You can use a grainy stock (or a print film) in order to hide the
lack of resolution (which is what was done for Terminator 2), but the folks
in the front row will definitely notice the difference.

>|>   2) What is the range of cost/frame for digital to film transfer?
>|>      -- $1/frame?
>|>      -- $200/sec?
>|>      -- 50 cents/foot?

If you do it yourself, it's free.  Last I looked, tape to film transfer
(just sleazy NTSC stuff) was about $1/ft, which is why I bought a telecine
camera last month.  There are houses that you can ship it out to (like IL&M)
if you have SGI graphics files, but they will charge on a time and materials
basis (and they are universally union shops, so you can imagine what time
and materials cost).
--scott


RESPONSE #6
-------------
From [e-mail]  Wed Nov  4 10:06:35 1992
Received: from gwha.com by pi.eai.iastate.edu via SMTP (920330.SGI/920502.SGI.AUTO)
    for boylan id AA16810; Wed, 4 Nov 92 10:06:35 -0600
Received: by gwha.com (920330.SGI/4.7)
    id AA00320; Wed, 4 Nov 92 09:12:47 -0700
From: J. Gabriel Foster <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
Subject: Digital to Film
To: boylan
Date: Wed, 4 Nov 92 9:12:46 MST
X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.3 PL11]

Hello,
    I saw your news message on your search for digital to film.
    We provide this as a service on a regular basis to our clients.
    Please contact us at 303-440-9631 and ask for Wyndham Hannaway,
    He can give you full information on pricing, format, etc.

    Note: Usually the resolution we record at is:
        2048x1366

    Hope we can help you,
        --> Gabe

> J. Gabriel Foster ([e-mail])
> GW Hannaway & Associates, 839 Pearl Street, Boulder, CO 80302
> Voice: [phone], Fax: [phone]


RESPONSE #7
-------------
From [e-mail]  Wed Nov  4 09:46:06 1992
Received: from SGI.COM by pi.eai.iastate.edu via SMTP (920330.SGI/920502.SGI.AUTO)
    for boylan id AA16613; Wed, 4 Nov 92 09:46:06 -0600
Received: from relay.sgi.com by sgi.sgi.com via SMTP (920330.SGI/910110.SGI)
    for [e-mail] id AA27989; Wed, 4 Nov 92 07:51:42 -0800
Received: from sgihoust.houst.sgi.com by relay.sgi.com via SMTP (920330.SGI/920502.SGI)
    for @sgi.sgi.com:[e-mail] id AA23027; Wed, 4 Nov 92 07:51:40 -0800
Received: from blivet.houst.sgi.com by sgihoust.houst.sgi.com via SMTP (911016.SGI/910805.SGI)
    for @relay.sgi.com:[e-mail] id AA15740; Wed, 4 Nov 92 09:51:16 -0600
Received: by blivet.houst.sgi.com (911016.SGI/910805.SGI)
    for @sgihoust.houst.sgi.com:[e-mail] id AA07604; Wed, 4 Nov 92 09:51:05 -0600
Date: Wed, 4 Nov 92 09:51:05 -0600
From: [e-mail] (Reuel Nash)
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: boylan
Cc:
Subject: Re: 35mm Computer Animation


In article <[e-mail]>, you write:
> I need to have a good idea before Monday of the cost of mounting
> a film production like this.  The final product will be in the
> 5 to 10 min range.
>

There is an SGI Geometry Partner named Wyndam Hannaway who (I believe)
does this kind of work all the time. He's at Hannaway & Associates in
Boulder, CO.  [phone]


RESPONSE #8
-------------
From [e-mail]  Wed Nov  4 07:14:17 1992
Received: from net.nrl.navy.mil by pi.eai.iastate.edu via SMTP (920330.SGI/920502.SGI.AUTO)
    for boylan id AA16194; Wed, 4 Nov 92 07:14:17 -0600
Received: by roadkill.nrl.navy.mil (920330.SGI/911001.SGI)
    for @net.nrl.navy.mil:[e-mail] id AA05636; Wed, 4 Nov 92 08:19:42 -0500
Date: Wed, 4 Nov 92 08:19:42 -0500
From: [e-mail] (Larry Schuette)
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: boylan
Subject: 35mm movie


hi terran,
    I will take a stab at your questions....  We have a Focus
graphics 35mm movie machine hooked up to a iris.  We have NOT made
a 35mm movie yet (so you know our experience level).   I'm estimating
under 10K for direct costs on a 5 minute movie.

Here are some of the costs involved.

35mm movie creator  -- focus graphics --- 20K

Kodak 5247 Negative film,  $.4122 per foot, 90' is 1 minute

Steps to movie creatation
us = me
CL = photo lab
editor = paul shaefer look alike with beret

i.  shoot film                                                  (us)
ii. Process film (negative)  $.12 per foot                      (CL)
iii. make work print, this is a positive that will be edited.   (CL)
iv.  edit work print.  deleting/moving                         (editor)
v.  conform negative (this means getting the original negative (editor)
        to sequence like the workprint.  There are numbers on
        the edge of the film that allows this to be done.
vi. make answer print, laying optical audio track down.  Audio  (CL)
        mastering is done elsewhere- gives CL audio track
vii. make vhs from 35mm, also duplicate 35mm movies             (CL)


Cost is a function of a. length, b. negative or positive working print
c. audio or not, d.  number of edits/dissolves required.

hope this helps,
larry

    ----------------------------------------------------------------------
    "The quality of the kite matters little.  Success depends upon
        the man who sits in it."        BMv. Richthofen

Lawrence C. Schuette              [e-mail]
Code 7133                  [phone]
Naval Research Laboratory          [phone] (fax)
Washington D.C.    20375-5320


RESPONSE #9
-------------
From [e-mail]  Tue Nov  3 20:32:57 1992
Received: from SGI.COM by pi.eai.iastate.edu via SMTP (920330.SGI/920502.SGI.AUTO)
    for boylan id AA15389; Tue, 3 Nov 92 20:32:57 -0600
Received: from [192.26.61.203] by sgi.sgi.com via SMTP (920330.SGI/910110.SGI)
    for [e-mail] id AA19355; Tue, 3 Nov 92 18:38:34 -0800
Received: by bent.wpd.sgi.com (920330.SGI/911001.SGI)
    for @sgi.sgi.com:[e-mail] id AA02876; Tue, 3 Nov 92 18:38:33 -0800
Date: Tue, 3 Nov 92 18:38:33 -0800
From: [e-mail] (David (Duis) Story)
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: boylan
Subject: Re: 35mm Computer Animation
Newsgroups: comp.sys.sgi
In-Reply-To: <[e-mail]>
Organization: Silicon Graphics, Inc.
Cc:

In article <[e-mail]> you write:

>Thank you for your time.  I will try to post a summary of whatever
>information I receive unless people providing the information
>specify that they want me to keep it confidential.

Please include me in that summary.  I'm very interested in slide/film
output from SGI's machines -- I'm an engineer on our Impressario
("PrintVision") product, and it's about time we supported slide
recorders and/or film recorders.

Cheers,

David Story                                    Silicon Graphics, Inc.
[e-mail]                Mountain View, California


RESPONSE #10
-------------
From [e-mail]  Thu Nov  5 13:54:40 1992
Received: from ben.uknet.ac.uk by pi.eai.iastate.edu via SMTP (920330.SGI/920502.SGI.AUTO)
    for boylan id AA01347; Thu, 5 Nov 92 13:54:40 -0600
Received: from eros.uknet.ac.uk by ben.uknet.ac.uk via UKIP with SMTP (PP)
          id <[e-mail]>; Thu, 5 Nov 1992 14:46:11 +0000
Received: from abekrd.co.uk by eros.uknet.ac.uk with UUCP
          id <[e-mail]>; Thu, 5 Nov 1992 14:37:10 +0000
Received: from willow.abekrd.co.uk by abekrd.abekrd.co.uk;
          Thu, 5 Nov 92 09:09:18 GMT
From: Simon Aglionby <[e-mail]>
Date: Thu, 5 Nov 92 09:09:16 GMT
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: boylan
Subject: Re: Digital animation to 35mm film
Newsgroups: comp.graphics.animation
References: <[e-mail]>


In comp.graphics.animation you write:


>Once again I turn to the net as my best source of
>information....

>Our computer animation company is looking at making
>a brief journey over the intimidating wall that separates
>film from video.  (From D-1 resolution to 35mm film.)


Abekas, for whom I am a hardware engineer, sell D1 video disk
recorders that are used by several of our customers for just this kind
of film transfer work.  If I understand the process correctly, D1 is
adequate resolution, although the film recorders use interpolation to
reduce the pixellation effects that you'd otherwise get on 16/35 mm
film.  (The video disk recorder is in the loop because the film
recorders do 3 colour sequential exposures of the same frame, so its
not a real time process, therefore _very_ hard on a D1 tape deck.)

Unfortunately I don't have access to our US customer list to point you
at a possible facilities house "in your area".  However our US head
office will do, and Steve Kilisky (Disk Recorder Product Manager) on
[phone] should be able to give you some contacts, if you don't
get any better answers.  I think the driving factor on cost is going
to be machine time, but that's guessing; better to find out for real.

Hope this is some help.


Simon Aglionby
Abekas Video Systems Ltd
READING, RG3 1EA, UK


RESPONSE #11
-------------
From [e-mail]  Fri Nov  6 07:43:45 1992
Received: from Rosa.nbr.no by pi.eai.iastate.edu via SMTP (920330.SGI/920502.SGI.AUTO)
    for boylan id AA03301; Fri, 6 Nov 92 07:43:45 -0600
Received: by rosa.nbr.no (5.57/Ultrix3.0-C)
    id AA14933; Fri, 6 Nov 92 14:48:35 +0100
Received: From BENONI/WORKQUEUE by mailgw.nbr.no
          via Charon 3.4 with IPX id 100.921106144725.416;
          06 Nov 92 14:47:47 -0500
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: boylan (Terran Boylan)
From: "Lars Gaustad"  <[e-mail]>
Organization: The Norwegian Library, Rana
Date:     6 Nov 1992 15:52:12GMT+1
Subject:  digital to 35mm FILM
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Priority: normal
X-Mailer: Pegasus Mail/Mac v2.0

Try Mike Boudry, Computer Film Company, London.
Experieced and flexible in resolution, even PAL looks nice on screen.
Sorry, I dont have adress og phonrnumber
 Not as time goes by,
but as time comes by


RESPONSE #12
-------------
From [e-mail]  Fri Nov  6 01:14:27 1992
Received: from vixvax.mgi.com by pi.eai.iastate.edu via SMTP (920330.SGI/920502.SGI.AUTO)
    for boylan id AA02851; Fri, 6 Nov 92 01:14:27 -0600
Received: by vixvax.mgi.com (MX V2.3) id 3694; Fri, 06 Nov 1992 01:20:05 CST
Date: Fri, 06 Nov 1992 01:20:05 CST
From: [e-mail]
Reply-To: [e-mail]
To: boylan
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
Subject: 35mm Computer Animation


Terran:

    I'm sure if any one from Management Graphics has contacted you
    but I'll make my self available for answering some of your
    questions.

    We are a manufacturer of digital film recorders -- the Solitaire
    family.


>  1) Have we as a computer animation community reached any kind
>     of consensus regarding "sufficient" image resolution for 35mm
>     film?
>     -- 720 by 486 (Wasn't the stuff for _Lawnmower Man_ done at D-1 res?)
>     -- 1280 by 1024? (Fits on my SGI screen -- hot damn!)
>     -- 2560 by 2048? (4 screensize quadrant images)

    State of the art Hollywood (T2, Backdraft, Hook, etc...)
    renders at 3K  (3072 x 2048) per frame  24 frames per second
    you need at least 12 original frames per second for good
    (Hollywood state of the art) animation.

>  2) What is the range of cost/frame for digital to film transfer?
>     -- $1/frame?
>     -- $200/sec?
>     -- 50 cents/foot?

    I can't help you here because we make the equipment.  If you want,
    I can put you in touch with some companies that do this type of
    work.

>  3) What is involved in doing polarized-light 3-D 35mm film like Pixar
>     did at SIGGRAPH with _Knick Knack_?  What was the film production
>     end (excluding rendering expenses) of the budget like?

>I need to have a good idea before Monday of the cost of mounting
>a film production like this.  The final product will be in the
>5 to 10 min range.
>     -- < $10K ?
>     -- $10K to $25K ?
>     -- $25K to $100K ?
>     -- > $100K ?

    Cost

        Rendering time  1440 frames per minute
        Imaging time  30 to 60 seconds per frame 3K resolution
        Purchase of equipment or service bureau time
        Production cost
        etc ...


    Hope some of this helps !!

            -Loren

--------------------------------------------------------------------------
                        Loren Schoenzeit
Office:        612-851-6123
Switch board:    612-854-1220            Management Graphics, Inc
FAX:        [phone]            1401 E 79th Street
Internet:    [e-mail]        Bloomington, MN 55425
--------------------------------------------------------------------------


RESPONSE #13
-------------
From [e-mail]  Thu Nov  5 18:23:59 1992
Received: from muwayb.ucs.unimelb.EDU.AU by pi.eai.iastate.edu via SMTP (920330.SGI/920502.SGI.AUTO)
    for boylan id AA02250; Thu, 5 Nov 92 18:23:59 -0600
Received: from werple.apana.org.au by muwayb.ucs.unimelb.edu.au (PMDF #2508 )
 id <[e-mail]>; Fri,
 6 Nov 1992 11:28:40 +1000
Received: by werple.apana.org.au id AA09832 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4.1 for
 [e-mail]); Fri, 6 Nov 1992 11:30:12 +1100
Date: 06 Nov 1992 11:30:12 +1100
From: James Gardiner <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: 35mm Computer Animation
To: boylan
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT
Newsgroups: comp.sys.sgi
References: <[e-mail]>

In comp.sys.sgi you write:

>(I know this isn't the _most_ appropriate newsgroup, but
> there seem to be a lot of knowledgeable folks here and
> the animation is being done on SGI equipment anyhow.)

>Once again I turn to the net as my best source of
>information....

>Our computer animation company is looking at making
>a brief journey over the intimidating wall that separates
>film from video.  (From D-1 resolution to 35mm film.)

Firstly, I would like a summery of what you are sent.

You will probably be sent some replies from some Indestry
prople but here are some of my ramblings.

My brother is into Vedio work like you.  We also have close
dealings with a UNI which runs a film and TV course.
They of course try to keep up with current Technology.
As you may know, the video industry is in a little bit of a
mess with resolution standards as HDTV starts to rear its
head and Video houses wonder what hugely expensive
equipment will show up to do whatever res is chosen.

Because of this Film has been considered in some ways
as a better way to bring live video into such high res
recorders.  Cameras that can record at HDTV res will
probably be a bit chunky for a long while.

This brings us the MAIN issue as seen by some but video
people I have met.  The biggest problem in the future is
the conversion of very high film images to digital and
back again.  This will be the most expensive phase.

Classics like Abyss (water tentical) are put to film with
a laser.  Considering the Huge res needed for cinima film,
no wonder.  The equimpent to do this is NOT common. I hear
manybe 3 units in the world.  Not something you would be
looking at.

Other techniques I have seen are very basic and simple.
Units that have a special screen from which you take
frame by frame down to the film.  I am not sure that
the unit I saw could do 35min.

You pay for the quality you want.

I am not a Film/TV person by occupation, my brother is one
and I hang around with them so much that I have picked this
up form general convosation.

I hope my input helped.

James


--
Terran J. Boylan, Sr. Artist/Programmer | "It's better to have loved
Engineering Animation, Inc.,  Ames, IA  | and lost than just to have
[phone] / [phone] (> 5PM) | lost." -- Dorky Dog