I bought one last year and it has been a great extra to my hobby work. I've made short films and put them onto SD cards for family and friends and they've been quite moved by the memories. An ideal way to to enjoy the past.
Thank you for spending the time to put this video together! Your explanation of the 3 tabs on the film guide and Frame adjustment helped me a lot. These features were not explained well in the instruction manual. Saved me lots of frustration ! thanks again!
I have the Wolverine pro and overall have been happy with it. Works very well with color reversal and B&W negative or reversal films (never tried color negative film with it). One thing the unit does hate is splices… it will hang up almost every time on a splice so you have to stop the scan or open the film gate and pull the splice manually through and then edit the sections together after scan is completed. I did about 50 rolls of very old film for my father in law last year and was quite amazed how well they came out even when played on a 55” TV. Agreed it’s not for someone trying to do serious filmmaking, but as an economical alternative to an expensive scanner it does the job.
You know, Dave, I really don't mind the overall quality of these little Pro machines either. I honestly think they do a pretty fair job for a budget option and definitely fine for sharing films with friends/family.
[I had a Wolverine, too] One of the "features" (design flaws) is that only one reel is motorized, and there's no clutch. [Reel-to-reel tape decks and movie projectors can send power to either or both reels (so you don't have to swap reels to rewind). And, there's a clutch to provide fairly low tension to the take-up reel when "playing". The clutch is bypassed for fast winding. These converters have no variation in tension between playing and fast-winding. It's no big deal to swap the reels to rewind, but the fixed tension is a problem. To have enough tension to fast wind (even with no braking on the other reel), it has too much tension for playing. Because there's so much tension, the converter has trouble registering/framing each frame. [Like a movie projector, the film is advanced one frame at a time, and the film stops with one frame lined up at the gate for it to be converted to a digital frame. There's an adjustment for the force on the film at the gate, but, to get it to work, the force is brutal - and the framing tends to drift.] I found it best to ease up on the gate force and to just let the film feed into a clean bowl on the floor next to the desk that the converter sat on. I removed all splices and separated all of the spliced reels and appended the .mp4 files with FFMPEG. [Many of the films that I converted were on 7" reels, and the converter could handle only 5" reels, so I had to split the spliced movies anyway.] One also has to fix the frame rate because film rates aren't the same as video. [The converter just copies each frame one-to-one to the digital file, but the video frame rate is that of normal digital video rather than the original (film) rate. And, because the input and output frame rates aren't evenly divisible, extra copies of some frames are inserted to pad things (by FFMPEG). And, FFMPEG, coming from the UNIX/POSIX/Linux world, is very user-unfriendly. [I like to call designs like this Calvinist. -They're designed to punish the user.] Abbreviate a time value? FFMPEG will get it wrong. Append one video to another with the exact same frame rate, and FFMPEG will set the frame rate on the output file to something completely different. It took a LOT of experimenting to get FFMPEG to do the right thing. -And, with no graphical interface, editing (trimming the beginning / end and separating unrelated scenes) took a lot of guessing/repeated attempts. I took extensive notes and included them when I finished my home videos and donated the converter to a library that has a do-it-yourself photo/film conversion studio. [Last time I looked, they still hadn't made it available. I suspect that they decided that it can't be handled by mere mortals.]
Excellent review/demo. I purchased the Wolverine Pro about a year ago and I would have returned it for a refund but my editing software saved the sale. The result right out of the machine was awful but thanks to an old version of PowerDirector I was able to post several reasonably nice home movies online for family and friends. A friend asked me to process her dad's super 8 combat movies he took in Vietnam. They were a challenge due to obviously a lot of camera shake but again the software came through. One word of advice I'd offer anyone using one of these types of machines is, avoid "cleaning the film" if at all possible. Some specks in a film are okay and just add to the "old movie" effect. I did "clean" some of mine. I cleaned away some content (as in color). But again, great video. I've been super busy and need to catch up on the videos I've missed.
Thanks, Dale!! Great advice on cleaning the film. I've actually done the same thing you mentioned and "cleaned" off some of the color. Not good! I only do a light cleaning if absolutely necessary.
So, I received one of these for Christmas and have so far worked on (8)-3inch reels and (1)-5inch. I find that it's VERY inconsistent. My reels are from the mid-70's and just tried one from the late-1950's. I clean them all prior to scanning I find that it catches on the output side of the gate far too often and then simply can no longer advance the film. Just clicks and clicks and rescans the same spot over and over. I've tried putting felt on one of the static rollers. I've even released the gate and stood there with a little bit of finger pressure on it. I often stand there with a little metal screw driver to apply back pressure on the film (after it leaves the gate / right before the first static roller). That sometimes helps as I think it helps keep the advancer sprocket engaged. Other times, it's futile. Then, with 4-6 copies of the scanned video, I knit them all together in an editor later...deleting bad scans / keeping good, etc. I think it has something to do with internal stresses / warping in the film causing it to rise up (slightly, underneath the gate) and not allowing the advancer/sprocket to push it forward. I'm pretty much at the point where I'm going to send all of mine off for processing at a professional lab and sell this on Ebay. I'm just done with this. While it may cost a smidge over $1K at a lab (for equivalent of (54)-3in reels), the amount of hours spent babysitting this thing for mediocre results just isn't worth it. Plus w/ that cost including color correction and cleaning - which you also need to do - I use 99% isopropyl alcohol - it does pay for itself. Like other comments stated below, it would be awesome if someone made a "pro-sumer" scanning device for around $1K.
Thank you for sharing your experiences with this machine, they're definitely hit & miss for sure. It would be awesome if there were a middle grade scanner in the $1K range, I think those would sell themselves. If you feel like it, send me an email at filmboy24@gmail.com, I have been using the Moviestuff RetroScan Universal 2K scanner for several years now. I scan film for people all the time and at about half the price of what you mentioned. Thanks again!!
Nice video! Just bought one of these units, pretty happy with performance. Bad splices have hung up in the gate, no big deal. Pulling SD card, after film ran out and forgot to stop record , got me into trouble with file number not incrementing. Without thinking about it I started recording a dummy short file before pulling card to be safe. Usually file number increments OK. The problem here is if you copy files off to PC OK, but the last file on SD could get overwritten, no warning prompt on device. Video editor image stabilization is a must. If you look at frame borders / sprocket hole, in video 24:04 , you will see what I will call frame bounce. So even source movies filmed on a tripod will be "jumpy" with out stabilization. Camera shake compounds this problem. I used a program called Power Director Pro to clean up video. Would be nice if a little larger file size was used to extract every bit of detail from film, but I would imagine not too much loss. Would I have paid $500 for higher resolution, probably after waiting so many years. Finally, some film from my father is 70 years old and looks great. Kodachrome. Some of the movies I filmed 40 years ago using Ektachrome, colors not quite so good.
My biggest issues with this unit (having digitized many super 8 films with it now), is the vertical jitter and the auto-white balance/exposure that happens during each cut. Plus, the sprocket hole on the left side of the frame bleeds/glows light through that hole onto the image area. Very noticeable on darker scenes. I've had to do a lot if image stabilization and cleanup in post. I've learned that the SD card itself can be an issue with jittering recording/playback, but I've checked and made sure I'm using the correct card type and formatting. I'm guessing the vertical jitter is mostly because there is only one sprocket/claw, not enough to register the film steadily in place for each frame. For the price, it's better than shooting it off of a wall, though.
Yes, definitely not top of the line by any means but as you said, probably better than shooting off the wall. I will say that even my MovieStuff RetroScan unit can give you some light bleed in real dark scenes and I almost always have to stabilize in post. The picture quality is night and day different though. Thanks for watching, I appreciate it!!
Thanks, yes, as I mentioned in my post, I had made sure that the correct card type and formatting had been done. Thank goodness for post production fixes! @MrmelodyUs
If yours is like mine, the vertical jitter is caused by the excessive tension on the take-up reel. -Because there's no bypassable clutch; for fast wind to work, they have too much tension in "play" mode. As mentioned in my reply to another reply, I just fed the film into a clean bowl on the floor next to the desk that the converter sat on. That way, no excessive take-up tension to screw up frame registration - and no jitter. [I have no idea how the SD card format could possibly cause jitter.]
@@larrycamilli9589thanks. But I have tried transferring the film without the take up reel, letting it pool up into a box. I’ve gotten the same results. Personally, I think the unit needs more than one claw to register the film in place as it is held in the gate. Luckily, I’m a Vfx artist so I can fix all of that in post.
Great demo, Michael! I like that you encourage people to work with film, avoiding the high cost of professional processing and scanning and still enjoy the results. Of course you noticed that this particular scan turned the highlights into yellow. Not much you can do about it in post, except with some crazy tweaking and overlaying perhaps. I also noticed that this particular roll doesn't look like the lush old Kodachrome, but rather like Orwo. But enough ranting, thanks for doing what you do. I look forward to your first Super 16mm narrative film 😉😉😉😎
Thanks, Christian! Yep, definitely a lot of yellow tone came through on the positive film. I probably could've done a better job with the color grading but...yeah...😆 I long for the day I make a 16mm feature. Funny, my older brother was visiting the other day and asking just what it would take to get that accomplished. A great story, a lot of work and dedication, a little $$ and a whole lot of help, I told him. I have a few of those knocked out, just need to piece the rest together 😉
@@Filmboy24 Well I would start on a 16mm film (doesn't need to be a full feature) at this very moment if I could. I work my butt off as a musician and I just can't manage to have the time or the money at the moment. Times are hard. Hopefully I will be able to get a much better paid job soon and make some cash. Add to that the fact that every single person who could greatly contribute with their skills is located in the US. Hopefully one day before I get too old.... I would love seeing you working on such an endeavor. It is very hard getting it off the ground, that's why you almost never see it from a member of the 8mm and 16mm film community, except for Emil, who is just adding the finishing touches to his latest feature film.
@@truefilm6991 You're absolutely right, my friend. Making a "real" film is such a huge undertaking. I've produced a lot of short movies and even those are big undertakings. I've wanted to shoot a feature film, on film, for over 30 years now and just never have. Probably more about excuses for me than anything but I do keep dreaming 😃
Good review nice to see this at a price that more reflects it's quality. The other one was always too expensive at £399. This one is £260 in the uk. many thanks for reviewing this model
I am think the problem you had with the film jumping which you had to fix with Davinci I would have returned as faulty as either the stepper motor tension was wrong or the gate pressure to high or low. You should be able to take the file and show it without having to process it, your idea to use it for dailys would require this straight out of the machine approach. You should return this to Digitnow and get them to send you another to see if this is just that machine or are they all like that Great channel.
Thanks, Robert! I have had similar problems with both of my Wolverine units. I’m thinking it’s the tiny advance pin and the fact that nothing really keeps the film completely flat/stable while a photo is taken. The pressure plate does an ok job but I definitely think it could be improved.
I have now ordered one of these units at this price it will allow me to get all my super8 and regular 8 on digital if I need any of it I can that done professionally by my friend and ex BBC telecine engineer who run a a great outfit in London called The Flying Spot.
Hi Mike I have known got my movie maker pro and straight out of the box the results are rock steady not needing anything doing to them except speed correction if required. So anyone getting one of these that the results are not rock steady return it as faulty. I will be scanning my whole collection. you can run the results on your phone. many thanks for your excellent channel.
I have the 720 version scanner very happy with it but I wish they would make them a bit more robust you do get a sense they could breakdown at any moment
Ah there it is what you've been teasing. Was really antsy for what to expect. So far yeah it really seems to be your typical OEM 8mm film scanner clone. Sadly there's still no proper settings for the image like turning off auto-whitebalance, framerate, videobitrate, options for LOG Gamma curve and also file format. Personally i'd prefer if it would just take single shots of each frame that you can put together in a Video editing timeline and turning it into ACTUAL 18fps or 24 fps (or 16fps for Normal8). The black foam cushions at the filmgate worry me a little because after a few years it will completely break apart and become dust. Major bummer is that Negative stock still won't get properly scanned by it since switching to negative doesn't seem to affect the auto-whitebalance and it just inverts the colors. I wonder why nobody has firmware hacked this thing yet and basically gave these scanners a "Magic Lantern" kind of firmware upgrade because i'm sure with the proper software inside the thing could looks pretty good, if you only had full manual options.
You're right about the manual settings, it would make a world of difference in these little things. I'm not an engineering guy but it does seem that most of the hard work is done (advance frame, take a picture), so firmware updates could now be done periodically with add on features. Like you said, the ability to compile a series of images for import into your editing software would be a great start. My Retroscan software lets you import Jpeg, TIFF, BMP or PNG image sequences. I love it!
Thanks, Dave!! Yes, unfortunately there's likely always going to be jittering with these little scanners. I will say this, most film scanners (even professional ones) have that problem. The thing is, the higher end scanners' software is so much better that it's usually solved before the final render.
Sir you should do a comparison between Wolverine, Reflecta, Megnasonic 81 also and most reviews I saw on you tube Megasonic 81 may be better. I think so.
Timesaver: Faced with 20+ single 50 foot reels, I decided not to rewind reels after scanning. This requires and empty reel to start then use the empty reel after scan as next take up, and so on. The downside to this is movies would play upside-down & backwards until rewound, if ever viewed again. My thinking is I might devise a fast rewinder using electric drill and improvised spindle, OR just blow off the rewind figuring I will never view again after scanning.
If DS8 film is split with any variation in width the gate in these scanners can't handle it and just jam. Are there any precision DS8 film splitters available?
I am struggling with the idea of buying one these units as there are too many complaints regarding issues with this product, reviews are all over the map from junk, to good, plenty of bad reviews as well as good. If I am going to buy a sketchy unit even when its new ... I am trying to justify why I would pay 300-400 dollars for one, maybe 100 bucks or whatever considering all the complaints, but 300-400 bucks?
Good review but no improvement these scanners because manufactured via one company may be but better review and huge gap between Moviestuff and these scanners and no one try to fill this gap for semi pro scanners and I am using Wolverine Pro scanners and its so so not good and I have try to replace film gate and send mail to Wolverine and ans was very attitude type mean they refuse to replace my scanners part.
Can it be the same product in an new casing? Well at least we see "Wolverine" in the first miliseconds of the display, when you turn it on... Am a little confused about the different low-end products - My budget however don't allow else just to make my fathers old 8mm from the 60ies and 70ies (My childhood) to MP4 - so an updated comparison would be nice to see - or just comment it here - I have found names like Reflecta, Wolverine and DigitNow... Also Kodak (which I thought was dead years ago) so I think it might be some businessman from the far-east buying the logo. As these all probably aren't real scanners - more just like cameras it would also be interesting to know what CMOS Chip the camera is using? BUT! Love your videos - this one was a little low in volume and not so clear as the others you have made! Thanks and Greetings from Denmark!
Thank you Soren!! I’m pretty sure these are simply re-branded Wolverine Pro scanners, hence the quick Wolverine flash in the software. I don’t have the CMOS information unfortunately, only what is listed in their product description. Thank you again for your support!!
Thx for the video. I'm a bit lost between the Wolverine Pro and this one which to choose ? (confused because the logo "Wolverine" appears at 10:10 ). Thank you.
Thanks!! You're absolutely right, wondering if anyone would catch that. It's clear that these machines all likely use the same software for their individually branded units. I have both of the Wolverine units as well as this one and in all honesty, I really couldn't tell a difference in image quality between this and the Wolverine Pro.
Nice video. I just purchased this unit. I have not used yet. I just received a couple day ago. Still trying to figure out the ins and outs. I do have 9 inch reels. I have not gone through to examine all but I think mostly super 8. The film is from the late 50's through mid 70's. These are films were my dad shoot. I was digging through slides and looking for these on my last visit to my hometown. Lots of family treasures. My question and I am hoping you can advise. How would you tackle the take up reel? Would you use a 9 inch reel? (I would have concerns on machine motor). Then if not advice on how to make reels smaller (looking for splices). Any thoughts would be helpful. Thank you for what you do.
Thank you Tim! I would experiment a little bit with the takeup. It's been my experience that the smaller the reel (on both sides), the smoother everything runs. There have even been people that felt like their machines ran a lot better with simply letting the takeup side fall into a cardboard box, rather than onto a reel, then wind it back on when it's finished. Not sure I would do that personally, but I've seen a few people do it.You can pick up 200' (5" diameter) plastic reels on Amazon or Ebay pretty cheap. If I had a bunch of 9" reels to convert, I'd transfer them onto 2 5" reels first. There should be splices in your films at roughly every 25' (8mm) or 50' (super 8). These would be ideal cutting points. I would spool onto a takeup reel and with a cotton glove on, feel the film as it spools. You'll know when you hit a splice, just keep track of them. You may have to use 3 reels but sometimes you can get away with only 2. Best of luck and have fun with it!!
@@Filmboy24 Thanks for getting back to me. I will convert small reels I have and then order some extra 5 inch reels to transfer the 9 inch reels. You confirmed my thoughts and gave me insight on how to find the splices. Thanks again.
I'm gonna be frank with you, Mike, this was an excellent video. One question: Was the 50D a brand new reel? Aside from that I think it would be interesting to see how well this scanner scans color negatives processed flat.
LOL, Thanks, Frank!! That roll was in my freezer but to be honest, I have no idea when I got it. I processed another roll of V3 50D with this one and it had an edge code of 2012, this one didn't have any. I presume it was newer but I'm really not sure. I have so much film everywhere that I have no idea when/where I got most of it anymore.🤣 I do imagine that if I ran a new roll of 50D through this scanner that was professionally processed, it would probably do a much better job.
Hi! Do you scan film for clients? If so, what are your rates? I did buy a wolverine, but I am not too sure that's what I want to do. Love your reviews!
Hi Debra, thank you for your kind words!! Yes, I do scan regularly for clients. The short answer is, I charge $10 per 50' reel for 2K transfers. Please feel free to email me at filmboy24@gmail.com for more details :)
How many 3” rolls can I expect the card to hold? I have approximately 60 to do. How do I know when the card is full? If I take a break for a few days and start again, is it possible to mistakenly record over previous recording? Thanks so much!
Hi Kurt, thanks for watching, I appreciate it!! The finished file sizes are pretty small, usually between 200-250mb each. That being said, a 32GB card could potentially hold somewhere around 140 individual 50' scans, which is obviously plenty for what you have to scan. I'm honestly not sure what happens when you reach capacity on the card as I've never gotten that far but I don't think it'll record over previous scans.
I just got this same unit. I am tech challenged but have figured this out except for getting it to record onto the SD. It takes soooo long to do 1 tape and it didn't take the first time. There were just a few few second clips. Then I did a 200 foot reel and waited at least a couple hours. Same thing! Is it automatically supposed to record? I've also selected record in the settings but it still didn't. It's so time consuming having to babysit it for it to not record after all. Help.
I have to say, this be never heard of this problem before. Make sure your SD card isn’t corrupt and that it’s 32GB maximum. Always insert the SD card before powering the unit on also. These little machines are certainly not fast and unfortunately, you do have to sit with them most of the time.
@Filmboy24 thanks for your response. I have been making sure I hit record. It's flashing the red dot like it is, but when I go to watch it when it's finished it's just a few different thumbnails. Isn't it supposed to be just one long clip? Like the reel? That's what I'm wanting. It's a brand new 32 gig SD card. These things are so old and fragile that I'm trying to get it right the first time since there's no guaranteed second time. 😅 Some are at least 49 years old.
@@Your.mom.goes.to.college Yes, those thumbnail should be your files. You should be able to transfer those to your computer, double click them and watch your movies. You should also be able to go to the "Playback" selection on your scanner and click OK to view the saved files as well. Have you tried this?
@Filmboy24 yes. I can watch it on the machine or when I put it in the computer. I just don't understand why it makes several individual clips vs. one entire one for that 1 film. I may have got it right last night. The entire clip on my last one was about 2:40 and a 3" inch reel is 3 minutes, so that made me feel a little better that I did something right.
I'm just letting you know that I'm all finished with the movies I had from childhood. There was a bit of a learning curve and some little tricks I learned along the way. I just wanted to let you know I figured out why I would have several little clips early on. So apparently, anytime you try to make an adjustment such as exposure or frame adjust that it starts a new recording. So I realized I'd have to back up a little if I wanted those first few seconds in the recording after I got it how I wanted. Thanks for all your help.
This is a $400 machine. I think there would be a massive market for a $2000 machine, if it did a substantially better job than this one. I would have bought one of these machines but I've seen the results and they're, sadly, extremely mediocre. We've all seen the Zapruder film of the Kennedy assassination. That was taken on a wind up standard 8 movie camera. They advanced each frame on 35mm film and the results were impressive. This is 60 (sixty) year old technology. The film area was only 66% that of Super 8. I've taken some Super 8 movies with 25asa Kodachrome on my Braun S709XL. (Probably one of the best Super 8 movies cameras ever made). One film I took, with the camera on a tripod, in bright sunlight and perfectly exposed was so good, that most people would think it was photographed on top grade 16mm equipment. My point is that Super 8 can give fantastic results and it *needs* something a hell of a lot better than these cheap film scanners to do justice to the medium. The next step up in terms of movie scanners is $12,000 minimum. There must be a market for equipment that can provide decent scanning for a reasonable price.
You have a good point and I've often wondered why there was nothing in the middle. Maybe the demand just isn't there, as most scanners are probably used for a family project, then never touched again. I think most people simply send their collections off to a shop. I know there have been some pretty decent DIY scanners, using 4K cameras that produced pretty nice results. On a side note regarding your Bauer (I think you mean Bauer, not Braun) S708XL, I couldn't agree more. I used, almost exclusively, my Bauer S715XL super 8 camera throughout the 90s and it produced awesome images. Wish I'd never sold it :(
These "rollers" are a real problem , it is not "Now your loaded and ready to go" , when it is starting , then it's o.k. , but after a 15 -20 minut's the machine start making to make noises like scratching over glass, then it seems that the"pressure" on the take up wheel is to less , and the Moviemaker Pro , starts doing strange things. After a lot of tiny problems with the "take-up wheel " I decided to replace the "winding colums" for "needle bearings " , because the power of the take-up wheel is to low to pull the film all the way thru, as soon as the needle bearings are "mounted" I will let you know what the results are . Another point, 2 things, first the machine needs a extra rubber support, under the frontside , it tilts very easy forward, the next point is the poor quality of the reel adapters ( S8 - Normal8) Up till now I am not really happy with the " Moviemaker Pro " , O, Yes ! the quality (1080 p) of the capture is very much better the former (720p) machines ( Selecta, Moviemaker ect.....)
Hi Mike , Today I received the needle-bearings, not the one I ordered , but usable , after the modification I was very happy with the results, jitters gone, the take-up reel moves smoothly, and I have the feeling that the machine runs more smoothly then before, and you know !!! all the materials for the modification are available in most of the ( D I Y) hardware-stores and costs no more then € 25-30 , with a little bit of Tech. feeling is it not to difficult, I think I'm gonna make a workflow-sheet and make it available for people who like to modify the Movimaker Pro .
@@Filmboy24 Hi Mike! , I have to put my modification(s) “on holdl” , because the scanner went completely “dead” yesterday, I had to send it back , and hope to get a new one , somewhere next week. I keep you posted!
Roberto Trombetti - These may be "just toys", but they're better than nothing and resulting in having precious old movies deteriorate to destruction. Professional digitizing services cost $$$$$.
@The Celluloid Alchemist very sad they didn't fix the major issue of that scanner that is very bad image compression. They should allow to extract raw or un compressed BMP image files and let people compress the video with a proper computer.
Hi Chris, I personally use Vegas Pro but there are a lot of different ones out there. Really depends on whether you want to buy a program or use a free one and how much editing you plan on doing.
@@Filmboy24 ... thanks for replying. Its rather strange that there's not even any reference to the SD card in the user manual Accessories section on page 15, but as you say there's no label on the card !!
@@tonydecotiis the USB cable is to offload what's on the SD card (without removing it from the scanner) onto your computer. Obviously it's not needed if you have an SD card reader in your computer.
@@tonydecotiis yes, it is used for your TV or monitor as you're scanning and recording. I believe you can also use it as playback from the SD card to TV (never tried this part but I don't know why you couldn't).
Hmmmmm, we just got this unit, and the right side reel (motor?) doesn't seem to spin, leaving someone to manually sit there and turn it for the entire process. Any ideas anyone? We can't seem to find any customer service phone number etc.
Hey Jon, you can scan sound film in these units but it will capture picture only. There are very few scanners that will capture that mag track during initial scan. I now use the RetroScan Universal along with the RetroSync unit for sound film but it's 2 different processes.
@@Filmboy24 yes that’s what I meant. You have to spend considerably more for a scanner that will also playback both sound stripes as well as capturing the image.
Terry Chootiyaa - They all look cheap. But these are a godsend in saving old home movie images before they deteriorate to rubbish. Professional digitizing services are $$$$$. If I can successfully copy/digitize and share some of my home movies it will be worth it to me and my family.
I bought one last year and it has been a great extra to my hobby work. I've made short films and put them onto SD cards for family and friends and they've been quite moved by the memories. An ideal way to to enjoy the past.
That's awesome to hear, Paul! I think that's exactly what these little machines should be used for.
you should do a comparison of this machine and your retro it would be interesting
P
Thank you for spending the time to put this video together! Your explanation of the 3 tabs on the film guide and Frame adjustment helped me a lot. These features were not explained well in the instruction manual. Saved me lots of frustration ! thanks again!
My pleasure, thanks so much for watching!!
It actually says Wolverine on the screen at 10:10 for a very brief second when powering up.
Good eye, I was wondering if anyone would catch that 😉
I have the Wolverine pro and overall have been happy with it. Works very well with color reversal and B&W negative or reversal films (never tried color negative film with it). One thing the unit does hate is splices… it will hang up almost every time on a splice so you have to stop the scan or open the film gate and pull the splice manually through and then edit the sections together after scan is completed. I did about 50 rolls of very old film for my father in law last year and was quite amazed how well they came out even when played on a 55” TV. Agreed it’s not for someone trying to do serious filmmaking, but as an economical alternative to an expensive scanner it does the job.
You know, Dave, I really don't mind the overall quality of these little Pro machines either. I honestly think they do a pretty fair job for a budget option and definitely fine for sharing films with friends/family.
Mine had problems from the get go and there is no warranty or support. Lost my money so be careful.
[I had a Wolverine, too] One of the "features" (design flaws) is that only one reel is motorized, and there's no clutch. [Reel-to-reel tape decks and movie projectors can send power to either or both reels (so you don't have to swap reels to rewind). And, there's a clutch to provide fairly low tension to the take-up reel when "playing". The clutch is bypassed for fast winding. These converters have no variation in tension between playing and fast-winding. It's no big deal to swap the reels to rewind, but the fixed tension is a problem. To have enough tension to fast wind (even with no braking on the other reel), it has too much tension for playing. Because there's so much tension, the converter has trouble registering/framing each frame. [Like a movie projector, the film is advanced one frame at a time, and the film stops with one frame lined up at the gate for it to be converted to a digital frame. There's an adjustment for the force on the film at the gate, but, to get it to work, the force is brutal - and the framing tends to drift.] I found it best to ease up on the gate force and to just let the film feed into a clean bowl on the floor next to the desk that the converter sat on. I removed all splices and separated all of the spliced reels and appended the .mp4 files with FFMPEG. [Many of the films that I converted were on 7" reels, and the converter could handle only 5" reels, so I had to split the spliced movies anyway.] One also has to fix the frame rate because film rates aren't the same as video. [The converter just copies each frame one-to-one to the digital file, but the video frame rate is that of normal digital video rather than the original (film) rate. And, because the input and output frame rates aren't evenly divisible, extra copies of some frames are inserted to pad things (by FFMPEG). And, FFMPEG, coming from the UNIX/POSIX/Linux world, is very user-unfriendly. [I like to call designs like this Calvinist. -They're designed to punish the user.] Abbreviate a time value? FFMPEG will get it wrong. Append one video to another with the exact same frame rate, and FFMPEG will set the frame rate on the output file to something completely different. It took a LOT of experimenting to get FFMPEG to do the right thing. -And, with no graphical interface, editing (trimming the beginning / end and separating unrelated scenes) took a lot of guessing/repeated attempts. I took extensive notes and included them when I finished my home videos and donated the converter to a library that has a do-it-yourself photo/film conversion studio. [Last time I looked, they still hadn't made it available. I suspect that they decided that it can't be handled by mere mortals.]
Excellent review/demo. I purchased the Wolverine Pro about a year ago and I would have returned it for a refund but my editing software saved the sale. The result right out of the machine was awful but thanks to an old version of PowerDirector I was able to post several reasonably nice home movies online for family and friends. A friend asked me to process her dad's super 8 combat movies he took in Vietnam. They were a challenge due to obviously a lot of camera shake but again the software came through. One word of advice I'd offer anyone using one of these types of machines is, avoid "cleaning the film" if at all possible. Some specks in a film are okay and just add to the "old movie" effect. I did "clean" some of mine. I cleaned away some content (as in color). But again, great video. I've been super busy and need to catch up on the videos I've missed.
Thanks, Dale!!
Great advice on cleaning the film. I've actually done the same thing you mentioned and "cleaned" off some of the color. Not good! I only do a light cleaning if absolutely necessary.
So, I received one of these for Christmas and have so far worked on (8)-3inch reels and (1)-5inch. I find that it's VERY inconsistent. My reels are from the mid-70's and just tried one from the late-1950's. I clean them all prior to scanning I find that it catches on the output side of the gate far too often and then simply can no longer advance the film. Just clicks and clicks and rescans the same spot over and over. I've tried putting felt on one of the static rollers. I've even released the gate and stood there with a little bit of finger pressure on it. I often stand there with a little metal screw driver to apply back pressure on the film (after it leaves the gate / right before the first static roller). That sometimes helps as I think it helps keep the advancer sprocket engaged. Other times, it's futile. Then, with 4-6 copies of the scanned video, I knit them all together in an editor later...deleting bad scans / keeping good, etc. I think it has something to do with internal stresses / warping in the film causing it to rise up (slightly, underneath the gate) and not allowing the advancer/sprocket to push it forward. I'm pretty much at the point where I'm going to send all of mine off for processing at a professional lab and sell this on Ebay. I'm just done with this. While it may cost a smidge over $1K at a lab (for equivalent of (54)-3in reels), the amount of hours spent babysitting this thing for mediocre results just isn't worth it. Plus w/ that cost including color correction and cleaning - which you also need to do - I use 99% isopropyl alcohol - it does pay for itself. Like other comments stated below, it would be awesome if someone made a "pro-sumer" scanning device for around $1K.
Thank you for sharing your experiences with this machine, they're definitely hit & miss for sure. It would be awesome if there were a middle grade scanner in the $1K range, I think those would sell themselves. If you feel like it, send me an email at filmboy24@gmail.com, I have been using the Moviestuff RetroScan Universal 2K scanner for several years now. I scan film for people all the time and at about half the price of what you mentioned. Thanks again!!
Nice video! Just bought one of these units, pretty happy with performance. Bad splices have hung up in the gate, no big deal. Pulling SD card, after film ran out and forgot to stop record , got me into trouble with file number not incrementing. Without thinking about it I started recording a dummy short file before pulling card to be safe. Usually file number increments OK. The problem here is if you copy files off to PC OK, but the last file on SD could get overwritten, no warning prompt on device.
Video editor image stabilization is a must. If you look at frame borders / sprocket hole, in video 24:04 , you will see what I will call frame bounce. So even source movies filmed on a tripod will be "jumpy" with out stabilization. Camera shake compounds this problem. I used a program called Power Director Pro to clean up video. Would be nice if a little larger file size was used to extract every bit of detail from film, but I would imagine not too much loss. Would I have paid $500 for higher resolution, probably after waiting so many years. Finally, some film from my father is 70 years old and looks great. Kodachrome. Some of the movies I filmed 40 years ago using Ektachrome, colors not quite so good.
Thank you for the info!!
My biggest issues with this unit (having digitized many super 8 films with it now), is the vertical jitter and the auto-white balance/exposure that happens during each cut. Plus, the sprocket hole on the left side of the frame bleeds/glows light through that hole onto the image area. Very noticeable on darker scenes. I've had to do a lot if image stabilization and cleanup in post. I've learned that the SD card itself can be an issue with jittering recording/playback, but I've checked and made sure I'm using the correct card type and formatting. I'm guessing the vertical jitter is mostly because there is only one sprocket/claw, not enough to register the film steadily in place for each frame. For the price, it's better than shooting it off of a wall, though.
Yes, definitely not top of the line by any means but as you said, probably better than shooting off the wall. I will say that even my MovieStuff RetroScan unit can give you some light bleed in real dark scenes and I almost always have to stabilize in post. The picture quality is night and day different though. Thanks for watching, I appreciate it!!
You MUST correctly FORMAT the Correct SD card to get rid of jitter!!!
Thanks, yes, as I mentioned in my post, I had made sure that the correct card type and formatting had been done. Thank goodness for post production fixes! @MrmelodyUs
If yours is like mine, the vertical jitter is caused by the excessive tension on the take-up reel. -Because there's no bypassable clutch; for fast wind to work, they have too much tension in "play" mode. As mentioned in my reply to another reply, I just fed the film into a clean bowl on the floor next to the desk that the converter sat on. That way, no excessive take-up tension to screw up frame registration - and no jitter. [I have no idea how the SD card format could possibly cause jitter.]
@@larrycamilli9589thanks. But I have tried transferring the film without the take up reel, letting it pool up into a box. I’ve gotten the same results. Personally, I think the unit needs more than one claw to register the film in place as it is held in the gate. Luckily, I’m a Vfx artist so I can fix all of that in post.
Great demo, Michael! I like that you encourage people to work with film, avoiding the high cost of professional processing and scanning and still enjoy the results. Of course you noticed that this particular scan turned the highlights into yellow. Not much you can do about it in post, except with some crazy tweaking and overlaying perhaps. I also noticed that this particular roll doesn't look like the lush old Kodachrome, but rather like Orwo. But enough ranting, thanks for doing what you do. I look forward to your first Super 16mm narrative film 😉😉😉😎
Thanks, Christian!
Yep, definitely a lot of yellow tone came through on the positive film. I probably could've done a better job with the color grading but...yeah...😆
I long for the day I make a 16mm feature. Funny, my older brother was visiting the other day and asking just what it would take to get that accomplished. A great story, a lot of work and dedication, a little $$ and a whole lot of help, I told him. I have a few of those knocked out, just need to piece the rest together 😉
@@Filmboy24 Well I would start on a 16mm film (doesn't need to be a full feature) at this very moment if I could. I work my butt off as a musician and I just can't manage to have the time or the money at the moment. Times are hard. Hopefully I will be able to get a much better paid job soon and make some cash. Add to that the fact that every single person who could greatly contribute with their skills is located in the US. Hopefully one day before I get too old.... I would love seeing you working on such an endeavor. It is very hard getting it off the ground, that's why you almost never see it from a member of the 8mm and 16mm film community, except for Emil, who is just adding the finishing touches to his latest feature film.
@@truefilm6991 You're absolutely right, my friend. Making a "real" film is such a huge undertaking. I've produced a lot of short movies and even those are big undertakings. I've wanted to shoot a feature film, on film, for over 30 years now and just never have. Probably more about excuses for me than anything but I do keep dreaming 😃
Good review nice to see this at a price that more reflects it's quality.
The other one was always too expensive at £399.
This one is £260 in the uk.
many thanks for reviewing this model
I am think the problem you had with the film jumping which you had to fix with Davinci I would have returned as faulty as either the stepper motor tension was wrong or the gate pressure to high or low.
You should be able to take the file and show it without having to process it, your idea to use it for dailys would require this straight out of the machine approach.
You should return this to Digitnow and get them to send you another to see if this is just that machine or are they all like that Great channel.
Thanks, Robert! I have had similar problems with both of my Wolverine units. I’m thinking it’s the tiny advance pin and the fact that nothing really keeps the film completely flat/stable while a photo is taken. The pressure plate does an ok job but I definitely think it could be improved.
I have now ordered one of these units at this price it will allow me to get all my super8 and regular 8 on digital if I need any of it I can that done professionally by my friend and ex BBC telecine engineer who run a a great outfit in London called The Flying Spot.
@@robmay3570 That's awesome, Robert!!
Hi Mike I have known got my movie maker pro and straight out of the box the results are rock steady not needing anything doing to them except speed correction if required.
So anyone getting one of these that the results are not rock steady return it as faulty.
I will be scanning my whole collection.
you can run the results on your phone.
many thanks for your excellent channel.
Very nice demo Miguel
Thanks, Pop!!
I have the 720 version scanner very happy with it but I wish they would make them a bit more robust you do get a sense they could breakdown at any moment
I can't disagree with you on that, Paul!!
Ah there it is what you've been teasing. Was really antsy for what to expect. So far yeah it really seems to be your typical OEM 8mm film scanner clone. Sadly there's still no proper settings for the image like turning off auto-whitebalance, framerate, videobitrate, options for LOG Gamma curve and also file format. Personally i'd prefer if it would just take single shots of each frame that you can put together in a Video editing timeline and turning it into ACTUAL 18fps or 24 fps (or 16fps for Normal8). The black foam cushions at the filmgate worry me a little because after a few years it will completely break apart and become dust. Major bummer is that Negative stock still won't get properly scanned by it since switching to negative doesn't seem to affect the auto-whitebalance and it just inverts the colors. I wonder why nobody has firmware hacked this thing yet and basically gave these scanners a "Magic Lantern" kind of firmware upgrade because i'm sure with the proper software inside the thing could looks pretty good, if you only had full manual options.
You're right about the manual settings, it would make a world of difference in these little things. I'm not an engineering guy but it does seem that most of the hard work is done (advance frame, take a picture), so firmware updates could now be done periodically with add on features. Like you said, the ability to compile a series of images for import into your editing software would be a great start. My Retroscan software lets you import Jpeg, TIFF, BMP or PNG image sequences. I love it!
Brilliant review! :) always interesting and engaging content! Thanks for sharing!
Thanks so much!!
4:07 An "audio out cable"? 🤔 I don't think so!
Do Wolverine Moviemaker Pro vs Kodak REELZ in one of your next videos
MANY THANKS
This is a great overview! I'm more curious about the output quality, Do you think that jitter is going to show up in any film this system scans?
Thanks, Dave!! Yes, unfortunately there's likely always going to be jittering with these little scanners. I will say this, most film scanners (even professional ones) have that problem. The thing is, the higher end scanners' software is so much better that it's usually solved before the final render.
Sir you should do a comparison between Wolverine, Reflecta, Megnasonic 81 also and most reviews I saw on you tube Megasonic 81 may be better. I think so.
Timesaver: Faced with 20+ single 50 foot reels, I decided not to rewind reels after scanning. This requires and empty reel to start then use the empty reel after scan as next take up, and so on. The downside to this is movies would play upside-down & backwards until rewound, if ever viewed again. My thinking is I might devise a fast rewinder using electric drill and improvised spindle, OR just blow off the rewind figuring I will never view again after scanning.
Nice! That will definitely save you some time, especially with how slow these little machines rewind.
If DS8 film is split with any variation in width the gate in these scanners can't handle it and just jam. Are there any precision DS8 film splitters available?
Sadly, I've also noticed that. I have a couple of 8mm film splitters and one (Lomo) certainly seems to be more precise than the other (Baia).
I am struggling with the idea of buying one these units as there are too many complaints regarding issues with this product, reviews are all over the map from junk, to good, plenty of bad reviews as well as good. If I am going to buy a sketchy unit even when its new ... I am trying to justify why I would pay 300-400 dollars for one, maybe 100 bucks or whatever considering all the complaints, but 300-400 bucks?
Good review but no improvement these scanners because manufactured via one company may be but better review and huge gap between Moviestuff and these scanners and no one try to fill this gap for semi pro scanners and I am using Wolverine Pro scanners and its so so not good and I have try to replace film gate and send mail to Wolverine and ans was very attitude type mean they refuse to replace my scanners part.
Can it be the same product in an new casing? Well at least we see "Wolverine" in the first miliseconds of the display, when you turn it on... Am a little confused about the different low-end products - My budget however don't allow else just to make my fathers old 8mm from the 60ies and 70ies (My childhood) to MP4 - so an updated comparison would be nice to see - or just comment it here - I have found names like Reflecta, Wolverine and DigitNow... Also Kodak (which I thought was dead years ago) so I think it might be some businessman from the far-east buying the logo. As these all probably aren't real scanners - more just like cameras it would also be interesting to know what CMOS Chip the camera is using? BUT! Love your videos - this one was a little low in volume and not so clear as the others you have made! Thanks and Greetings from Denmark!
Thank you Soren!! I’m pretty sure these are simply re-branded Wolverine Pro scanners, hence the quick Wolverine flash in the software. I don’t have the CMOS information unfortunately, only what is listed in their product description. Thank you again for your support!!
I love your mug
🤣 Thanks, SciGuy!!
Thx for the video.
I'm a bit lost between the Wolverine Pro and this one which to choose ? (confused because the logo "Wolverine" appears at 10:10 ). Thank you.
Thanks!!
You're absolutely right, wondering if anyone would catch that. It's clear that these machines all likely use the same software for their individually branded units. I have both of the Wolverine units as well as this one and in all honesty, I really couldn't tell a difference in image quality between this and the Wolverine Pro.
@@Filmboy24 Thx for the help ✨ And quick answer :)
Nice video. I just purchased this unit. I have not used yet. I just received a couple day ago. Still trying to figure out the ins and outs. I do have 9 inch reels. I have not gone through to examine all but I think mostly super 8. The film is from the late 50's through mid 70's. These are films were my dad shoot. I was digging through slides and looking for these on my last visit to my hometown. Lots of family treasures. My question and I am hoping you can advise. How would you tackle the take up reel? Would you use a 9 inch reel? (I would have concerns on machine motor). Then if not advice on how to make reels smaller (looking for splices). Any thoughts would be helpful. Thank you for what you do.
Thank you Tim!
I would experiment a little bit with the takeup. It's been my experience that the smaller the reel (on both sides), the smoother everything runs. There have even been people that felt like their machines ran a lot better with simply letting the takeup side fall into a cardboard box, rather than onto a reel, then wind it back on when it's finished. Not sure I would do that personally, but I've seen a few people do it.You can pick up 200' (5" diameter) plastic reels on Amazon or Ebay pretty cheap. If I had a bunch of 9" reels to convert, I'd transfer them onto 2 5" reels first. There should be splices in your films at roughly every 25' (8mm) or 50' (super 8). These would be ideal cutting points. I would spool onto a takeup reel and with a cotton glove on, feel the film as it spools. You'll know when you hit a splice, just keep track of them. You may have to use 3 reels but sometimes you can get away with only 2.
Best of luck and have fun with it!!
@@Filmboy24 Thanks for getting back to me. I will convert small reels I have and then order some extra 5 inch reels to transfer the 9 inch reels. You confirmed my thoughts and gave me insight on how to find the splices. Thanks again.
@@Tim2024-y5c My pleasure!!
I would prefer keeping film straight
Without going thru rollers.
I have film that is pretty brittle ..
And has broke...
I'm gonna be frank with you, Mike, this was an excellent video. One question: Was the 50D a brand new reel? Aside from that I think it would be interesting to see how well this scanner scans color negatives processed flat.
LOL, Thanks, Frank!!
That roll was in my freezer but to be honest, I have no idea when I got it. I processed another roll of V3 50D with this one and it had an edge code of 2012, this one didn't have any. I presume it was newer but I'm really not sure. I have so much film everywhere that I have no idea when/where I got most of it anymore.🤣
I do imagine that if I ran a new roll of 50D through this scanner that was professionally processed, it would probably do a much better job.
Hi! Do you scan film for clients? If so, what are your rates? I did buy a wolverine, but I am not too sure that's what I want to do. Love your reviews!
Hi Debra, thank you for your kind words!! Yes, I do scan regularly for clients. The short answer is, I charge $10 per 50' reel for 2K transfers. Please feel free to email me at filmboy24@gmail.com for more details :)
😊
YA BUT I WANT SOUND WHY IS ALL YOU TUBE NOT EXPLAINING
How many 3” rolls can I expect the card to hold? I have approximately 60 to do. How do I know when the card is full?
If I take a break for a few days and start again, is it possible to mistakenly record over previous recording?
Thanks so much!
Hi Kurt, thanks for watching, I appreciate it!!
The finished file sizes are pretty small, usually between 200-250mb each. That being said, a 32GB card could potentially hold somewhere around 140 individual 50' scans, which is obviously plenty for what you have to scan.
I'm honestly not sure what happens when you reach capacity on the card as I've never gotten that far but I don't think it'll record over previous scans.
@@Filmboy24 Thanks for your quick response! My dad has stage 4 cancer and trying to get them done prior to Christmas so we can enjoy watching with him
In Australia the standard frame rate is 25 fps.
Really? For a Regular or Super 8 movie film camera? You sure about that? For video, of course, 25fps, but film? Ok. You probably live there.
@@johnnycaps1 I do live here in Australia. As far as I'm aware. be it film or video, the frame rate for smooth motion has always been 25fps.
Can it record sound if the cine film has it?
Unfortunately, it does not extract audio from film. Very few scanners anywhere will do that. I do it now with my RetroSync unit.
I just got this same unit. I am tech challenged but have figured this out except for getting it to record onto the SD. It takes soooo long to do 1 tape and it didn't take the first time. There were just a few few second clips. Then I did a 200 foot reel and waited at least a couple hours. Same thing! Is it automatically supposed to record? I've also selected record in the settings but it still didn't. It's so time consuming having to babysit it for it to not record after all. Help.
I have to say, this be never heard of this problem before. Make sure your SD card isn’t corrupt and that it’s 32GB maximum. Always insert the SD card before powering the unit on also. These little machines are certainly not fast and unfortunately, you do have to sit with them most of the time.
@Filmboy24 thanks for your response. I have been making sure I hit record. It's flashing the red dot like it is, but when I go to watch it when it's finished it's just a few different thumbnails. Isn't it supposed to be just one long clip? Like the reel? That's what I'm wanting. It's a brand new 32 gig SD card. These things are so old and fragile that I'm trying to get it right the first time since there's no guaranteed second time. 😅 Some are at least 49 years old.
@@Your.mom.goes.to.college Yes, those thumbnail should be your files. You should be able to transfer those to your computer, double click them and watch your movies. You should also be able to go to the "Playback" selection on your scanner and click OK to view the saved files as well. Have you tried this?
@Filmboy24 yes. I can watch it on the machine or when I put it in the computer. I just don't understand why it makes several individual clips vs. one entire one for that 1 film. I may have got it right last night. The entire clip on my last one was about 2:40 and a 3" inch reel is 3 minutes, so that made me feel a little better that I did something right.
I'm just letting you know that I'm all finished with the movies I had from childhood. There was a bit of a learning curve and some little tricks I learned along the way. I just wanted to let you know I figured out why I would have several little clips early on. So apparently, anytime you try to make an adjustment such as exposure or frame adjust that it starts a new recording. So I realized I'd have to back up a little if I wanted those first few seconds in the recording after I got it how I wanted. Thanks for all your help.
This is a $400 machine. I think there would be a massive market for a $2000 machine, if it did a substantially better job than this one. I would have bought one of these machines but I've seen the results and they're, sadly, extremely mediocre. We've all seen the Zapruder film of the Kennedy assassination. That was taken on a wind up standard 8 movie camera. They advanced each frame on 35mm film and the results were impressive. This is 60 (sixty) year old technology. The film area was only 66% that of Super 8. I've taken some Super 8 movies with 25asa Kodachrome on my Braun S709XL. (Probably one of the best Super 8 movies cameras ever made). One film I took, with the camera on a tripod, in bright sunlight and perfectly exposed was so good, that most people would think it was photographed on top grade 16mm equipment. My point is that Super 8 can give fantastic results and it *needs* something a hell of a lot better than these cheap film scanners to do justice to the medium. The next step up in terms of movie scanners is $12,000 minimum. There must be a market for equipment that can provide decent scanning for a reasonable price.
You have a good point and I've often wondered why there was nothing in the middle. Maybe the demand just isn't there, as most scanners are probably used for a family project, then never touched again. I think most people simply send their collections off to a shop. I know there have been some pretty decent DIY scanners, using 4K cameras that produced pretty nice results. On a side note regarding your Bauer (I think you mean Bauer, not Braun) S708XL, I couldn't agree more. I used, almost exclusively, my Bauer S715XL super 8 camera throughout the 90s and it produced awesome images. Wish I'd never sold it :(
These "rollers" are a real problem , it is not "Now your loaded and ready to go" , when it is starting , then it's o.k. , but after a 15 -20 minut's the machine start making to make noises like scratching over glass, then it seems that the"pressure" on the take up wheel is to less , and the Moviemaker Pro , starts doing strange things.
After a lot of tiny problems with the "take-up wheel " I decided to replace the "winding colums" for "needle bearings " , because the power of the take-up wheel is to low to pull the film all the way thru, as soon as the needle bearings are "mounted" I will let you know what the results are .
Another point, 2 things, first the machine needs a extra rubber support, under the frontside , it tilts very easy forward, the next point is the poor quality of the reel adapters ( S8 - Normal8)
Up till now I am not really happy with the " Moviemaker Pro " , O, Yes ! the quality (1080 p) of the capture is very much better the former (720p) machines ( Selecta, Moviemaker ect.....)
Thanks for the info, it'll be interesting to hear how the bearings work out.
Hi Mike , Today I received the needle-bearings, not the one I ordered , but usable , after the modification I was very happy with the results, jitters gone, the take-up reel moves smoothly, and I have the feeling that the machine runs more smoothly then before, and you know !!! all the materials for the modification are available in most of the ( D I Y) hardware-stores and costs no more then € 25-30 , with a little bit of Tech. feeling is it not to difficult, I think I'm gonna make a workflow-sheet and make it available for people who like to modify the Movimaker Pro .
@@James-rp3fc That's great news! If you want, feel free to post it in a new comment here also if you'd like. I appreciate your updates!!
@@Filmboy24 Hi Mike! , I have to put my modification(s) “on holdl” , because the scanner went completely “dead” yesterday, I had to send it back , and hope to get a new one , somewhere next week. I keep you posted!
@@James-rp3fc Oh no!! OK, well keep me posted, thanks!
Do they make one with sound? - Toronto, Canada.
Unfortunately, they do not.
what makes my playback run in high speed Mike?
Hmmm, hard to say. I can tell you that the output file on these machines is 20 FPS, so if you shot your film at 18 FPS, it might look a little fast.
you need more than that to get professional results! these are just toys!
Roberto Trombetti - These may be "just toys", but they're better than nothing and resulting in having precious old movies deteriorate to destruction. Professional digitizing services cost $$$$$.
Sadly no improvement in five years. Just a rebrand of a mediocre scanner
@The Celluloid Alchemist very sad they didn't fix the major issue of that scanner that is very bad image compression. They should allow to extract raw or un compressed BMP image files and let people compress the video with a proper computer.
What is a good editing app to use on pc or iPad?
Hi Chris,
I personally use Vegas Pro but there are a lot of different ones out there. Really depends on whether you want to buy a program or use a free one and how much editing you plan on doing.
Where Cann I buy one
Here's a direct link to them on Amazon: amzn.to/478SYjd
What class is the SD card included in the box ??
Unfortunately, there's no label on the card, so I'm not sure.
@@Filmboy24 ... thanks for replying. Its rather strange that there's not even any reference to the SD card in the user manual Accessories section on page 15, but as you
say there's no label on the card !!
how do you download from projector direct to a computer instead of sd card?
Hey Tony, unfortunately that's not possible. You have to record directly to the SD card first.
@@Filmboy24 so why include a USB cable?
@@tonydecotiis the USB cable is to offload what's on the SD card (without removing it from the scanner) onto your computer. Obviously it's not needed if you have an SD card reader in your computer.
@@Filmboy24 I gather the other cable for the TV is for the same purpose from your SD card in the projector to the TV?
@@tonydecotiis yes, it is used for your TV or monitor as you're scanning and recording. I believe you can also use it as playback from the SD card to TV (never tried this part but I don't know why you couldn't).
My moms middle name was wolverine.
That explains a lot!! 🤣
why there is no sound???
Most scanners don't transfer sound.
소리는? Sound recoding?
Nope
They don't transfer sound, the one important fact left out
😂😂
Perhaps you didn't have the CZcams sound turned on. @Filmboy24 did mention it in the audio about the "sound" or lack thereof. @7:05
Hmmmmm, we just got this unit, and the right side reel (motor?) doesn't seem to spin, leaving someone to manually sit there and turn it for the entire process. Any ideas anyone? We can't seem to find any customer service phone number etc.
That sounds unusual for sure and not normal. If you have this exact unit, try this number: digitnow.com/pages/returns
Too bad it can’t scan striped film, only silent.
Hey Jon, you can scan sound film in these units but it will capture picture only. There are very few scanners that will capture that mag track during initial scan. I now use the RetroScan Universal along with the RetroSync unit for sound film but it's 2 different processes.
@@Filmboy24 yes that’s what I meant. You have to spend considerably more for a scanner that will also playback both sound stripes as well as capturing the image.
WHY R YOU GOING BACKWARDS IN LIFE,, IF THERES NO SOUND JUNK IT
😂
*I won't bother with this make or model it looks cheap and rubbish* 😐
Terry Chootiyaa - They all look cheap. But these are a godsend in saving old home movie images before they deteriorate to rubbish. Professional digitizing services are $$$$$. If I can successfully copy/digitize and share some of my home movies it will be worth it to me and my family.