Kino; I can't see what is the actual subject you are trying to argue with me and why. I can see no discrepancy nor controversy anywhere. I say just that scanning (not telecining, thank you for the correction) is nowadays easier and cheaper than 10 years ago. Am I wrong if I say that scanning is used in film restoration nowadays more usually than it was 10 years ago?
Anyhow, I've also built my own 16mm "scanner", though it's quite easy and simple design and maybe doesn't deserve to be called a scanner at all. So I know also a bit about the subject, yet probably less than you. Considering the easiness of the build, and time (a few days) and money (nothing) my "scanner" took, it gives quite pleasant results at about 1,5K. My unit is a modified 16mm projector with DC motor drive, enlargened image port, removed audio rollers, adjustable precision RGB led source (to scan color negs) and a normal digital camera (Fuji S5600), using the projector's original lens as a close-up lens. I've opened the digital camera and soldered wires to shutter release button to allow shooting automatically every frame. This unit scans about 1,5 frames per second. I've also written a piece of software on PC to postprocess images acquired. This is the same design as in some units called "workprinters" that are sold at quite high prices. The difference is that they usually use low-res video cameras.
Please tell us something about your scanner! I'm quite interested, too.
Last edited by hrst; 11-19-2009 at 05:11 PM. Click to view previous post history.