I'm sure that you would only use the most professional units in your work, but as I mentioned, these were "home" products that one could use on his/her old 8mm/16mm motion pictures.
Thanks for the more additional ideas; maybe Tom will be better prepared to make him final decision.
--- On Wed, 11/11/09, Richard L. Hess <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> From: Richard L. Hess <[log in to unmask]>
> Subject: Re: [ARSCLIST] Seeking a 16-mm to digital video transfer in NYC
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Date: Wednesday, November 11, 2009, 5:29 PM
> At 08:18 PM 2009-11-11, Roderic G
> Stephens wrote:
> > Here are a couple of the home transfer units I had in
> mind (I used to have one, but it got lost in moving): http://photography.shop.ebay.com/s.html?_nkw=film+to+video&_sacat=21166&_trksid=p3286.m270.l1313&LH_SellerWithStore=1&_odkw=&_osacat=21166
> Hi, Roderic,
> I took a quick look at these things and they reminded me of
> other camera gadgets that ultimately disappointed.
> When it came to doing our slides, negatives (and where
> those did not exist, prints) we chose a Nikon Super Coolscan
> 5000 ED for 35 mm and an Epson V700 for everything else.
> These devices did not disappoint.
> I'm surprised that Jim picked on the Uher -- I can think of
> many worse examples like a Craig 212 <grin, duck, and
> run>. I'm doing some lovely Sephardic field recordings
> that were, sadly, recorded on something like a Craig 212 at
> 1.88 in/s. But the life of the music still comes through.
> Richard L. Hess
> email: [log in to unmask]
> Aurora, Ontario, Canada
> (905) 713 6733
> Detailed contact information: http://www.richardhess.com/tape/contact.htm
> Quality tape transfers -- even from hard-to-play tapes.