[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: (Fwd) TIG Re: film look vs video look



>use the even one and see the result... When you put video on film
>recorder it looks like film not because it is on film, but because you
>are making full progressive frames out of fields. Let's imagine now a
>manufacturer building a video camera that would work 25/30 frames/s
>full progressive...  any comments ?

While this would definitely help the resolution and aliasing on certain types
of images compared to conventional interlaced video, I do not think it would
result in "the film look," just better looking video--as long as there wasn't
too much motion in it.

It seems to me that a large part of "the look" of film is due to the
randomness of film grain.  In any piece of film, the grains fall into a range
of sizes, and consequently exhibit a range of sensitivities.  When the
shutter on the camera opens, all of the grains in the film frame are exposed
at the same time, and each one captures its part of the image in its own
unique way.  It is this pseudo-randomness that makes film so similar to the
way our own eyes see things.  

In video cameras, images are scanned in regular patterns that depend on the
design of the sensor used.  And the images are viewed on displays that
likewise follow a predictable pattern.  This is the fundamental purpose of
video systems, to take parallel information (the original image), convert it
to serial so it may conveniently be recorded and transmitted, and then
convert it back to parallel so it may be viewed again.  If a video camera
could be made with pixels of the same physical size as film grains, and then
programmed to scan in a somewhat random fashion, its data could be assembled
into parallel digital frames, which would probably be indistinguishable from
a telecine transfer of film from that point onward.  While such a camera is
perhaps theoretically possible, it would probably take a R&D budget beyond
imagination, and even when it was perfected, it wouldn't be film so nobody
would want to use it anyway.

Christopher Bacon