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

IBC Itch & Urge



IBC Itch & Urge

Regarding telecine pros and cons there has recently been several thoughtful,
inspiring and educated comments as to the various benefits of current
technology. But it has been with lack of discussion on a certain subject. I just
have to say it.

The REALLY novel  part of FLH-1000 (and presumably  the Spirit, although  I
havent had my hands on it)  happens BEFORE the CCD's (possibly including them).
I am referring to the entire light source package.
Spectrally the light source provides wider bandwidth than halogens or CRT's,  it
does so more spectrally uniformly thus reducing heavy masking in the post
PEC/CCD domain when it is, strictly speaking, too late (from a scientific point
of view).
Since the light source is very intense it must be moderated and thus utilizes an
adjustable aperture/shutter system allowing light adjustment (without colour
temperature changes) to a wide range of densities. Obviously, this allows to
adjust light rather than (by the conventional method) electrical gain (and noise
with it)  in the post film domain. An intelligent eye-like colour/detail concept
can thus be designed without taking into account  the constraint of an
inadequate light source, the CCD's will operate optimally. Remember that detail
in CCD's is normally traded against sensitivity, thus less of a compromise need
to be made. Finally, a device is also used to ensure that the light that hits
the film is "soft" that is, purely and uniformly dispersed.

So, who designed the lightpath? You know the reply,  Kodak did. They should know
what the state of the art  technology up until then was lacking, shouldnt they?
Or in a more provocative and speculative manner, what could not be extracted
from film before...
This sort of matches in with Dick Hobbs reprint about Kodak comments on films
happy future.

Shall a donn my asbestos suit?

Mike Reichel 
(feeling better now)