[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
RE>Re: 2K work with Spirit
- To: Telecine Internet Group <telecine at alegria.com>
- Subject: RE>Re: 2K work with Spirit
- From: Paul Grace <paulg at rushes.co.uk>
- Date: 11 May 98 13:30:30 +0000
- Resent-Date: Mon, 11 May 1998 13:08:01 -0700
- Resent-From: telecine at alegria.com
- Resent-Message-ID: <"VZZU-.A.sSE.up1V1" at sun>
- Resent-Sender: SmartList account <slist at sun.alegria.com>
- Resent-To: multiple recipients of <telecine at alegria.com>
RE>Re: [TIG] 2K work with Spirit 11/5/9
I too am concerned at the quality levels of carrying out Film VFX on scans from 'telecines on steroids' as opposed to dedicated film resolution scanners.
There are some basic requirements for a scanned image for film visual FX work as most people here realise.
1/ Absolute image steadiness, that is sub pixel.
2/ Image registration between successive passes. That is to be able to take the film off and relace and have sub pixel accuracy to the previous pass.
Both of the above can be helped by tracking shots in Inferno/Illusion, but this is costly and time consuming.
3/ Absolute spacial resolution, that is a true say 2048x1536 not interpolated in the case of 2K.
4/ Equal colour bandwidth for compositing.
5/ The cost effectiveness of using such expensive equipment and an expensive room plus operator for a straight forward task.
What I will say is that maybe these telecines are just the start and the outputs of which will lead to perhaps stylized, coloured projects, for instance a brooding feel as opposed to providing elements for VFX.
I am not taking a swipe at the Spirit, it's great and has great TV pictures, the demo at NAB was cool, I was impressed....C-Reality does not fulfill these needs either (in my humble opinion).
People will and are, starting to try to use these machines for this kind of work and I commend their pioneering, budgets will ensure it happens. Maybe if a project was shot on S16, graded for a look and datascanned out for shoot out to 35mm, then I think the results would be comparable with a dedicated scanner due to the film mediums limitations. 35mm though is a different story.
>I have noticed some feature projects this year using 1K processing for
>their post effects work, and it does not compare well with 2K work. At
>least, it didn't intercut very successfully with the surrounding live
>action footage - pretty much the benchmark for expert and layman alike.
I agree 100% on film projects I have seen also...... BUT, carrying out all the elements at 1K for an enhanced television production that can be scaled down to 720 pixels may be interesting and offer a quality hike for TV VFX without slowing down the workflow as much. An improvement on our 4:4:4 standard. Maybe we will use HDTV in the Uk for exactly this purpose if the client feels it offers them a value for the extra costs. I hope so, it would be great to push the quality further.
Paul "anarchy in the Uk" Grace
66 Old Compton Street
Fax - (44) 171 734 3467
Thanks to Video Post and Transfer for supporting the TIG in 1998..
No product marketing allowed on the main TIG. Contact rob at alegria.com
978 subscribers in 36 countries on Mon May 11 13:07:05 PDT 1998
subscribe/unsubscribe with that Subject: to telecine-request at alegria.com
complete information on the TIG website http://www.alegria.com/tig3/