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

Re: Re: Re: 480P - Anyone know what this is?




In a message dated 07/17/1998 17:22:44, you wrote:

<<In terms of grainsstructure, as it is now "sampled" at double speed it

should become more uniform.>>

Why would uniform grain structure be considered a good thing? I like a little
bit of chaos in life. I'm not exactly sure what you are going after here, is
it a better looking image, or an image that handles being compressed better?

<<Not sure what you mean by temporal resolution.



The capability to portray motion.>>

I think that for the most part Film at twenty four Frames a second handles
motion really well. One could muck around a bit with the shutter angle.
Panavision can open up to 200 degrees, and give you more motion blur ( a
longer exposure time). Many 35 mm cameras have adjustable shutters that allow
you to have a shorter exposure time, and less blur. Of course with shorter
exposure times panning can become problematical ( which a higher frame rate
may help). Movement itself can become Too crisp ( In my opinion), although it
depends on the aplication. More light will be needed with shorter exposure
times, and that will up the cost of production. 
It so happens that many people like the motion blur associated with shooting
at 24 F.P.S. with an 180 degree shutter. Although in the theater we do see the
same image two times before the next frame comes along ( or is it three.)  OR
do you mean that when transfering film shot at 24 F.P.S. for NTSC, then you
get a less than wonderful capability to portray motion 
( would that mean Aliasing, and motion artifacts associated with 3:2 )?
Again not sure why you want to change film cameras, frankly I don't like the
idea of runing my Aaton at 48 F.P.S. all the time. Film loads last only half
as long, the camera becomes louder, and then the soundman complains more
{which is bad enough  ;-) }, and then production may have to spen more money
in post filtering out the much louder cameras,  Not to mention how much more I
will need to spend having my camera serviced more often. As a side note all
those wonderful speed effects being shot at 150 F.P.S. and ramped to 24/25,
the ones that clients seem to have fallen in love with, will now be much less
effective if the base speed is 48/50 FPS.

<<<<<And this two perf scheme? is the idea to maintain the aspect ratio? that

would

>mean an optical ( or electronic) stretching ( anamorphosizing ) of the

>vertical of the image ( stretching it).



Now that would mean I suppose someone

>saying that there is less resolution or some other complaint.



Less rez yes but film has actually gotten so much better that this progress

could be used in this way. >>>>

Really, with much of the HD literature claiming that super 16mm is insuficient
for HDTV, youare proposing creating a new standard , that will have
approximately the same vertical height as Super 16?

Steven ( It isn't so confusing, I'm just not sure what you are after. However
I am enjoying this topic) Gladstone
Gladstone


---
Thanks to Bob Festa and Rick Dean for support in 1998.
No product marketing allowed on the main TIG.  Contact rob at alegria.com
994 subscribers in 39 countries on Sat Jul 18 00:58:58 PDT 1998 
subscribe/unsubscribe with that Subject: to telecine-request at alegria.com
complete information on the TIG website http://www.alegria.com/tig3/