[Tig] Regular 8mm Film That No Longer Measures 8mm Wide

Rob Lingelbach rob at colorist.org
Tue Dec 6 03:01:52 GMT 2011


I need to look at this further.  May I post the message from me in the meantime, referring back to you?

Hang on a sec. what do you mean the topic appears on the tig but the text does not?   Oh, I see.   please forgive me and the TIG for this error.  It looks like certain email programs are confusing the TIG's filtering.  Here I go, posting it for now.


On Dec 5, 2011, at 6:46 PM, John A. Mozzer wrote:

> I'm confused again.  My topic appears on TIG, but the text of my email (below) does not.
> http://tig.colorist.org/pipermail/tig/2011-December/019700.html
> 
> 
> -------- Original Message --------
> Subject:	Regular 8mm Film That No Longer Measures 8mm Wide
> Date:	Sun, 04 Dec 2011 18:08:09 -0800
> From:	John A. Mozzer <jamworks at earthlink.net>
> To:	tig at colorist.org
> 
> Currently, I am having HD scans done of some of my dad's regular 8mm films on the Millennium II (natively at 1920 x 1980, overscanned, pillarboxed.)
> 
> Some of the film has shrunk to the point where it no longer measures 8mm wide. I am concerned about whether this may result in a distorted image (i.e., faces and objects looking thin.) How should the transfer service account for the film being shrunk?  Is there a mathematical method to adjust for shrinkage and/or a possible distorted image?  Or does such an adjustment have to be done visually, subjectively?
> 
> John A. Mozzer
> Los Angeles, CA
> Hobbyist; not affiliated with any business



More information about the Tig mailing list