Filmshooting

Really what's that all about. Is this just a popular word for an a generic product (based on imaginary ACME from cartoons) , or was there really a company called ACME?
I see a lot of old movie equipment called ACME.

This looks even better to me than first examples.

Is there away chance that you can post a good video clip T-scan?

If both films were trasfered in the same fashion, 100T looks like it has more pronounced edge effects.

Those look great. Boy, what I wouldn't give for a motion clip of that 100T stock scene.

These pics look awsome. Can we hope for a motion version posted at some point?

Hi

Do they already sell it at pro8mm or is it just an announcement at this point?

If it is already available, does anyone have any experiences or better yet posted material?

Yea, the blacks are really dense and really "hungry" (slightly underexpose and it gets consumed by black)

The blues and reds are really punchy. 3D bright blue skies.
That's what I'd describe E100VS

It also works well for high contrast printing or pushing the contrast in photoshop. Some films ...

Also, they say (Kodak) that 100D Is supose to be a motion picture version of E100VS

If all from this thread is true, then it is nothing like E100VS

E100VS is much more saturated than 64T and has higher contrast.

The mid/late 80's were NOT a good time for any kind moving pictures.
Video looked like crap, 35mm looked like crap too because everyone was using fast grainy films (think Terminator).
Early 90's were a real bloom of cinema technology with EXR stocks, a comeback of cinemascope etc.

I can see a lot of people equialize eletronic/digital lines with analog optical lines.

There is a BIG difference.


Here is an example of horisontal lines on both film and digital mediums. They are equally sampled, no problems:

film:
http://free-os.t-com.hr/redmist/film-horis.jpg
digital ...

If what you get is 600 lines, you'll need at least 1,200 pixels which is enough for HD resolution.


600 lines, not line pairs


But ok, if you want it to be line pairs, let's discuss that instead

Supose that you do have 600 line pairs. On horisontal that would be like 1200 video lines, or 1200 ...

You saw 600 lines on the film. Tell me how can you sample those 600 lines with 600 pixels if the lines are diagonal?
why on earth would i do that? to prove what? i have obviously never made any such claims so i can only assume it's you who have some kind of point to make? if so i suggest you make ...

So in order to sample film lines (or any kind of detail) that are not strictly vertical or horisontal it takes a lot more pixels per mm than lines per mm on film.

well, if you call a factor of the square root of 2 a lot. or is my geometry off?

the last time i did this test i saw around 600 lines ...

http://www.filmshooting.com/filming/page5.php

This link mentions Super 8 having over 1300 lines of resolution, more than 1080 in HD. Is that still a flour bag in a 10 pound sack?

that page should really be updated :/

super8 resolution is way under 1080 lines, the extra detail you get with a HD ...

hmmm...

Could benefit from a CCD with slightly more dynamic range, and maybe from a highe resolution scan.

David M. Leugers wrote:LOL! Kodak should use that story to help sell the idea of shooting S8mm better prepares you for a professional film career than shooting DV. 8)


David M. Leugers

doesn't it?