Interesting Article???

Post by **Nigel** » Mon Nov 17, 2003 6:51 pm

Read this.....

http://www.fordelabs.com/db_article.php?ID=2

Good Luck

Post by **synthnut** » Mon Nov 17, 2003 7:48 pm

Now that really sums it up! Just flip the spec like this and it really changes the slant on all that shiny new video kit!!!
Top stuff ;-)

Keep shooting the perforated stuff!

Ben

Post by **skyy38** » Mon Nov 17, 2003 7:50 pm

What an elitest piece of self-indulgent crap.....

:roll:

Post by **MovieStuff** » Mon Nov 17, 2003 8:09 pm

Ironically, the article more or less describes the attributes of K40 super 8!

Post by **Nigel** » Mon Nov 17, 2003 8:20 pm

Roger--

Except the 10 stop of latitude part.

Good Luck

Post by **MovieStuff** » Mon Nov 17, 2003 8:50 pm

Nigel wrote: Except the 10 stop of latitude part.

Your point being......?

Santo · Post by **Santo** » Mon Nov 17, 2003 9:20 pm

MovieStuff wrote:Ironically, the article more or less describes the attributes of K40 super 8!

Sure he does. They aren't all that far from each other in performance, properly exploited.

But in the third from last paragraph the writer bunches up the choice of super 8 or high end video as one in the same -- a dumb one. I think what's dumb or not depends entirely on the project you're doing. You're shooting LAWRENCE OF ARABIA, DV or Super 8 is a dumb choice. You're shooting a gritty micro-budget indie, 70mm or super35 is a dumb choice (and an impossible one, probably).

Post by **super8man** » Tue Nov 18, 2003 12:59 am

blank...oops

Post by **mshan** » Tue Nov 18, 2003 1:37 am

A great read, but the source is a company dealing with film. Still, it's the truth except for this viewing video tapes 15 years from now. I tend to give them a life of 20 to 50 years. I would like to know how many MB a frame of Super8 or Regular 8?

-Mark

Video for now, Film Forever!

Post by **S8 Booster** » Tue Nov 18, 2003 10:23 am

In the eye of the beholder I guess ;-) - you might not want to read this :mrgreen:
(Or it may depend on who writes what :?: )

FILM TECHNOLOGY

For a start:

Lens quality
Thirdly, the quality of the taking lens has a dramatic effect on resolution. While todayÃ¢â‚¬â„¢s zoom lenses are extremely good, the ultimate quality can often only be achieved with prime lenses. And how often do you see a prime lens on a video camera? For this article I will concentrate on 35m film resolution. The negative itself can achieve resolutions exceeding 6K, however zoom lenses tend to limit this to around 4K. Finally the printing process itself typically reduces there solution of film, to about 2K at the Inter-positiveÃ‚Â stage, with further minor reductions at each subsequent print stage. Therefore the result at the cinema, including projector lens losses, often measures less than 1.5K resolution on the screen. However the future for film is interesting. Already there.......

Now, 1.5k isnÃ‚Â´t that close to Super8/K40 projected :?: ;-)

Linx of possible interest on film scanning etc:
COMPRESSION TECHNOLOGY
http://www.cinemalibrestudio.com/Scanning-Transfer.htm
http://www.vtpcorp.com/htm/vidfilm.htm

R

Post by **mshan** » Tue Nov 18, 2003 12:28 pm

Sounds about right. Thank you.

-Mark

Video for now, Film Forever!

Post by **synthnut** » Tue Nov 18, 2003 12:49 pm

Hi folks,
I think some of you might have missed the point of this quote!
;-)
Ben

Post by **S8 Booster** » Tue Nov 18, 2003 1:58 pm

mshan wrote: I would like to know how many MB a frame of Super8 or Regular 8?

-Mark

Video for now, Film Forever!

Rough Calc on scanner equivalents.

35mm standard motion image size: 24.89mm x 18.67mm equals 4k
Super8 standard motion image size: 5.50mm x 4.50mm equals (approx) 0,9k.

WasenÃ‚Â´t that very low :?: :badgrin:
Ouch - 4k low res scanners are no good.

Conclusion: Super8 lenses are far better than 35mm motion cam lenses;?
Not surprising. Why :?:

Well, how big do you want the S8 frames to be then? 10 MB ok?

R

Post by **mattias** » Tue Nov 18, 2003 2:25 pm

S8 Booster wrote:35mm standard motion image size: 24.89mm x 18.67mm holds typical 4k
Super8 standard motion image size: 5.50mm x 4.50mm holds (approx) 0,213k.

4k isn't a measure of an area but a line.

24.89/5.5=4k/x <=> x = 4k*5.5/24.89 <=> x ~= 0.9k

/matt

Post by **S8 Booster** » Tue Nov 18, 2003 2:32 pm

Yup you are right.
I did this calc based on the area/filesize given by Kodak once before and came to almost the same result as you did. Got it right then ;-) 0.913 actually (S8 frame size not being exactly defined that is - well actually it is but variations occour).

Sorry I messed it up this time.

TNX

R

Filmshooting

Interesting Article???

Interesting Article???

ANother quote with a bias...