Filmshooting

there must be a .mpg for mac somewhere. BTW, it IS MPEG-2 so you would need something that plays that. sorry, there isn't. most of the open/free software people are not mac users it seems, and no company wants to touch it because of the licensing stuff. at least i think that's the problem, since th...

i'm not sure i get your joke. in case you're actually asking a question, a what you see is what you get viewfinder is a video monitor. :-)

/matt

I have found that the contrast actually increases measurably when transferring reversal to video with a video camera as opposed to shooting the same scene "live" with the very same video camera. that's probably true. you'll still get som clipping, but my experience is that for very contra...

i agree with roger's post. all of it actually, except maybe for the part about responding to mattias' posts. i'll leave that to others, even though i'm often tempted... ;-)

/matt

i'm not sure, but shouldn't the re-exposure be "as long, as bright and as close as possible?" what you're trying to do with this step is to expose as many of the remaining crystals as possible.

/matt

the compser has been dead long enough, but you still can't use it without permission from the performer, or if it's a midi file, from the author of that (i guess it would be considered an arrangement). but if it's an obscure recording or "bulk" midi file i'd use it anyway, since nobody's l...

but wait. look. video can still capture almost all of the contrast on the film emulsion this is what I take for granted somehow, but do not understand at all, video can capture all the contrast of film, but it can only record limited contrast when actually filming, say, a bus station which shadows ...

Anonymous wrote:I think you forgot to draw the reversal/negative bars. they are not the same I think.

true, reversal has less latitude (shorter first bar) and higher emulsion contrast (longer second bar).

/matt

> Actually you should move the second bar to the right a bit believe me, i tried. should have used the code tag or something i guess. too late to change now, since the board think it was a guest who made the post. :-) to all readers: picture the bars pretty much centered under each other. > What a v...

But, really, how many people consider "format" to be determined by the type of camera or CCD? i don't know. you're the first i've seen. how else am i supposed to interpret you claim that the choice between film and video is a choice of format? to me that's clearly a choice of "imagin...

i hate it when i get logged out for no reason. why doesn't the auto login work?

/matt

here's one:

http://macrar.free.fr/

there's probably a "winrar" somewhere too, but i couldn't care less. ;-)

/matt

sorry roger, one more thing: i agree with almost everything you've said. i just don't get what it has to do with this discussion. i suggest you go back and read the beginning of the thread, and the question i originally replied to in particular.

/matt

sorry, missed this one: > Therefore, I think it is reasonable to suggest that using the same or > similar CCD array as the source, the format is going to dictate the difference in quality. obviously, but in this case that's completetly irrelevant. in fact, we have a very simple situation since it's ...

> After all, one looks better than the other, not because of the camera > used but, rather, the choice of format i don't agree. what you call "format" is the equivalent of a camera or a ccd. the format as we're discussing it here is the video format used for the final projection. > Obvious...