Jump to content

The HD Revolution?


Guest dpforum1968

Recommended Posts

Guest dpforum1968

Oh and of course I know this....

 

"Film negative for stock shots is requested primarily because programs wish to do their own telecine transfer, for multiple reasons - color correction, sizing changes, integration into visual effects shots, and other reasons. In many cases, the telecine transfers provided by the stock houses are simply not at the same quality level as those done for the rest of the show by the larger post houses"

 

Like I said I run a stock footage company. And you you seem to have shot a hole in your own argument. This statement is more in favour of 35mm than against it.

 

BTW, I use the biggest transfer house in the city of Toronto for my transfers, Deluxe. They do ALL the feature films shot in Toronto.

 

DC

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 162
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

  • Premium Member

Hi,

 

 

> Even if technically speaking grain is a mistake/artifact, it still adds to the look.

> Personally I like the feel of grain.

 

Yes, absolutely, under certain circumstances it helps and in others hardly matters. I just think it should be an option, not an unavoidable side-effect.

 

Phil

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Phil, I am curious as to you saying that grain shows up quite handily in 2K transfers. While this might be the case with the high-speed stocks that people seem content to shoot in the middle of the day just because they don't want to deal with lighting and metering and screening, I feel that the slower speed films can produce virtually grainless 2K transfers even from 16mm. With film, all stocks are not the same. 5245 is a lot different from 5289. Grain is distracting in some instances I agree, but it can be controlled. Personally, I find 2K transfers to be just as annoying if not more so than grainy film is. Bourne Supremacy looked like it was shot on 16mm or 5289 it was so grainy looking as a result of the DI coupled with grain aliasing. People seem to think that when they telecine footage that when they get grainy results that it's all the fault of the film. A lot of times it's the fault of the scanner/telecine machine and the overall inability of the pixel to render fine detail and color properly. Incidentally, I saw a commercial for an HDTV the other day (can't think of the brand off hand, sorry) that advertised its televisions capable of delivering the quality of a theatrical movie at home. It then showed a movie camera. So not all people feel that HD and HDTV will bring out the graininess and imperfections of film. Many people in fact feel that HDTV will bring out the good things in film that SDTV can't grasp.

 

Take Care.

~Karl Borowski

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Premium Member

Hi,

 

Certainly true. I have an Arri test shot here (girl sitting at table holding macbeth chart, possibly a standard) which is certainly a lot less grainy than, say, Cold Mountain, which is as chunky as you'd expect from ISO500 stock. It's still very visible, though. Scanned on Northlight, so that's not liable to be the problem!

 

Unfortunately there's no keykode string in the Arri test DPX so I can't determine the stock - I'll look around.

 

Phil

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Premium Member
Just stock footage/film lingo for:

 

DX = Day Exterior

 

NX = Night Exterior

 

There is a long list of "codes" we use for describing shots.

 

NX and DX are the most common since a lot of the stock footage business is providing establishing shots for projects filmed in one place but set in another.

 

DC

Oh, that's makes sense. I probably could have figured that out for myself if there was an NX in there.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest dpforum1968

You want to download full res 1080X1920 HD video off the web?

 

Unless it's HDV with a data rate of 3.5 MBs per second it would be a huge file taking hours to download. We usually send out HD shots on CD with a data rate of about 30 MBs per second, so a 10 second shot is going to be about 300MB.

 

How would you view this shot once you had it? On your computer monitor? How would you play it back? A standard 7200 rpm drive is not fast enough to playback a 30 MB per second shot, your drive with chug and sputter.

 

The best thing for you to do is to go into Circuit City or the local Sony store. Just watch a SD and HD TV side by side. Make sure you are watching a HD signal on the HD TV. Many of these stores just play a regular DVD designed for SD on the HD TV, which is really missing the point of HD TV.

 

Try and watch Discovery Channel HD on the HD TV, then you can compare.

 

I frankly don't see the big deal, as I have stated numerous times in my posts.

 

But you can judge for your self.

 

DC

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Premium Member

Compare Discovery Channel real HD with an upconverting DVD player. You should be able to do that at a retail electronics place. The upconverted DVD, of course, isn't as sharp as true HD. But to me, very subjectively, it looks about 2/3 of the way from NTSC to HD. You can get the player for about $300 U.S. If you buy an HD set, the player is well worth having. Given the choice between bugs and beasties very sharp and major feature films not quite as sharp, I'll often go for the movies.

 

 

 

-- J.S.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Like I said I run a stock footage company.  And you you seem to have shot a hole in your own argument.  This statement is more in favour of 35mm than against it.

 

BTW, I use the biggest transfer house in the city of Toronto for my transfers, Deluxe.  They do ALL the feature films shot in Toronto.

 

I'm not going to waste everyone's time here by continuing to argue with you about this. You have your opinion based on your own experience, and I have mine based on my experience. Take your pick.

 

And, for the record, I didn't "shoot a hole" in anything, and I'm not "for" anything or "against" anything. What I said was that most stock that is currently available is on 35mm, so shots are presumed to have originated on that format, and, when this is the case, producers generally prefer to do their own transfer of said stock - regardless of where the stock house's original transfer might or might not have been done. When it is not true, there is no telecine, so the situation doesn't exist. I didn't say anything that indicates any particular personal preference between the two. I simply reported the way things are.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Premium Member

If you want to see what REAL HD looks like don't go to your local Circuit City or Best Buy, go to your local rental house and ask if you can see any tests they have shot using an HD camera played back from an HD tape on a broadcast quality monitor. Of course thats not what its going to look like on a regular television set because of all the compression, but its a good way to see how great HD can look.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Premium Member
If you want to see what REAL HD looks like don't go to your local Circuit City or Best Buy, go to your local rental house and ask if you can see any tests they have shot using an HD camera played back from an HD tape on a broadcast quality monitor.  Of course thats not what its going to look like on a regular television set because of all the compression, but its a good way to see how great HD can look.

Likewise, compare the NTSC you see at home or Circuit City with the NTSC on professional monitors in post facilities. (Likewise, I'm sure, for PAL/SECAM in those countries). I had a decent semi-pro monitor and 3/4" player at home, and the neighbors asked if it was HDTV.

 

 

 

-- J.S.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Premium Member
Likewise, compare the NTSC you see at home or Circuit City with the NTSC on professional monitors in post facilities...

 

Thats very true. Watching DigiBeta or Beta SP on a professional monitor, with a professional player can be better than broadcasted HD. I don't own an HDTV at the moment, and I don't plan on buying one until there is some kind of standard for HD DVD's.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Premium Member
I don't own an HDTV at the moment, and I don't plan on buying one until there is some kind of standard for HD DVD's.

I was also of the opinion that it's too early for HD at home. But my wife really wanted something better than what we had.... So I went with a 34" Panasonic CRT and the upconverting DVD.

 

 

 

-- J.S.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

Forum Sponsors

Metropolis Post

New Pro Video - New and Used Equipment

Gamma Ray Digital Inc

Broadcast Solutions Inc

Visual Products

Film Gears

CINELEASE

BOKEH RENTALS

CineLab

Cinematography Books and Gear



×
×
  • Create New...