RAJENDRA BISWAS Posted November 25, 2009 Share Posted November 25, 2009 does image quality if film dpeend on the size of the film like 35mm or 120,70mm ,in photograhy world 120 film creates higher resolution rpovides used witha good lens,,so is the lens important for film size,is shooting in 70mm any different than 35mm...is 70mm just amedium to blowup for imax or there is ahigher image quality Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris Millar Posted November 25, 2009 Share Posted November 25, 2009 There is no cine 120 - 70mm is a projection format, 65mm is the acquisition format associated with it - all things being equal yes it is higher res - yes you'll need special lenses for it, ones with a larger image circle or 'coverage' - 70mm much more expensive in terms of stock, processing, scanning and heavier rarer cameras etc... For various reasons sometimes people shoot 35mm and blow up to 70mm - sometimes people shoot 65mm or vistavision and reduce to 35mm - and then all that IMAX carry on too - but for now dont let this bog down your understanding ... I dont think I answered all your questions - ha ha - oops Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Premium Member Adrian Sierkowski Posted November 25, 2009 Premium Member Share Posted November 25, 2009 The main difference in those films is the grain. The image is "decreased" less to fit on 120mm as opposed to 35mm still film so it's size in relation to the grain on the film is different. And we then later will enlarge this "recorded" image to view it, it is again enlarged less off of the 120mm film, which means the grain is enlarged less. And this grain enlargement is what changes our perception of resolution; even if we're using the same film in both the 120mm camera and the 35mm camera (say TriX for stills people). In motion pictures it's the same idea with 8/16/35/65(70). You are enlarging and reducing the world less as you move up that scale, and the recorded image is "larger" in relation to the grain of the film as you move up and down. That's the simple way to think about it. Now shooting 70mm (which as mentioned is really 65) has many other considerations, primarily cost, but also Depth of Field, lenses, camera size etc. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RAJENDRA BISWAS Posted November 26, 2009 Author Share Posted November 26, 2009 ron frickes movies are 70mm do people din a difference in the visaul quality is a difference between 35mm and 70 visible in tv Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brian Drysdale Posted November 26, 2009 Share Posted November 26, 2009 I suspect it might be difficult to do direct comparisons because they currently don't shoot features on 65mm. Although films like "Lawrence of Arabia" do look cleaner than their contemporary films even on SD, although with modern stocks on SD you mightn't notice a difference, however on HD the 65mm may look slightly better. 70mm is really a big screen format and HD is supposed to be similar to 35mm prints. In the end it will depend on the chain, chances are for TV, the 70mm road show productions will have been reduced to 35mm for the transfer to video. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Holland Posted November 26, 2009 Share Posted November 26, 2009 Hey most people who watch the TV , cant see any difference between 8mm and 70mm , their TVs are so badly set up over bright ,way do much contrast ,over saturated !! The general viewing public are stupid !!! sad but true !! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Salim Posted November 26, 2009 Share Posted November 26, 2009 The main difference in those films is the grain. The image is "decreased" less to fit on 120mm as opposed to 35mm still film so it's size in relation to the grain on the film is different. And we then later will enlarge this "recorded" image to view it, it is again enlarged less off of the 120mm film, which means the grain is enlarged less. And this grain enlargement is what changes our perception of resolution; even if we're using the same film in both the 120mm camera and the 35mm camera (say TriX for stills people). Can I just correct the grammer for 120 'stills' film. 120 film is actually 64mm wide, and for some reason even some labs call it 120mm format. :rolleyes: John S Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Premium Member John Sprung Posted November 27, 2009 Premium Member Share Posted November 27, 2009 ... however on HD the 65mm may look slightly better. . Does anybody know of a 65mm originated film that's been telecined to HD? It would be interesting to see how big the difference is. -- J.S. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michel Hafner Posted November 27, 2009 Share Posted November 27, 2009 Does anybody know of a 65mm originated film that's been telecined to HD? It would be interesting to see how big the difference is. -- J.S. Blu Rays: Baraka (70mm 8K scan), IMAX parts of Dark Knight and Transformers 2, Grand Canyon (IMAX 8K scan), How the West Was Won (3 times 2K scan of Cinerama), The Searchers (Vistavision), North by Northwest (Vistavision) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Premium Member Adrian Sierkowski Posted November 27, 2009 Premium Member Share Posted November 27, 2009 Can I just correct the grammer for 120 'stills' film.120 film is actually 64mm wide, and for some reason even some labs call it 120mm format. :rolleyes: John S Quite true. Force of habit on the "mm" designation I suppose. Didn't know 120 was 64mm though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Site Sponsor Robert Houllahan Posted November 28, 2009 Site Sponsor Share Posted November 28, 2009 Does anybody know of a 65mm originated film that's been telecined to HD? It would be interesting to see how big the difference is. -- J.S. I have seen Imax scanned to 6K and downressed to for display on a Pioneer Kuro 50" for a baselight demo did it look better? f**k yeah, the better the item you stuff in the little box the better it looks. I find it funny that most comparisons between D-Cine cams and film are usually made with the worst film formats like 3-perf or whatever practically the smallest negative possible. But when you see older film like "to catch a theif" like I did last night on my mom's 20" crap crt from cable they look better than any of these garbage "modern" formats. So much for progress and not for nothin stocks have not advanced that much since that film was made they just need less light. Want more? cut a bigger film cloth... -Rob- Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RAJENDRA BISWAS Posted November 28, 2009 Author Share Posted November 28, 2009 does 65mm film capture more detail and information... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RAJENDRA BISWAS Posted November 28, 2009 Author Share Posted November 28, 2009 Can I just correct the grammer for 120 'stills' film.120 film is actually 64mm wide, and for some reason even some labs call it 120mm format. :rolleyes: John S but 120 comes in category of large format.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Premium Member David Mullen ASC Posted November 28, 2009 Premium Member Share Posted November 28, 2009 does 65mm film capture more detail and information... Sure... if you think of detail in terms of lines per millimeter, if you have more overall millimeters, you have more overall lines. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Glen Alexander Posted November 28, 2009 Share Posted November 28, 2009 (edited) does 65mm film capture more detail and information... it depends on how much you want to spend and what film stock you shoot on. i scanned my VistaVision film at 78 lp/mm and it crushes any 4-, 3-, or 2-perf, only IMAX resolution comes close. i am only limited by the grain of my film. Edited November 28, 2009 by Glen Alexander Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Premium Member Charles MacDonald Posted November 29, 2009 Premium Member Share Posted November 29, 2009 but 120 comes in category of large format.. While 120 film would be a large format in the Movie world, it is only considered medium format in the still world. 8 by 10 Inch is large format! 120 film produces images about 60mm wide, and they can be 9, 6 or 4.5 cm long on older cameras, with some newer (like from the 1960 era) shooting 6X7cm Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris Millar Posted November 29, 2009 Share Posted November 29, 2009 While 120 film would be a large format in the Movie world, it is only considered medium format in the still world. 8 by 10 Inch is large format! 120 film produces images about 60mm wide, and they can be 9, 6 or 4.5 cm long on older cameras, with some newer (like from the 1960 era) shooting 6X7cm Some panoramic 120 ratios are considered 'large format' - especially once their diagonal dimension exceeds that of 4x5 ;) - You could exceed the total area if you wanted... But yes, 645, 6x6, 6x7, 6x8, 6x9 = medium format Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RAJENDRA BISWAS Posted November 29, 2009 Author Share Posted November 29, 2009 Some panoramic 120 ratios are considered 'large format' - especially once their diagonal dimension exceeds that of 4x5 ;) - You could exceed the total area if you wanted... But yes, 645, 6x6, 6x7, 6x8, 6x9 = medium format thats why its called mamiya 645 :) i guess... but does the lense does the amgic or the film coz, cameras like holga do take good pictures but ti limited by plastic lense Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris Millar Posted November 29, 2009 Share Posted November 29, 2009 thats why its called mamiya 645 :) i guess... but does the lense does the amgic or the film coz, cameras like holga do take good pictures but ti limited by plastic lense Yes - Rollei SL66, Mamiya RX67, Fuji GSW690 etc... Both lens and film are factors - the main factor involved is the photographer Film size has a relationship with the lenses themselves - for example: Larger formats tend to have relatively slower lenses for the same FOV in a smaller format It might sound contradictory but larger formats tend to have smaller DOF for the same FOV etc... Snore. Can we talk about lighting ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris Millar Posted November 29, 2009 Share Posted November 29, 2009 oops RZ67 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Premium Member Keith Walters Posted November 29, 2009 Premium Member Share Posted November 29, 2009 (edited) Hey most people who watch the TV , cant see any difference between 8mm and 70mm , their TVs are so badly set up over bright ,way do much contrast ,over saturated !! The general viewing public are stupid !!! sad but true !! Yes, but they might be of the opinion that some people's obsession with six foot TV screens, Blu-ray players and spending a fortune squeezing the last 2% of performance of the system is also stupid. A clapped-out 14" CRT TV with a 2" speaker on an indoor aerial still tells the story well enough for many people. Who are we to judge? Edited November 29, 2009 by Keith Walters Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RAJENDRA BISWAS Posted November 29, 2009 Author Share Posted November 29, 2009 Yes - Rollei SL66, Mamiya RX67, Fuji GSW690 etc... Both lens and film are factors - the main factor involved is the photographer Film size has a relationship with the lenses themselves - for example: Larger formats tend to have relatively slower lenses for the same FOV in a smaller format It might sound contradictory but larger formats tend to have smaller DOF for the same FOV etc... Snore. Can we talk about lighting ? yeah lighting is important..but its really the aprture which manipualtes light, so iguess 35mm and 6x7 both are unique and contribuiting to the artist..but i think35mm is bteer than 16mm Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mark Dunn Posted November 29, 2009 Share Posted November 29, 2009 Quite true. Force of habit on the "mm" designation I suppose. Didn't know 120 was 64mm though. It's not quite as wide as that. I've just measured some at 61mm. which accords more with the European name for it, 6x6. The spool is a little wider as the backing paper overlaps the film. The aperture dimensions vary but it's 55x55mm. in a Hasselblad. The 70mm. back for the Hasselblad has the same frame size, but of course there's no comparison with cine film. The sprocket holes are positioned differently. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RAJENDRA BISWAS Posted January 3, 2010 Author Share Posted January 3, 2010 so does 70mm improve tone quality Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
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 accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now