Jump to content

Adam Ray

Basic Member
  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Profile Information

  • Occupation
  • Location
    Los Angeles
  1. You are saying scan at 480 then blow the 480 up to HD. Of course anything blownup from 480 will not be great. If I was viewing on 1080 then I would scan at 1080. The issue with money is on the top end overscanning 35mm film. For budgeting and backing up digital media every 36-48 months for life - things get expensive.
  2. It's really simple actually and people try to make it out to be more difficult than it is. I can scan a faded Polaroid at 1200dpi and it doesn't make it any better, just because I can now zoom in more on a portion of the picture doesn't mean it has "hidden resolution" "fine detail" or anything else. Based on human 20/20 vision seated at a minimum distance from the source at what point is over scanning overkill and a waste of time and money? The first list here is all that is needed.
  3. Nonsensical, is you telling us what we already know and was covered in the original post. Best possible scenario. Lens resolutions etc, no one said "fixed" resolutions. I specifically stated this was a category it fell into. If you don't turn the 4k camera on it has 0 resolution. If Alfalfa shoves a fist full of bubble gum in the 35mm camera it will run at 0 frames a second etc etc. Not worst case scenarios, not common scenarios, Best case. Any and all discussions on resolution are production decisions based on money...always. Our eyes don't have lines of resolution either, so why do we talk about lines, pixels or grain? We have too. A 4k camera shooting 4k and downloading at 1080p looks better than the same camera shooting at 1080p to start with. I don't even care why I just need to know this. If I shot 35mm with a low quality zoom lens on 500ASA I wouldn't expect it to be 6k. Scanners, Monitors, TV's, Projectors and Digital Cameras measure in "K's". Film doesn't and must be matched to a corresponding equivalent. No one here is going to shoot 35mm and project it in their house -- and be a part of this discussion at least. You aren't going to stand in the middle of a screening room and look at your dailies and say "Ah, yesterday didn't go very well, just scan this at 1.5K" You need to plan ahead and do the math for hard drives and everything needed. Kodak is releasing a better quality Super 8 camera soon so even those numbers play into this. We didn't shoot on 35mm in the past because what we saw at the theater was sub 1080p if you were lucky, with the dirty scratched up lenses, projector lamps that were too old and running at half power to save money. We did it for the future. Because people like you try and shut down resolution discussions so often, is why it took me so long to put together and provide this information. If you look at the great chart provided by Tyler Purcell and copy and paste it online you won't find it anywhere. Perhaps a million people have it already, maybe none, but if it's not searchable, it's not public. I even opened with the chart so no one would be forced to read anything to get to it when needed. If you are happy with your DVD's on your SD TV that is great, just shoot on Beta-SP but try handing it to a neighbor to watch. I'm not fascinated with the numbers, it all takes away from the art of it all. Basically you need a little digital overkill but not too much ($$$). Without the numbers, you don't have a budget and without a budget you don't have a film.
  4. My mistake the equation is right in front of me.
  5. Looks like the numbers aren't far off except for the lower end 8mm category. What is the equation to get megapixels from resolution?
  6. 2 perf is only using half the negative space of 4. I like the easy math on this one.
  7. 18k = IMAX 15-perf (or 36K?) 12-13k = 70MM 5-perf 6K = 35MM 4-perf 3K = 35MM 2-perf 1.8K = S16MM 1.5K = 16MM 720p = S8MM 480 = 8MM I had to share this with someone. I found so many people including myself looking for these numbers I had to compile this list. I cannot find anything close to this on the internet all in one place. Digitally, IMAX is referred to as being three times better/larger than 35mm (18k / 6K). On Film, IMAX is three times larger then 70mm and 70mm is twice as large as 35mm therefore it should be six times as large. This is of course the best possible scenario of each format. These are all comparables, they cannot be absolutely perfect. I'm comparing category to category. So much in the real world changes these numbers, for example cropping 16mm to a release format reduces the frame size and corresponding resolution or finding a camera and lens that can shoot S8mm or 8mm and come close to 720 or 480 quality.
  • Create New...