|
|
Posted by Dave Plowman (News) on 10/11/05 17:07
In article <434be8f9$0$29076$ed2619ec@ptn-nntp-reader01.plus.net>,
Ben <nospam@nospam.com> wrote:
> >>The film stock that studios posses certainly has very much higher
> >>resolution than current HDTV standards, but the projected image that
> >>you see in a typical cinema is probably about the same or even poorer
> >>than HDTV resolution.
> >
> >
> > Are you talking about electronic projectors or film ones?
> Sorry if it wasn't clear, I was talking about the 35mm stock that ends
> up in your local cinema.
Right.
> >>Kodak did a study into this in the early days of digital projection
> >>and found that some cinemas were equivalent to only 900 horizontal
> >>pixels (approximately PAL quality) while the average was iirc in the
> >>region 1500 or so.
But you've mentioned 'digital projection'?
> > Wonder what source those projectors were using? In the early days it
> > was U-Matic, which doesn't get close to broadcast PAL.
> Ermm, 35mm film ;-)
It would require an *incredibly* tatty 35mm film projector to give results
in a cinema as soft as PAL at its best. And I doubt such a beast was ever
used in UK mainstream cinemas. Of course if the lenses etc were filthy and
it wasn't focused correctly...
--
*Remember not to forget that which you do not need to know.*
Dave Plowman dave@davenoise.co.uk London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.
Navigation:
[Reply to this message]
|