|
|
Posted by mmaker on 09/19/05 10:21
nonkert@yahoo.co.uk wrote:
> I see the "1080x1440" figure, but I don't understand how so few pixels
> can make up, say, the imagery on Star Wars Episode 3 stretched across a
> huge screen.
As far as I remember, HDCAM records 1440x1080 luminance pixels with
color samples for about 1/3 of those pixels. I don't know the details
of his movie, but Lucas may have been using an uncompressed camera that
could shoot up to 1920x1080 with full color information, recording to
hard disk.
Even 35mm film's greatest supporters only claim that the original
negative is equivalent to about 4k pixels across, and that's dropped a
lot by the time it's been through multiple analog reproduction stages
to get the final print onto the screen. I believe most effects shots
are scanned at around 2048 pixels wide, and parts of the 'Toy Story'
movies were rendered at only 1280 pixels wide.
I went to an IMAX seminar some time ago where they were arguing about
whether CG for an IMAX frame should be rendered at 6k or 12k pixels
across, and IMAX is a _HUGE_ negative compared to 35mm.
Mark
Navigation:
[Reply to this message]
|