When is HD NOT HD

[Doramius]

Kodak Cineon if a few years ago ...

no longer made -- but still very popular and high quality

It may have been as I'm originally from upstate NY and most everything was a Kodak product if it had to do with imaging. I just remember it having REALLY good quality. When bringing it to a digital image it took up a lot of space too.

[Marco33]

I hate to get back on topic, but

I guess we will be subject to the same poor transfering once HD-DVD comes along. So it would seem that these new HD-DVD's will not be "HD".

[flaninacupboard]

they'll either be junk and affordble (like DVD's) or the best they can be but obscure and picey (like criterion lasers)

[BJ_M]

Kodak Cineon if a few years ago ...

no longer made -- but still very popular and high quality

It may have been as I'm originally from upstate NY and most everything was a Kodak product if it had to do with imaging. I just remember it having REALLY good quality. When bringing it to a digital image it took up a lot of space too.

when we are working with 70mm film resolution digital images created in maya or SI or along those lines at generally the highest quality -- each frame is about 50meg and we render to 30fps .... thats using 16bit cin files ;..

for scanning to 2k to 4k -- each image is still pretty big

[Doramius]

In actual referrence, some of the digital movie cameras used for big budget films today have better resolution than traditional cameras used for movies in the past. So any of the new movies, should have no problem being in HD-DVD. I think when they do HD-DVD, they need to have the players be compatible with the standard DVD discs. Obviously HD-DVD discs won't be playable in the standard DVD players, but people don't necessarily have to get all their movies over again when the difference in quality between the 2 movies (IE: Saturday Night Fever) is no different from each other because the movie company is just trying to make more money. When DVD came out, movie companies were thrilled, because now they are taking in tons of royalties on movies, a second time, that people already had in a VHS collection. I have a VHS and DVD copy of Jurassic Park, Indiana Jones, Better Off Dead, and quite a few others. To make this new jump would spark a lot of money for movie companies, but I think it's FLOP would be to not allow it to play the traditional DVD's. Why would I spend extra money on new discs and player that doesn't play my large collection or isn't compatible with any of my current players? If they do that way I think it'll die like Laser Disc and Beta.

[flaninacupboard]

a digital camera being beter resoltuion than a film camera is an entirely subjective thing. personally i think a 70mm film will crap all over anything available today, this can always change of cousre.

The players will undobtedly play DVD's, SACD's, DVD-A's and CD's. the laser assembly will also weigh about twelve kilos

[Doramius]

a digital camera being beter resoltuion than a film camera is an entirely subjective thing. personally i think a 70mm film will crap all over anything available today, this can always change of cousre.

The players will undobtedly play DVD's, SACD's, DVD-A's and CD's. the laser assembly will also weigh about twelve kilos

I think there are a few digital models that come close or are just a tad better than 70mm, but are about as cheap as a new 3000 sq. ft. house in San Diego, CA that has a new Porche Roadster in the 3 car garage. You're talking a very pretty penny for a piece of equipment like that. I'm sure it'll get better in the future, too. You have to understand, US government already has cameras that are on satellites that can take a distant picture, and then use a negative and zoom in on an antenna on the top of your house. Don't even need the camera for the zoom in because the picture taken was of such high pixelation/resolution. Wouldn't that be a nice thing to use?

They'll add cushioning and arms and sell it like a couch so it has usefulness for the space it will consume. Just like early TV's with a shelf and bookcase included with the housing.

[Marco33]

In actual referrence, some of the digital movie cameras used for big budget films today have better resolution than traditional cameras used for movies in the past. So any of the new movies, should have no problem being in HD-DVD. I think when they do HD-DVD, they need to have the players be compatible with the standard DVD discs. Obviously HD-DVD discs won't be playable in the standard DVD players, but people don't necessarily have to get all their movies over again when the difference in quality between the 2 movies (IE: Saturday Night Fever) is no different from each other because the movie company is just trying to make more money. When DVD came out, movie companies were thrilled, because now they are taking in tons of royalties on movies, a second time, that people already had in a VHS collection. I have a VHS and DVD copy of Jurassic Park, Indiana Jones, Better Off Dead, and quite a few others. To make this new jump would spark a lot of money for movie companies, but I think it's FLOP would be to not allow it to play the traditional DVD's. Why would I spend extra money on new discs and player that doesn't play my large collection or isn't compatible with any of my current players? If they do that way I think it'll die like Laser Disc and Beta.

After reading your notes here, it may be in the movie Co's best interest to make the HD's realy HD. Like you said "why would I bother to re-buy a movie I already have if the picture quality is not much better". So, we could speculate that, HD-DVD's may not be a big seller because of this point and may go the way of the laser disk.

Hmm... I would have to say NO, to re-buying HD-DVD's if the picture quality is marginaly (good word) better than DVD. If it was true HD... I would re-buy them. Just my favorites though.

[flaninacupboard]

i have to say, 720p. wow. big ******* deal. i'm not sure what the proposed format will be, but if it's 720p i couldn't give a monkeys. when PAL DVD is 720x576 an increase of 144 lines doesn't interest me. now, give me 1440x1152 and i'll show an interest.

[Doramius]

i have to say, 720p. wow. big ******* deal. i'm not sure what the proposed format will be, but if it's 720p i couldn't give a monkeys. when PAL DVD is 720x576 an increase of 144 lines doesn't interest me. now, give me 1440x1152 and i'll show an interest.

There's technology, not compatible with anything outside of the prototype models, for video screens, cameras and storage media of resolution of up to 23,040x18,432. You thought LCD was crystal clear? This would make pure crystal look like a granite rock.

[Marco33]

i have to say, 720p. wow. big ******* deal. i'm not sure what the proposed format will be, but if it's 720p i couldn't give a monkeys. when PAL DVD is 720x576 an increase of 144 lines doesn't interest me. now, give me 1440x1152 and i'll show an interest.

Right, but then again, what they actualy do with it another thing. Like HDTV, they up-convert SD. Just cause the SD signal is now 1080i they think it's realy HD.

[BJ_M]

a digital camera being beter resoltuion than a film camera is an entirely subjective thing. personally i think a 70mm film will crap all over anything available today, this can always change of cousre.

The players will undobtedly play DVD's, SACD's, DVD-A's and CD's. the laser assembly will also weigh about twelve kilos

I think there are a few digital models that come close or are just a tad better than 70mm, but are about as cheap as a new 3000 sq. ft. house in San Diego, CA that has a new Porche Roadster in the 3..............

not even close to 70mm on the filming side !! you would be smoking crack to even think so ... though its a bit like comparing LP's to CD's ....


i posted before the effective resolution of film --


here is a pic of one of our custom 3d 70mm ...... there is also a portable model we rent out .. http://www.simex-iwerks.com/images/bush/2.JPG


here is a frame of 70mm film scanned and then COMPRESSED to jpg http://www.simex-iwerks.com/images/bush/3.JPG