|
|
This topic comprises 3 pages: 1 2 3
|
|
Author
|
Topic: Digital Conversion
|
|
|
Bobby Henderson
"Ask me about Trajan."
Posts: 10973
From: Lawton, OK, USA
Registered: Apr 2001
|
posted 11-18-2011 12:10 PM
What kind of system is being installed (Dolby Digital Cinema, AccessIT/Doremi, etc.)? Is it 2K or 4K? Is the sound system being upgraded to 5.1? I may have to check it out when the conversion is finished.
Video has a certain look to it, but I don't agree that it is "sharper" in the sense of showing more detail. Film photography can still beat video in that regard (and absolutely trounce video whenever large format processes are being used). I hope most movies will continue to be shot on film for years to come regardless of how they are projected in movie theaters. Even if I only see a movie on Blu-ray, the movie is going to look better if it was shot on film rather than video.
The Carmike 8 here in Lawton still has operational 35mm projection systems on screens 5 and 7; Christie 2K projectors are positioned along side. Nevertheless, it's been a long time since the theater received a film print.
In terms of image quality, I can't say the switch to digital made any noticeable improvement at the Carmike theater. 35mm projection typically looked very good there. The black levels are superior on film. With digital the image is absolutely rock steady. So many movies have their film scanned and then "color timed" via digital intermediate. Digital projection is giving you a closer reproduction of that finished digital source file. Life in the booth will be easier in some respects (no more prints to build up, tear down, carry, ship, etc.).
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
Scott Norwood
Film God
Posts: 8146
From: Boston, MA. USA (1774.21 miles northeast of Dallas)
Registered: Jun 99
|
posted 11-18-2011 01:17 PM
Depth of field relates to the lens aperture and the focal length of the lens used in original photography. This is indirectly influenced by the amount of available light, the speed of the film being used, the shutter angle of the camera, and the film format.
In general, and all other things being equal, longer lenses have a shallower depth of field than shorter lenses. Smaller lens apertures provide deeper depth of field than larger ones.
If I photograph something with a 35mm still camera using a 35mm lens and then photograph the same thing, using the same film speed and camera settings, with a 4x5 camera using a 135mm lens (which has approximately the same field of view), the picture from the 4x5 camera will have shallower depth of field.
If I scan these pictures and look at them on a computer monitor (or video projector), depth of field is not affected.
I think that the difference that Ron is seeing is that edges of objects look sharper when projected on a DLP system. I agree that this is the case, and it gives the illusion of greater sharpness. This could relate to the way in which the film is scanned (and possibly edge-enhanced). This does not mean that there is more actual detail than there would be with a 35mm print, however. If you want to see the difference in detail of film vs. DLP, look at close-ups of actors' faces. There is far more actual detail in a film print. (Disclaimer: I have not seen 4K DLP.)
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Bobby Henderson
"Ask me about Trajan."
Posts: 10973
From: Lawton, OK, USA
Registered: Apr 2001
|
posted 11-18-2011 05:02 PM
quote: Greg Anderson
One reason that people who shot video were so excited by the video capabilities of Canon's 5D Mark II was that the larger sensor suddenly made it so much easier to get that artistic, shallow depth of field everyone liked to see.
Expanding on that farther, one could use any of the lenses in Canon's EF series, or other non-Canon lenses. Video cameras simply don't have that variety of lens choices. If you want an extremely narrow focal plane lenses like the L-series 85mm and 50mm will open up to f/1.2. You can get other effects from macro lenses, tilt-shift lenses, fisheye, super telephoto, etc. Having a "full frame" sensor, the 5D Mark II will show a greater periprheal view from each lens. That's a big advantage in wide angle photography.
The low DOF look is something you really need to use even if you don't want to use it when shooting with the 5D Mark II or other "HDSLR" cameras. Because of the way the camera down samples to 1080p it is prone to showing moiré when shooting video with deep depth of field.
quote:
Unfortunately, if you were also lazy about focus (because your previous video camera was more forgiving) you might be in trouble! If you didn't bring a good monitor to your shoot and you tried to rely on your little viewfinder then you might not see your mistakes until you got home. Oops!
It's pretty crazy how much one has to spend on accessories to make a DSLR camera like the 5D Mark II work reasonably well as a general purpose video camera. Shotgun mic, focus rails, shoulder mounted camera platform, external monitor, etc. All that gear, plus the camera body and the lenses make the system cost considerably more than a dedicated "pro-sumer" level HD video camera.
You don't need all the accessories if you're doing shots of objects, landscapes or anything static. I disable auto-focus for a number of different types of photography. You can focus using the LCD screen and pressing the button that gives a 5X or 10X zoomed in view. I like using live view anyway to see the histogram (this works much better than the light meter in the view finder). The EOS utility can tether the camera to a computer, such as a notebook, and provide a much bigger view of the shot. If you're having to follow-focus moving action then some of those accessories become a necessity.
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
All times are Central (GMT -6:00)
|
This topic comprises 3 pages: 1 2 3
|
Powered by Infopop Corporation
UBB.classicTM
6.3.1.2
The Film-Tech Forums are designed for various members related to the cinema industry to express their opinions, viewpoints and testimonials on various products, services and events based upon speculation, personal knowledge and factual information through use, therefore all views represented here allow no liability upon the publishers of this web site and the owners of said views assume no liability for any ill will resulting from these postings. The posts made here are for educational as well as entertainment purposes and as such anyone viewing this portion of the website must accept these views as statements of the author of that opinion
and agrees to release the authors from any and all liability.
|
Home
Printer-friendly view of this topic