Is 35mm film considered HD? - Page 2 - Blu-ray Forum

vveksuvarna · 08-08-2009, 04:21 AM

speaking of which ILM pipeline, has been on 4k..

RiseDarthVader · 08-08-2009, 04:57 AM

Well Michael Bay said that the IMAX scenes with Transformers in them in Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen were the first characters rendered in 4K. He is slightly wrong being that that most of the CGI rendered for The Dark Knight including Batman were done in 5.6K by Double Negative.

BozQ · 08-08-2009, 06:32 AM

The CGI in IMAX portions in Transformers ROTF were rendered in 8K.
And I'm quite sure the same is true for The Dark Knight's IMAX portions too.

RiseDarthVader · 08-08-2009, 07:05 AM

No Double Negative said they rendered it in 5.6K then upscaled to 8K for the IMAX prints. 8K is way too much work for the rendering farm they would have. And Michael Bay himself said that Devestator's IMAX scenes were rendered in 4K.

BozQ · 08-08-2009, 10:39 PM

My bad indeed it was rendered in 4k.
Sheesh, and that actually blew up the farm!

vveksuvarna · 08-08-2009, 11:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by RiseDarthVader

the CGI rendered for The Dark Knight including Batman were done in 5.6K by Double Negative.

5.6k ? whats up with that, why not have an even number ?

pagemaster · 01-17-2013, 07:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cinemaddict

I found this online:

The term "High Definition" refers to a certain number of vertical lines of resolution in an image (720 and 1080 being the most common). Because 35mm technically has no "resolution," it cannot be called "High Definition." That does not mean High Definition is better. It is just a term that does not apply to 35mm film.
From a filmmaker's perspective, High Definition offers many advantages. You don't have to wait for the film to be processed; you can upload it to a computer and begin editing that very day. But which one produces a better-looking image? That's the debate.

Is that fair to say?

From a filming purpose, 35mm is exceeds the data capture capability of HD. The problem with 35mm is that there are numerous variables that reduce the amount of data that is present on the actually movie screen. So it would be in fact possible to actually see more data on a 1080p HDTV of a 35mm 4K scan.

Alan Brown · 01-18-2013, 04:12 PM

These are a couple of excellent articles, with graphical representations of key issues, that should help most folks understand this topic better:

'4K+ Systems - Theory Basics for Motion Picture Imaging'
http://archiv.arri.de/4kplus-systems/index.htm

'The Truth About 2K, 4K and The Future of Pixels'
http://library.creativecow.net/print.php?id=1261

Best regards and beautiful pictures,
Alan Brown, President
CinemaQuest, Inc.
A Lion AV Consultants affiliate

"Advancing the art and science of electronic imaging"

pagemaster · 01-18-2013, 04:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Alan Brown

These are a couple of excellent articles, with graphical representations of key issues, that should help most folks understand this topic better:

'4K+ Systems - Theory Basics for Motion Picture Imaging'
http://archiv.arri.de/4kplus-systems/index.htm

'The Truth About 2K, 4K and The Future of Pixels'
http://library.creativecow.net/print.php?id=1261

Best regards and beautiful pictures,
Alan Brown, President
CinemaQuest, Inc.
A Lion AV Consultants affiliate

"Advancing the art and science of electronic imaging"

Useless, technically garbage.

Alan Brown · 01-18-2013, 07:04 PM

Slingblade hasn't had his fries yet today!

Penton-Man · 01-19-2013, 03:12 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by pagemaster

Useless, technically garbage.

You really are quite the sarcastic fellow

, both in your tone and in your expression….

Quote:

Originally Posted by pagemaster

You were informed wrong.

Also, 4K 3D at 24 fps has NEVER, EVER. EVER been done as of yet.

^ On the contrary, it’s been done through 2 servers and even only one (over a year ago)… http://magazine.creativecow.net/arti...-single-server

Not to mention non-publicized demos.

Penton-Man · 01-19-2013, 03:31 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Alan Brown

These are a couple of excellent articles, with graphical representations of key issues, that should help most folks understand this topic better:

'4K+ Systems - Theory Basics for Motion Picture Imaging'
http://archiv.arri.de/4kplus-systems/index.htm

Alan, as to the above ^ , indeed...and even award winning

…

http://forum.blu-ray.com/showthread....te#post6773074

Alan Brown · 01-19-2013, 03:37 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Penton-Man

Alan, as to the above ^ , indeed...and even award winning

…

http://forum.blu-ray.com/showthread....te#post6773074

Thanks for the link!

Penton-Man · 01-22-2013, 07:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Alan Brown

Thanks for the link!

You’re welcome.

Showing that his imaging interests aren't solely restricted to resolution, back near the end of the last decade, he also did some respectable work regarding a simple method to measure dynamic range -

http://www.visionaryforces.com/downl...est-Charts.pdf
Something which digital camera manufacturers have had a tendency to ‘fudge on’….at least in the past.

08-08-2009, 04:57 AM	#22
RiseDarthVader Power Member Member since:Sep 2008 Location:Australia Home Theater Gallery:27 Blu-ray collection:132 PS3 collection:10	Well Michael Bay said that the IMAX scenes with Transformers in them in Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen were the first characters rendered in 4K. He is slightly wrong being that that most of the CGI rendered for The Dark Knight including Batman were done in 5.6K by Double Negative. You can't spell film without ILM - Industrial Light & Magic

08-08-2009, 07:05 AM	#24
RiseDarthVader Power Member Member since:Sep 2008 Location:Australia Home Theater Gallery:27 Blu-ray collection:132 PS3 collection:10	No Double Negative said they rendered it in 5.6K then upscaled to 8K for the IMAX prints. 8K is way too much work for the rendering farm they would have. And Michael Bay himself said that Devestator's IMAX scenes were rendered in 4K. You can't spell film without ILM - Industrial Light & Magic

Similar Threads
thread	Forum	Thread Starter	Replies	Last Post
Why is Stripes not even considered yet?	Wish Lists	saintanthony	6	06-08-2009 02:29 PM
Woot I got a bit of a 35mm release print!	General Chat	RiseDarthVader	1	01-16-2009 01:29 PM
35mm film is awesome	Blu-ray Technology and Future Technology	Joe Redifer	56	01-20-2008 05:33 AM

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

08-08-2009, 04:21 AM	#21
vveksuvarna Senior Member Member since:Jul 2009 Location:San Francisco, CA Blu-ray collection:56	speaking of which ILM pipeline, has been on 4k..

08-08-2009, 06:32 AM	#23
BozQ Senior Member Member since:Jun 2007 Location:Singapore Blu-ray collection:95	The CGI in IMAX portions in Transformers ROTF were rendered in 8K. And I'm quite sure the same is true for The Dark Knight's IMAX portions too.

08-08-2009, 10:39 PM	#25
BozQ Senior Member Member since:Jun 2007 Location:Singapore Blu-ray collection:95	My bad indeed it was rendered in 4k. Sheesh, and that actually blew up the farm!

01-18-2013, 04:12 PM	#28
Alan Brown Active Member Member since:Aug 2008 Location:Denver, CO Blu-ray collection:1	These are a couple of excellent articles, with graphical representations of key issues, that should help most folks understand this topic better: '4K+ Systems - Theory Basics for Motion Picture Imaging' http://archiv.arri.de/4kplus-systems/index.htm 'The Truth About 2K, 4K and The Future of Pixels' http://library.creativecow.net/print.php?id=1261 Best regards and beautiful pictures, Alan Brown, President CinemaQuest, Inc. A Lion AV Consultants affiliate "Advancing the art and science of electronic imaging"

01-18-2013, 07:04 PM	#30
Alan Brown Active Member Member since:Aug 2008 Location:Denver, CO Blu-ray collection:1	Slingblade hasn't had his fries yet today!