Blu-ray's Big 'Picture Problem'

[Penton-Man]

Originally Posted by HDMe

I think you are mis-reading that document... and perhaps others in the motion picture industry are as well.

Firstly... of course the original source would be the best quality, and copies made after that and copies of copies and so forth would be of diminishing quality.
Secondly, projecting an image on the screen doesn't show all of the available resolution. Human perception is limited. It would be like saying that since you can't hear a dog whistle then it must not be making a sound.

The point with film is...

Well, I’ll give you one thing, you must have been the champion of your Debate Club in high school, or else a ‘subjective’ assumption by me is that you would have been, had you decided to pursue that endeavor.

The point is, you said to Anthony P “Movie theaters are either showing film which is much higher effective resolution than Blu-ray”

Perhaps you didn’t understand the part where I stated “MTF resolution of release prints measured out (using a microdensitometer scan of the film element in the lab)”, which is an objective measurement. Each element was measured for MTF and the results plotted. Or perhaps you don’t understand the significance of objective MTF curves. And yes, then, as would be expected, following passage of the release prints thru the film projectors, there was further resolution degradation identified subjectively ~ in the range of 500 – 875 lines/PH (average being 750). What this all means is that to create equivalence to the release prints tested by ITU, if the pixels on screen are “1 to 1” with resolution, 1280 x 1024 projectors are/were adequate to project typical release prints.

Your thoughts about ‘human perception being limited” is really not significantly relevant to the gist of the findings of this study. If you think they are, care to express in % a human’s visual threshold in terms of modulation? The only *discrepancy* I can find with the data of this study is that the investigators’ objectively measured absolute resolution of 2400 lines per picture height corresponding to 106 lp/mm which is higher than Kodak quoted on their spec sheets at the time for Kodak Vision 200T color negative film, 5274. But this can be explained by the fact that Kodak prepares (or prepared) its data using a camera to write to film and anyway, that, if anything, would shift the curves of this study toward being more *friendly* to the resolution of film than they really are.

Let me make it easy for you, there is always online film school charts…http://filmschoolonline.com/sample_l...HD_vs_35mm.htm I suggest you read this link completely and thoroughly as I think it is clearly written in laymen’s terms and may help you understand better.

However, hey, I’m always willing to learn from any mistake I’ve made as I’m far from perfect. Perhaps I am “mis-reading that document... and perhaps others in the motion picture industry are as well”.