What's new

Quick question regarding film transfers... (1 Viewer)

MarcoBiscotti

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Sep 2, 2003
Messages
4,799
Hey guys, I'm just typing out some notes from class and I came upon something I'm unsure of in regards to film transfer effects...

Well I guess I was sloppy with my note-taking because I was listing various production means of manipulating the "look" of a film and I somehow forgot to write down the result of the following:


When you shoot on film, than transfer to video, and than output back to film...


Can anyone please tell me the effects that will have on the image quality / contrast / resolution of the film?


I'm really not looking for a long or complicated answer. Just something along the lines of "it reduces the image quality" or "softens the picture", etc.

What are the basic & general effects?


Thanks in advance!!!


:)
 

MarcoBiscotti

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Sep 2, 2003
Messages
4,799
Any help here?


I'm guessing the result would be a softened image and loss of quality but added contrast?
 

Steve Felix

Supporting Actor
Joined
Jan 17, 2001
Messages
619
Real Name
Steve Felix
Without details on the process, I guess the only sure thing would be a loss in quality (more color than resolution, probably). And it could be argued that not even that is sure! Hollywood movies tend to have digital intermediates these days so obviously the quality loss is minimal.
 

Thomas Newton

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Jun 16, 1999
Messages
2,303
Real Name
Thomas Newton
35mm camera film can have something like 24 megapixels of resolution. That is a lot more resolution than broadcast NTSC, DVD, or even HDTV video.
 

Elinor

Supporting Actor
Joined
Oct 29, 2004
Messages
559
Actually if I scan a 35 mm negative at 2750 dpi, I get an image that's about 24 MB. If I scan at 5400 dpi, I get a 50 MB image. Film itself doesn't have a defined resolution, it has an emulsion that consists of tiny grains of silver ... any resolution one might name is strictly a function of the resolution at which it is scanned.
 

Steve Felix

Supporting Actor
Joined
Jan 17, 2001
Messages
619
Real Name
Steve Felix
I doubt Marco is talking about consumer formats. A 4k film scan, which is what's typical for a modern digital intermediate, is about 9 MP. It depends on the film stock whether 35mm beats that resolution -- 24 MP (about 6K) would be the absolute maximum from current emulsions, but you'd only find that straight out of the camera, not in prints. 4K (9 MP) is seen in practice and that's why 6K scanning is widely considered unnecessary.

When I say that a loss in quality is a sure thing I'm assuming we're doing a scientific test and not manipulating the video before it goes back to film. If we take advantage of the color correcting possibilities video affords, it will subjectively look better when it winds up on film again.
 

MarcoBiscotti

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Sep 2, 2003
Messages
4,799
Thanks a lot guys, and Steve I don't think we're doing any scientific tests...

Though I'm not actually putting any of this theory into effect, the context of the question was basically for stylistic effect, say for instance in a sequence like the citizen kane newsreels that required low-res high contrast antiquated appearance, to differentiate from one another to seem as though they were shot at different times in different context, etc.


Anyways, thanks for all your help!


PS - Wouldn't that final transfer back to film raise the contrast level as well?
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Forum statistics

Threads
356,814
Messages
5,123,741
Members
144,184
Latest member
H-508
Recent bookmarks
0
Top