---- John Francis said: > [...] > > I believe there was *no* film shot for Episode II: it was > "all digital, all the way". > > From what I remember at the time the digital film cameras > are based on regular film cameras, rather than on video > cameras, so that all the usual lenses, cranes, etc. can > be used. The sensor is a half-frame sensor (i.e. just > about the same size as that used in the *ist-D), with 6MP. > >
Burst mode in 6MP for extended number of frames! So I guess the digital frames will be similar to the 35mm film frames of the Panavision format "Goldeneye" shown here: http://www.dvdaust.com/film_to_tape.htm i.e. compressed horizontally to match the aspect ratio of the 35mm format. I guess there's no need to allow for space for the audio tracks on the digital frames! ---- Peter Loveday said: > > [...] > > For shooting live, things like this are shot on various HD > cameras, and > recorded to digital magnetic tape, such as sony HDCAM format, > or Panasonic > DVCPRO HD Cinema camera (being the two major companies used > in High-Def > production). Both are compressed digital video formats. > While they are > similar to DV being digital video on mag-tape, I wouldn't > call them the same > thing... its a bit like saying a billy cart and an F1 car are > the same as > they both have wheels :) HD resolution is basically > 1920x1080, though > vaious formats often have less resolution than this. While HDTV is > typically 30fps interlaced, HD capture is usually done at > 24fps progressive > to match film, then 'multi-mastered' (converted to a varienty > of formats, > such as film, 30fps TV, 25fps TV etc) from there. > Maybe using tape is a solution for longer burst mode. Put it in the vertical grip:-) And the 1920x1080 format must be the 6MP sensor that John mentioned. Doesn't seem to be sufficient for use in the cinema, though. Certainly can't match the resolution of the 70mm film. > > For neg-scanning for digital post production from 35mm cinema > film, this is > done with a film scanner, such as a Kodak Cineon, Arri Laser, > or similar. > Some TeleCine machines (used to convert film to video) also have this > capability, usually not at the same quality however. For > digital post > production, 35mm film (which is a smaller size frame to 35mm > still, being > rotated on the film) is usually scanned at either "2k" > (2048x1536) or "4k" > (4096x3112) resolution, depending on requirements and budget. > This is > called a 'full-frame' scan, often not all of the frame is > used, and a crop > is applied for "academy crop", or other formats. For anamorphic > (widescreen/cinemascope), the film neg is still 35mm, but optically > stretched to be wider. Scanning is still usually done at 4:3 > aspect, and > then dealt with as non-square pixels in processing. Note that this > resolution is true resolution for each colour channel, R G > and B are all > scanned at full resultion, not interpolated bayer data. This > would give a > "4k" scan approx 38 megapixels (or photosites really) in > digicam terms, > despite only having 12.7 million actual pixels. Digicam > marketting has a > lot to answer for :( > This now makes sense for me after I visited the film to tape page. The 4k scan, or a digital sensor of that resolution, probably is enough for showing in cinema. When will they make a digital film camera with a 38MP sensor? > Love, Light and Peace, > - Peter Loveday > Director of Development, eyeon Software > Yefei
