My understanding was that commercial film recorders didn't work by projecting an image and photographing it, but rather by directly exposing dots onto the film using tiny sources of light. Think of how an inkjet printer head sprays tiny dots of ink, then imagine it spraying drops of light instead.
But I never looked into the technology very much; I could be mistaken, or multiple techniques might be used. On Wed, Aug 26, 2015 at 7:55 AM, Malcolm Smith <[email protected]> wrote: > Some months ago I asked a question about how best to transfer slides to > digital images. All is good with that, and the slow scanning transfer > continues. Probably for several years as time allows. > > However, I was asked the other day how to do this the other way, transfer a > digital image to a 35mm slide. As I still live in the 1970s and shoot film > and have slide shows etc, that rather appealed to me to have a go myself. A > look on-line showed there were companies out there who would do this, but I > want to be able to have a try at this from home without the need for further > expense in equipment. Obviously, companies aren't exactly up front on how > they achieve this, but I presume they are sent the images by e-mail, convert > them to a certain standard pixel image size, and have some way of mounting a > film camera to view the image in sort of dark room conditions to exclude > other light sources? > > If it were a picture or a document, it would be more straight forward to use > a duplicating stand with appropriate lighting. The only thing that came to > mind was taking a picture of the image on a computer screen in a darkened > room (image displayed at a size which would result in a full frame capture, > camera tripod mounted), but I want to ensure that a quality image remains a > quality image when transferred to film and projected (no pixels!). Those > companies doing this commercially are displaying the digital image on > something from which they take a film image; I just suspect that their > 'something' is considerably better than I have available at home. I have > tried doing the above with a digital camera+tripod/computer screen, just to > see how it comes out, and some results have been OK. I'm not aiming for OK, > I'm aiming for good as a minimum, and it must be repeatable time after time. > > Anyone tried this or is it just me....? I thought this was also a different, > although backwards technologically, method of keeping certain images stored. > > > Malcolm > > > > > -- > PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List > [email protected] > http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net > to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow > the directions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List [email protected] http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
