Page 2 of 2

Re: Digitising Ciné film.....

PostPosted:Tue May 14, 2019 6:04 pm
by spaughty
If memory serves 80 lines per mm was pretty good for black-and-white negative film, and I would expect colour to be worse.

According to wikipedia each std 8 negative measures 3.3mm x 4.5 mm which suggests that 264 x 360 pixels is an upper bound (i.e. approx 95 kilo-pixels for each still image).

My dad had some std 8 transferred to VHS yonks back, and it looked fuzzy on that...

Re: Digitising Ciné film.....

PostPosted:Tue May 14, 2019 6:34 pm
by PaulB
Perhaps what I've got is as good as I can expect. Previously it was projected onto a screen that was maybe 48" wide.

I can't recall what the resolution looked like as it's over 20 years ago since I've seen it (and the film itself is all more than 50 years old)

Re: Digitising Ciné film.....

PostPosted:Wed May 15, 2019 8:57 am
by spaughty
Thinking about this again, you need two pixels per line to see that it is a line, so 528 x 720 would be the upper bound, 380 kpix. I never remember it looking that good, but slow film and 1960s zoom lenses meant it was probably out of focus :-)

Re: Digitising Ciné film.....

PostPosted:Wed May 15, 2019 9:44 am
by PaulB
No zoom lens in this case.... and the camera was clockwork!

Re: Digitising Ciné film.....

PostPosted:Fri May 17, 2019 8:41 pm
by spaughty
Pure nostalgia! I'd forgotten that windup motor...

Re: Digitising Ciné film.....

PostPosted:Sat May 18, 2019 8:35 am
by riverrock
When I last looked at this there was no consensus on the highest digital resolution you can get / you need to capture all the detail from film.
The chemical "grains" are distributed randomly in film (not lines), there is continual varying contrast (unlike digital steps), colour palette is different (certain colours can't be stored in the digital RGB pallet, mainly certain blues). That is before you start looking at camera & lens quality, film quality, film speed.
Then the transfer technology (project in real time onto a screen (worst) or at a sensor (better) or have every frame individually captured, processed then stitched back together in slow time (best - some say up to 30% better, but the equipment to do this costs alot more). After capture any processing (compensating for any wobble in the original capture, fixing contrast, adding audio, speed fixing when hand wound ) and then digital compression (which normally loses information).
All of this means questions about quality are more art and opinion rather than science.
I hope you get a good result!
My parents ones were transferred to VHS but it was much more fun to setup projector and make an event out of watching them on big screen rather than just shoving on a video.
Must remind them to convert them to digital though before it becomes impossible to find working VHS players!