Jump to content


Photo

Super16 vs. HD video


  • Please log in to reply
2 replies to this topic

#1 georg lamshöft

georg lamshöft
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 310 posts
  • Berlin

Posted 02 April 2009 - 03:21 PM

I'm not sure if it was already posted, because it's already a few years old:

http://www.ecctv.de/...top_reasons.wmv

It is in German but here are the basics about what is said:

- DI with Spirit 2k

- First comparisons with "normal" zooms, later also with Digiprime (as written)

- Super16 shot with Ultraprime


It's not perfect, I'm sure a high-quality scanner would have done a better job (oversampling from higher resolution, 2pass for full 16bit DR...) and 1080p-cameras can do better recording uncompressed RAW.

They claim that the first comparison a few years before failed because the old Vision1-stock caused too much grain - are these new stocks really THAT much better, is this the point where still photography film has stopped?

But it shows that film has about the same amount of resolution, more grain/noise (about 2 stops difference?) but also much higher dynamic range (even from telecine?).

But after all, they're comparing Super16, not 35mm!!!

Makes me wonder if we head in the right direction...

Edited by georg lamshöft, 02 April 2009 - 03:22 PM.

  • 0

#2 Adrian Sierkowski

Adrian Sierkowski
  • Sustaining Members
  • 7375 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Los Angeles, Ca

Posted 02 April 2009 - 04:11 PM

I'd say from my own experience the grain you're seeing in that S16mm seems a bit excessive.... Why that is, I can't say, but w/o doing your own side by side tests you can't get too deep into these types of comparisons IMHO.
Also, of course you'll see more grain in a freeze frame, but we normally watch films w/o freeze framing them, and when the film is moving, I would say that film grain is pretty much so un-apparent, even in S16mm, but again, that's my own subjective view.
  • 0

#3 georg lamshöft

georg lamshöft
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 310 posts
  • Berlin

Posted 03 April 2009 - 04:46 AM

Of course making tests on your own is always the best way, but how often do you get the chance to make these comparisons?
The telecine will propably add some noise, which will look like some kind of grain (after post-production), but it shows that film really depends on a good DI/post-production. We are used to see bad 35mm prints, DIs and are somehow getting used and more attracted to the "digital" look and a whole generation thinks that blu-rays are the ultimate standard in IQ...
  • 0


Willys Widgets

Visual Products

CineLab

Rig Wheels Passport

Tai Audio

Abel Cine

Broadcast Solutions Inc

The Slider

Media Blackout - Custom Cables and AKS

Ritter Battery

Technodolly

Paralinx LLC

Glidecam

FJS International, LLC

Aerial Filmworks

Metropolis Post

Gamma Ray Digital Inc

New Pro Video - New and Used Equipment

CineTape

rebotnix Technologies

Wooden Camera

Media Blackout - Custom Cables and AKS

Technodolly

CineTape

Rig Wheels Passport

Abel Cine

Glidecam

Willys Widgets

CineLab

Aerial Filmworks

Wooden Camera

Gamma Ray Digital Inc

The Slider

rebotnix Technologies

Tai Audio

Ritter Battery

Paralinx LLC

Broadcast Solutions Inc

Visual Products

FJS International, LLC

New Pro Video - New and Used Equipment

Metropolis Post