LCD or CRT?
Posted 17 August 2005 - 10:49 PM
This is probably a well worn topic. However, any help will be appreciated. My intention is to do my own 35mm cine film recordation. Originally, I was going to use Viewsonic's 4K LCD monitor. Unfortunately, IBM got tired of making the LCD display panel and put Viewsonic out of the 4K monitor business as well. My current best choices are IBM's P275 (2058 wide resolution flat face CRT) and Mac's 2500 wide resolution LCD. Which monitor would you prefer using: LCD or CRT? Please, offer your why's and what-for's to your reply.
Thanks in advance,
Posted 18 August 2005 - 07:47 AM
I'd look around for one of those monochrome medical-imaging monitors, and shoot three exposures per frame with a dichroic colour wheel. That way, you get guaranteed perfect colour registration and no strange fringing or banding as is the risk with colour displays. Those monitors are built to very high standards and should have excellent geometry; you'll ideally figure out some way of counting an exact number of scans per film frame (real CRT filmout devices open the shutter then flash the display a given number of times) You could achieve this by having a photosensor look at some part of the screen that isn't in frame, or at least isn't inside the 1.85 or 1.33 area you're interested in, and linking this count to the camera's shutter. Alternatively, you could do it by writing software to display the image for a given number of increments on the video card's vertical-refresh counter if the monitor has a sufficiently good black level that it won't fog the film unduly when dark.
I would imagine that you will end up running the monitor with the HT wound way up to get a bright, contrasty image.
Posted 18 August 2005 - 10:02 AM
Posted 18 August 2005 - 11:11 AM
Thanks for the info. I like the dichroic wheel idea. There are a number of easy ways to control that off the intervalometer. That's do-able. I'll check on med-grade monitors as well. Thanks for the SMPTE heads up, John.
It's good to hear from you guys. Later.
Posted 20 August 2005 - 10:42 AM
Kodak published several papers about CRT and Triniscope recording in the SMPTE Journal back in October 1971 and September 1974.
Which film stock would you recommend for such a transfer, which would basically involve shooting a flat, high-def monitor with a 35mm movie camera? Would you choose different stock based on the video material to be transferred? In other words, would daylight video dictate using daylight stock, and tungsten-lit video dictate using tungsten stock? Done correctly, can the results realistically be expected to rival that of other current day methods of transferring video to film?
Posted 20 August 2005 - 02:46 PM
Regarding the tungsten to daylight thing: if you've lit and shot the video correctly, the white balance circuitry in the camera will have normalised everything before you come to film it out in any case. I would suspect that you'd be looking around for a stock where the response best fit the output of the monitor, then you'd spend a while shooting short test strips (possibly shooting motion stock in a 35mm stills camera) with various colour chips on the monitor until you had defined some sort of transfer curve for the process that would allow you to get reasonable lights when printing the negative. I would suspect that you will end up with a deeply strange image on the monitor to get something that's both decent-looking and predictable out of the filmstock. Anticipate lots and lots of tweaking around with the monitor's engineering controls and the software you're using to display the frames just to get something that "looks reasonable", let alone "is correct".
Not that I have any experience in this beyond idle consideration.
Posted 21 August 2005 - 12:35 PM
Thanks for the feedback. Other sources I have talked to recommend staying away form shooting big monitors. They say the grid lines on the big CRTs are a monumental hassle. They also recommend that while a big, high-res LCD delivers sharp pictures, their contrast stinks and even a lens filter can't compensate. I'm going to snatch up an Ebay slide recorder. I can get an 8K unit for $200.00 to $1,000.00. I don't know yet how I'll handle the optics and mounting. It's worth a try. Those things are slow as Christmas with a single frame time of 40 to 60 seconds, but if it works for that cheap, then I can live with the time factor.
Wish me luck...