[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: CINTEL VS QUADRA
It could take several servers' worth of messages to go through the
differences between CCD and flying spot telecines - or Quadra and URSA - in
detail. Can I just make one comment, though, which is to beware of the
statement "fully digital". No telecine is fully digital: every professional
telecine on the market today, from whichever manufacturer, has an analogue
In the case of Philips BTS it is a line array CCD. A CCD is an analogue
device (not always remembered): in this case a line of detectors, each of
which outputs an analogue voltage in proportion to the amount of light
falling on it.
In a flying spot telecine such as the URSA or Turbo from Cintel, the line
structure is created by focusing a bright but otherwise unmodulated
television tube through the film and collecting the resulting light in a
simple photo-electric cell (usually a photomultiplier).
In both cases, as I said, the result is an analogue voltage varying in
proportion to the density of the film for each pixel. In the case of Quadra
or Spirit and URSA or URSA Gold (and presumably URSA Diamond, whatever that
is), the conversion from analogue to digital occurs next, and all signal
processing which follows occurs in the digital domain. So, both - or
neither - manufacturers produce "all digital" telecines.
The colorists in the group are far better able to comment than I on the
balance of image quality against stability against running costs against
operational flexibility which governs their preferred choice of system.
I would like to think that this has helped, but somehow I doubt it.