[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
RE: conforming the neg.
- To: "'telecine at sun.alegria.com'" <telecine at sun.alegria.com>
- Subject: RE: conforming the neg.
- From: "Case, Dominic" <dominic_case at atlab.com.au>
- Date: Mon, 7 Jul 1997 12:23:25 +1000
- Old-Return-Path: <dominic_case at atlab.com.au>
- Resent-Date: Sun, 6 Jul 1997 19:24:31 -0700 (PDT)
- Resent-From: telecine at sun.alegria.com
- Resent-Message-ID: <"smIEI.A.MuG.ZNFwz" at sun>
- Resent-Sender: telecine-request at sun.alegria.com
- Resent-To: multiple recipients of <telecine at sun.alegria.com>
Chuck Kahn / odin at interlog.com wrote
>DFort at aol.com sez:
>>Remember that the
>>dot can fall on any of the four perforations on 35mm--I'm talking about the
>>standard formats used for theatrical release.
>So what happens on non-standard formats like 3-perf or 2-perf?
There's a dot every 64 perfs: in 2-perf that's not really a problem, the
dot will occur every 32 frames.
But in 3-perf, it's harder. The dot appears every 21 1/3 frames - so in
practice we can count either 21 or 22 frames between dots, depending on
where the sequence started. Logging systems need to specify whether a
logged frame has the dot at perf 1,2 or 3. It all starts to sound a bit
like 3/2 pulldown and A,B,C,D frames. What can possibly go wrong?
Has anyone heard of a successful, frame-accurate match back to negative
in 3-perf for a film finish?
thanks to Gary Shaw of Pacific Video Canada for support of the TIG in 1997
mailinglist digest available......posting guidelines on the webpage