[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
RE: RE>Re: Sony HD Telecine Review
- To: 'Rob Lingelbach' <rob at alegria.com>, Paul Grace <paulg at rushes.co.uk>, cbhunt <cbhunt at allpost.com>, multiple recipients of <telecine at sun.alegria.com>
- Subject: RE: RE>Re: Sony HD Telecine Review
- From: "Michael D. Most" <mmost at encorevideo.com>
- Date: Thu, 17 Jul 1997 10:58:46 -0700
- Old-Return-Path: <mmost at encorevideo.com>
- Resent-Date: Thu, 17 Jul 1997 10:59:17 -0700 (PDT)
- Resent-From: telecine at sun.alegria.com
- Resent-Message-ID: <"m4rN2B.A.JoF.v1lzz" at sun>
- Resent-Sender: telecine-request at sun.alegria.com
- Resent-To: multiple recipients of <telecine at sun.alegria.com>
>> > In my opinion.......There is no problem using sprocket drive, this is
> how the camera works.
But the camera makes one pass on the film, the telecine potentially
many. I had the impression that one of the greatest advancements of
the modern telecine age was the advent of the Rank transport's gentle
nature, which allowed transfer of negative, in the mid-1970's. <<
My biggest potential problem with the return of the film chain approach is not film handling, but mechanical maintenance. Camera movements are constantly cleaned and maintained by people who know how to do this. Video facilities (as opposed to optical houses or film labs) are not used to complicated mechanical movements, or the level of maintenance probably required, at either the engineering or operational level. Keeping negative clean during multiple passes through a fairly involved mechanical gate (as opposed to the single sprocket drive in a Panaflex) is another issue I'm not completely clear on.
Mike Most, Encore Video, L.A.
mailinglist digest available......posting guidelines on the webpage
the Telecine Internet Group <http://www.alegria.com/telecinehome.html>