| Author |
|
Reflect
Susuwatari
Registration Date: 12.04.08
Location:
Posts: 3 |
|
|
 12.04.2008, 02:47 PM |
  
|
arren18
Administrator
Registration Date: 08.15.06
Location: Edinburgh
Posts: 10673 |
|
|
Ooh, that's quite an interesting question. Does anybody have an answer...?
And also, welcome to the forum. ^_^
__________________
|
|
| 12.04.2008, 02:51 PM |
|
Orphic Okapi
Baron
Registration Date: 04.08.07
Location: Saskatchewan
Posts: 1335 |
|
|
Good question. That seems like something dballred would know.
__________________
 I like tea!
|
|
| 12.04.2008, 03:03 PM |
|
dballred
Ohmu
Registration Date: 04.24.06
Location: Oklahoma City - Seattle - Tokyo
Posts: 406 |
|
|
I'm not an expert in the technical process, but scanning is not the limiting factor--nor is it the way to go in the first place.
An anime frame, in the traditional sense, is a stack of Mylar scene fragments photographed frame by frame. The foreground mylars are replaced and/or the background mylars are moved with each shot. The limiting factors here are the original sizes and the graininess of the photographic medium. Computers can be used to eliminate the limiting factors on the photographic side through other means, such as vector regeneration or highly detailed rendering.
Professional outfits are going to use the finest grain films available or are going to use digital media capable of a resolution about twice the resolution capability of the same film. Anything less will be noticeable on the screen.
Now here's a solveable mathematical puzzle. Assume that the requisite resolution in a theater is twice that of a typical 1080 high defiition television. Also assume that the movie has a 1.8 to 1 aspect ratio (very low, but eminently watchable) and that the projection film is 70mm. What is the required dot resolution (per unit area) of the projection film?
There's maybe only one piece of information left that you might need to research on the Internet--like the actual frame size on 70mm projection film.
|
|
| 12.04.2008, 11:14 PM |
|
Roarkiller
Your Daddy-O
Registration Date: 06.03.03
Location: Home, resting...
Posts: 6077 |
|
|
I thought films in cinemas are shown on traditional reel, so resolution isn't even an issue.
1080p would be 1920×1080, which by default is already n 16:9 ratio. 7.8mm x 4.375mm on a 70mm film, and doubled, approximately 493.714 pixels/mm².
__________________
I am me.
I am who I am.
I am Roarkiller.
No one else is me.
Roarkiller.net
Isakaya High RPG Site
quote:
Originally posted by fenkashi
Screw your opinions, they are not relevant ^^.
|
|
| 12.05.2008, 02:41 AM |
|
arren18
Administrator
Registration Date: 08.15.06
Location: Edinburgh
Posts: 10673 |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Roarkiller
I thought films in cinemas are shown on traditional reel, so resolution isn't even an issue.
Good point. In that case, I'd imagine that the highest practical resolution would be best, so that the projection actually looks good.
__________________
|
|
| 12.05.2008, 05:15 AM |
|
dballred
Ohmu
Registration Date: 04.24.06
Location: Oklahoma City - Seattle - Tokyo
Posts: 406 |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by arren18
quote:
Originally posted by Roarkiller
I thought films in cinemas are shown on traditional reel, so resolution isn't even an issue.
Good point. In that case, I'd imagine that the highest practical resolution would be best, so that the projection actually looks good.
It might seem to be the case, but there are limitations on the ability of the eye (or any other measuring device) to discern two separate dots that is based on the wavelength of the light and the angular separation at the observation point. The (soon to be defunct) NTSC color standard played on that big time and allowed an acceptable picture in the relatively narrow bandwidth of a black and white television broadcast. All that mumbo jumbo aside, all we need to do is set an analog resolution and double it for a digital resolution in order to achieve the same result. It's a principle named after some dude named Nyquist. Any resolution above that will not result in appreciable improvement. Any resolution below it will degrade quickly.
|
|
| 12.05.2008, 06:52 PM |
|
dballred
Ohmu
Registration Date: 04.24.06
Location: Oklahoma City - Seattle - Tokyo
Posts: 406 |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Roarkiller
I thought films in cinemas are shown on traditional reel, so resolution isn't even an issue.
1080p would be 1920×1080, which by default is already n 16:9 ratio. 7.8mm x 4.375mm on a 70mm film, and doubled, approximately 493.714 pixels/mm².
I think your frame size is a bit small for 70mm film. It would be about right for home projector grade 8mm film, however.
You made me look it up. The standard frame size for 70mm film is 65mm wide with a 5mm sound track. The aspect ratio can be determined from the width.
|
|
| 12.05.2008, 07:06 PM |
|
Reflect
Susuwatari
Registration Date: 12.04.08
Location:
Posts: 3 |
|
|
Thank you all for considering the question. 
This is one answer I got from an independent film maker:
quote:
in America normal movie theater projectors use 2K resolution. IMAX is higher. Most major motion pictures shot on 35mm are digitally scanned at 4K (approx. 4000 pixels of horizontal resolution) and their vertical resolution is somewhere around 2K (different directors use different aspect ratios - 2:1 is pretty common, but 1.85:1 is acceptable). There are lots of movies shot on 2K resolution or even 1K HD res and up-converted when printed to film. I'd say your best best is to use AT LEAST 2K. I'm not sure how to describe this in DPI, cause that's used for print resolution. But, say, for example if the drawings are on 8.5" x 11" paper (standard A4 size) and you scanned them at 300 dpi, you would get about 3K horizontal resolution. Which, I think should be totally sufficient.
dballred: Thanks again.. Are theathers mostly using 70mm film?
|
|
| 12.05.2008, 07:59 PM |
|
dballred
Ohmu
Registration Date: 04.24.06
Location: Oklahoma City - Seattle - Tokyo
Posts: 406 |
|
|
"Are theathers mostly using 70mm film?"
No, most theaters use 35mm. 70mm is used in some really large screen cinemas and Imax. The dot resolution required for 35 millimeters, however is greater.
|
|
| 12.05.2008, 10:56 PM |
|
Reflect
Susuwatari
Registration Date: 12.04.08
Location:
Posts: 3 |
|
|
quote:
The dot resolution required for 35 millimeters, however is greater.
So the guy I quoted was wrong? It should be greater than 300 dpi? If so, do you know how much? I'm sorry, this is not my strongest field 
|
|
| 12.05.2008, 11:54 PM |
|
dballred
Ohmu
Registration Date: 04.24.06
Location: Oklahoma City - Seattle - Tokyo
Posts: 406 |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Reflect
quote:
The dot resolution required for 35 millimeters, however is greater.
So the guy I quoted was wrong? It should be greater than 300 dpi? If so, do you know how much? I'm sorry, this is not my strongest field
No, the original scan depends only on the size of the original drawing and the quality you wish to achieve. This is the required resolution of the film medium upon which the final projection is made.
|
|
| 12.06.2008, 12:37 AM |
|
Artoo
Warawara
Registration Date: 07.19.07
Location: UK
Posts: 160 |
|
|
This is interesting.
I actually got the excellent, visually astonishing Baraka Blu-ray for Christmas, and on it was a short extra feature on how they scanned the film and brought it to Blu-ray.
Baraka was shot on 70mm, and they determined that they needed to scan it in at 8k to retain as much detail as possible. It would therefore seem credible to say that 4k would be a reasonable level to set for the digital resolution of a more usual 35mm film.
Obviously for Blu-ray and DVD the scans are then further reduced to (usually) 1080 and 576 / 480 (PAL / NTSC) respectively.
Another point is that digital projectors are currently either 2k or 4k. I saw the latest James Bond on what I assume was a 2k, but it looked better than anything I'd ever seen on film in a cinema theatre. Resolution isn't the only thing that affects the quality of cinema - dirt and scratches etc from film just gets worse the more times a print is used, especially if it's not handled well when it's moved around. A digital copy is going to look the same in 20 years' time (or possibly even better on newer projection technologies!)
__________________
Let us go forth together in search of the treasure of Lapis Lazuli! Have no fear. Space is deformed on the night of the new moon.
|
|
| 01.04.2009, 12:35 AM |
|
|
