I always hear people/actors/directors say, this tape or film is x meters long, it is this size, etc. do they really still use physical film? If so why aren’t they using terabytes of storage in a way more compact form?

        • Pons_Aelius@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          1 year ago

          You are correct.

          The figure I was given at art college was that a well exposed and developed 35mm negative had a minimum resolution of 90 million pixels, which is higher than 8K at ~75 million.

            • MentalEdge@sopuli.xyz
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              3
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              edit-2
              1 year ago

              We have electron microscopes. As long as you have time (which when you’re recording actors doing a scene, you don’t) we have the tech to look at things at any scale we want.

              We wouldn’t even need AI, just a way to illuminate the film and some optics to project it at whatever scale we need onto a sensor, and we could scan every frame on a film down to the molecular level if we wanted.

              Compositing the resulting scan data into digital video would be trivial, and the resulting file would have a level of quality higher than what any digital sensor could have recorded directly.

              • schmidtster@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                2
                arrow-down
                4
                ·
                1 year ago

                Is it just me, or does that not contradict the statement you said of “film doesn’t have infinite resolution”?

                • MentalEdge@sopuli.xyz
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  What? Not at all.

                  I’m saying we can already scan stuff at way beyond the resolution film is able to record, how is that mutually exclusive with there only being useful detail in the film up to a certain scale?

                  • schmidtster@lemmy.world
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    arrow-down
                    3
                    ·
                    edit-2
                    1 year ago

                    We wouldn’t need Ai just a way….

                    Yeah you contradicted yourself, that’s why I mentioned you would need Ai and infilling…

      • bestusername@aussie.zone
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        Well you’re definitely right about remastering/digitising old film…

        But if Star Wars was done on old DV, Lucas wouldn’t have been able to digitally butcher it, so there’s that.

      • crandlecan@mander.xyz
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        Ergo, analogue for now still beats digital at the highest ends of the market. There’s no digital camera outperforming the analogue ones. I want some of them upvotes back!! 😤