From: bryan mckay (email suppressed)
Date: Tue Jun 22 2010 - 13:09:09 PDT
I'm not sure how much of this chain of commentary is in jest, butů
a) Filming the screen would yield a print that was only as good as, if
not much worse than, the DVD copy. In that case, why not just screen
b) Getting a print from the DVD, even from the original digital master
used to make the DVD, would still be vastly inferior to any decent
16mm print in existence. Yes, DVD can look very good, in my opinion,
but you lose so much (dynamic range, fine detail, grain, et cetera)
during the digitization and compression process that going back out to
print would be worthless.
On the other hand, if there were a good 2K or 4K scan of the original
to use as a digital intermediate, then you could clean that up and
make a very nice looking print. But, still, it wouldn't have anything
on a good, clean print struck fresh from a pristine negative.
On Jun 22, 2010, at 3:16 PM, Matt Helme wrote:
> That might be an improvement.
> From: Nicholas O'Brien <email suppressed>
> To: Experimental Film Discussion List <email suppressed>
> Sent: Tue, June 22, 2010 2:18:44 PM
> Subject: Re: [Frameworks] Rape
> Couldn't you make a great print off a great DVD copy?
> ya, film the screen!
> Nicholas O'Brien
> FrameWorks mailing list
> email suppressed
FrameWorks mailing list