Mikkel Høj <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Just out of sheer interest; is it also this quality of film recorders > that is used in the motion picture industry? This subject came up once before, and someone said that the recorders used for motion picture work were actually lower in resolution - 2048 lines - since the number of frames to process is much higher and the motion tends to make pixels less noticeable. Rob ==================================================================== The filmscanners mailing list is hosted by http://www.halftone.co.uk To resign, <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> with UNSUBSCRIBE FILMSCANNERS in the title, or UNSUBSCRIBE FILMSCANNERS_DIGEST if you are reading the Digest.
- RE: Measuring resolution (was Re: Real resolution of a ... Roger Smith
- RE: Measuring resolution (was Re: Real resolution ... Rob Geraghty
- RE: Measuring resolution (was Re: Real resolution ... Hemingway, David J
- Re: Measuring resolution (was Re: Real resolut... James L. Sims
- Re: Measuring resolution (was Re: Real resolut... Arthur Entlich
- Sv: Measuring resolution (was Re: Real resolut... Mikkel Høj
- Re: Sv: Measuring resolution (was Re: Real... James L. Sims
- RE: Measuring resolution (was Re: Real res... Rob Geraghty
- RE: Measuring resolution (was Re: Real resolution ... Hemingway, David J
- RE: Measuring resolution (was Re: Real resolution ... Hemingway, David J
- Re: Measuring resolution (was Re: Real resolut... Johnny Deadman
- 16Mpixel back from Kodak Rob Geraghty
- RE: Measuring resolution (was Re: Real resolution ... Hemingway, David J