On 18/12/06, J. C. O'Connell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I dont see how a high quality moving pictures could > be "boring" to some how enjoys high quality **still** pictures. > Motion picturs can be an art form, and as such some of > them can be greatly more appreciated and enjoyed with > signifigantly better picture quality. Enough so to the point that > boredom > can be transformed into artistic communication between > the filmmaker and the viewer.
The difference it that I make the pictures, watching TV is a passive experience where the participant has zero control over the content. I'm not interested in making movies and I'm not fussed on seeing other peoples efforts in doing so. It' pretty simple really. > I cant see how many of you can be so concerned about MP, > color space, color gamut, raw vs. jpeg, color balance, > etc. and then say it doesnt matter that the old > crappy ntsc picture is far worse than what HD provides. > These are the very same things. Absolute rubbish. It's like top end Hi-Fi, if the only great pressings you can get contain crap music what's the point. -- Rob Studdert HURSTVILLE AUSTRALIA Tel +61-2-9554-4110 UTC(GMT) +10 Hours [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://home.swiftdsl.com.au/~distudio//publications/ Pentax user since 1986, PDMLer since 1998 -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
