> Hmm.. there's probably film footage of things with a running counter in > the scene counting tenths or hundredths of a second (sporting events, > nuclear bomb tests, etc.) I wonder if you could see that difference by > single framing something like a filmed 100 meter race where they have an > onscreen timer. > > You don't have to go back very far and film cameras used mechanical > governors for speed control.. "quartz lock" is a relatively recent > addition, and as recently as 20 years ago, you had to pay extra for it > when renting camera gear.
Hi Jim, I recently happened to view the Director's cut of Woodstock. On the bonus disc there's a piece called "Synchronization" with amazing information about the extreme effort it took to sync 3 days of footage of 12 cameras and 8-track audio tape in an era before quartz timing. 60 Hz hum played a role. Since I know none of you are going to spend 9 hours watching the DVD, I found at least one page on the web with part of the story. Go to https://www.editorsguild.com/V2/magazine/archives/0107/news_article04.htm and skip way down Chuck Levey's part, or just text search for the word "sync". He mentions the wristwatch trick: "In 1969, we shot the performance material using AC power in order to stay in sync. It was clumsy. There were cables. The motors were heavy and became very hot. In the rain we kept getting shocked. And don't forget our primitive 'get a shot of your wristwatch' attempts at time code. The last sentence wins a prize: "With a laugh, Levey compares the new syncing technologies to those of the original film. "We were glad when it came to the footage of The Who, because Pete Townshend's trademark windmill guitar technique made syncing that passage a little easier," he recalls. /tvb _______________________________________________ time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts@febo.com To unsubscribe, go to https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts and follow the instructions there.
