[filmscanners] RE: 3 year wait

["Austin Franklin" <darkroom@ix.netcom.com>]

> When I say "4K", it means an image of 4096 x 2731, nothing more.
> My film recorder can do 4K or 8K resolution.

I guess that's the root of the issue I have.  It's the same as calling a
monitor X by Y resolution.  Resolution is really not a good word in this
case.  Resolution, in the digital imaging field, means so many somethings
(Ds, Ps, Ss or whatever) per inch.  Inch is a standard unit of measurement.
Apparently in "film recorder speak", the unit of measure is the long side of
a 35mm piece of film (like in monitor speak, it's the physical size of the
monitor)!  Not, in my opinion, a very good metric.

How does this work between different film formats?  You kind of discussed
this, but didn't give the "terminology".  What if I am recording a 6x6 with
an "8k" film recorder, that gives me 8k over a 6cm spread, right?  But the
same recorder used with 35mm film, gives me 8k over a 3.6cm spread?  Same
film recorder terminology ("8k"), but the ACTUAL resolution is entirely
different (3555 vs 5333).

BTW, thanks for the write-up on film recorders.  Not an item I've ever been
involved with, but certainly interesting to know something about.

Regards,

Austin

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Unsubscribe by mail to listserver@halftone.co.uk, with 'unsubscribe 
filmscanners'
or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title or 
body