Results 1 to 4 of 4

Thread: HDTV 9 x 16 options for super 8

  1. #1
    Inactive Member oldasdirt's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 31st, 2003
    Posts
    362
    Follows
    0
    Following
    0
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quoted
    0 Post(s)

    Post

    Here we have the age old problem of putting the rectangle in wider rectangle.As I understand super 8 has a few options.Widening the gate such as what is done with 16mm to super 16,what is called Super Duper 8 (gay *** sounding name but whatever),and Pro 8mm's Max 8(better name similar idea).Or you could just shoot as is and crop for 9 x 16 when you shoot.Then there's anamorphic,which intrigues me,but I'm sure this could open up a can of worms too.

    Not too hip on carving into the gates od super 8 cameras.Not much there to carve into and I don't see much difference on what is gained.

  2. #2
    HB Forum Moderator Alex's Avatar
    Join Date
    December 29th, 2000
    Posts
    11,383
    Follows
    0
    Following
    0
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quoted
    0 Post(s)

    Post

    I'm of the opinion that the Super-8 image should be kept just as it is, slightly rectangular. It's the simplest, most logical, and best quality solution when one wants to view Super-8, standard def, or 16mm on a High Def screen.

    I've seen my standard definition work viewed as a square on a high definition screen and I loved it.
    It actually looked better than on regular def!

    But we are in an era where the simplest and cheapest solution won't necessarily be embraced by all the new product driven magazines that usually only have articles about new products. [img]eek.gif[/img]

    My keep it as it is idea doesn't require a new product to implement, so you WON'T read about my solution anywhere in the foreseeable future in any of the product driven magazines that drive the media industry.

    Sadly, I recently encountered a HI-DEF Television that AUTOMATICALLY stretched the standard definition picture without giving me the choice to see the image normally, this is truly outrageous. [img]graemlins/thumbs_down.gif[/img]

  3. #3
    Inactive Member oldasdirt's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 31st, 2003
    Posts
    362
    Follows
    0
    Following
    0
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quoted
    0 Post(s)

    Post

    Originally posted by Alex:
    I'm of the opinion that the Super-8 image should be kept just as it is, slightly rectangular. It's the simplest, most logical, and best quality solution when one wants to view Super-8, standard def, or 16mm on a High Def screen.

    I've seen my standard definition work viewed as a square on a high definition screen and I loved it.
    It actually looked better than on regular def!

    [img]graemlins/thumbs_up.gif[/img]
    <font size="2" face="verdana, sans-serif">But if the TV is 9 x 16,how does it fit the 3 X 4 image in without losing something on the top and bottom?Is it cropped on the sides?

    <font color="#FFFF00" size="1">[ January 17, 2006 07:17 PM: Message edited by: Alex ]</font>

  4. #4
    HB Forum Moderator Alex's Avatar
    Join Date
    December 29th, 2000
    Posts
    11,383
    Follows
    0
    Following
    0
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quoted
    0 Post(s)

    Post

    Just a quick note, I had to edit the thumb signal in your quote because you accidentally the second one in my quote rather than the first.

    Your instincts are right, the standard box is full screen from top to bottom, but the left and right side of the screen has a border.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •