how do avids work?

[peter_g]

hey everyone,
I've been reading up on avids and I'm confused to say the least. ok.... The avid digitalises the film,you edit, and it somehow gets back to film. How does it get from film to a digital file, and how does it get back? How could any computer handle video that had resolution comparable to 35mm film?

thanks

[miker]

the avid would generate an EDL for the lab

[ickle_jim]

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size=2 face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">quote:</font><table border="0" width="90%" bgcolor="#333333" cellspacing="1" cellpadding="0"><tr><td width="100%"><table border="0" width="100%" cellspacing="0" cellpadding="2" bgcolor="#FF9900"><tr><td width="100%" bgcolor="#DDDDDD"><font size=2 face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">How could any computer handle video that had resolution comparable to 35mm film? </font></td></tr></table></td></tr></table></BLOCKQUOTE>

Surely if a computer was powerful enough there is no end to the resolution possible? You could have a greater resolution than film?

[SoulJacker]

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size=2 face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">quote:</font><table border="0" width="90%" bgcolor="#333333" cellspacing="1" cellpadding="0"><tr><td width="100%"><table border="0" width="100%" cellspacing="0" cellpadding="2" bgcolor="#FF9900"><tr><td width="100%" bgcolor="#DDDDDD"><font size=2 face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif"> Surely if a computer was powerful enough there is no end to the resolution possible? You could have a greater resolution than film? </font></td></tr></table></td></tr></table></BLOCKQUOTE>

Genius.

[Actor]

Before Avid the camera original negative would come back from the lab with a "work print." Both the negative and the work print would have frame numbers in the margins. The editor would edit the work print, making cuts and splices and generally getting the work print all scratched up and dirty. When the editor was done he would make up a "cut list" indicating where cuts would be made and which frame numbers would be spliced to each other. The work print would also be marked up with a grease pencil to indicate fades, dissolves, etc.

The cut list would then be given to a "negative cutter" who would splice the camera original negative together. The negative cutter would not make any editing decisions. He would just cut and splice according to the cut list, minimizing any potential damage to the precious negative. This is called "conforming the negative."

From the conformed negative an "answer print" would be made. From the answer print one or more "internegatives" would be made. From the internegative "distribution prints" would be made.

What the Avid did originally was to provide a digital work print. It would generate the cut list for the negative cutter. From that point the process was the same as the traditional method.

For what it's worth "cut list" is considered a film term, "edit decision list" a video term. They are really the same thing.

With the advent of high definition video it has become possible to make internegatives directly from the computer, eliminating the answer print and the neg cutter's job.

Francis Ford Coppola was inpressed with the Avid but was disappointed with hi def's 1080 x 1920 pixels. He wanted something like 2000 x 4700 (super high def with an aspect ratio of 2.35:1) to make internegatives directly from the Avid. He was going to try and have a one-of-a-kind system that would do just that. Whether he ever got it made I do not know.

One final note, originally the Avid was intended as a video editing tool only.

[Alex]

In case anyone is wondering, EDL means Edit Decision List.

The problem for computer video/digital video is everytime it's improved, the look of film on the improved format looks even better than before.