Originally posted by: Hardcore Legend
You have to wonder a few things. 1) The print quality. 2) the amount of information a 16mm film holds. 3) at what k/b coding level anyone on this forum can capture the film.
(1) Some of the 16mm trilogy prints are quite nice. But it's also possible to get a scratched-up old hunk of worthless polyester.
(2) A lot. Way more than the LDs; quite a bit more than the DVDs. You can reasonably expect HD quality from high-quality 16mm prints.
(3) ??? What's "k/b coding level"?
Telecine will not simply be better than the LDs. The DVDs were downconverted 4k captures... I doubt anyone can get to that level or even close.
You have to wonder a few things. 1) The print quality. 2) the amount of information a 16mm film holds. 3) at what k/b coding level anyone on this forum can capture the film.
(1) Some of the 16mm trilogy prints are quite nice. But it's also possible to get a scratched-up old hunk of worthless polyester.
(2) A lot. Way more than the LDs; quite a bit more than the DVDs. You can reasonably expect HD quality from high-quality 16mm prints.
(3) ??? What's "k/b coding level"?
Telecine will not simply be better than the LDs. The DVDs were downconverted 4k captures... I doubt anyone can get to that level or even close.
Obviously, for DVD you don't need anywhere near 4k. There are movies in the theatre that only had a 2k digital inter. DVD is only 0.72k, at 4:2:0 linear. So, while I agree nobody's going to get to a 4k level, I don't necessarily think 4k is particularly relevant here.