Originally posted by: Karyudo
Way too far over in the "HD Rulez (16 mm is no better than DVD)" camp: boris
Too far over in the "Film Is Great (16 mm is way better than HD)" camp: zombie84, RIJIR
Bemused bystanders who think the above are all at least a little wrong about their pet formats: the rest of us? The fact is I'm not saying you can't get 6000 lines or more from 35MM - but the level of detail in 35MM is about the level Lucas achieved with his digital filming. I don't see my views as "extreme" - like I said, look at the DVD transfer for Last House on the Left - now it wasn't made from the original camera negatives - but they did use the highest quality sources for the movie available - and the film was shot in 16MM - it's not meant to have a lot in common with SW, except to say that the film was in relatively bad condition. There's no grain removal either, and in my opinion the level of detail in the film is fully bought out by the DVD resolution, which means that the level of detail in the theatrical print reels they used is less then the level of detail expressed by DVD resolution. That's how it was shown theatrically - and the sources they used were the best quality ones they could find.
Now as far as I know, they mastered the LHOTL DVD from 35MM prints - which are "blown up" from the 16MM negatives, and those 35MM prints will hold the quality and detail in there better then a 16MM print will, if that makes sense. You know, like if you get a photo developed onto A4 it'll hold more detail and quality then if you get it developed onto you standard sized photo, because there's more information in there. With SW you don't get that - it was transferred from 35MM anamorphic negatives to 35MM prints - so the prints are at the same level of detail and quality as the source (or less detailed if anything). I've said I think 35MM and HD is roughly equal in terms of detail and quality. Now I think most 16MM films would have a bit more detail in there then LHOTL has, but it would still only be about standard definition in quality.
To say that I've lost the plot is just silly. Just because some people love film so much they want to believe it's always going to be better quality then digital filming, doesn't mean they're always right. They're biased.
To zombie84: Super35 is not always cropped, and can use "all the negative" without becoming anamorphic - this yields to being able to film for longer. It's true though T2 was shot open-frame. And anamorphic filming presents its own problems that are created by stretching the image vertically onto the film, such as depth of field - which will always be expressed better using a non-anamorphic lens.
"Jim Cameron is not a cameraman."
Haven't I heard before that Cameron knows everyones job better then they know it themselves?
"Let me tell you something though--HD, and AOTC and ROTS obviously, do indeed appear sharper and more detailed than 35mm because HD gives that impression."
Then why are you saying 16MM is better? If it "gives that impression" that's all it's supposed to do. I mean, if it appears more detailed then 35MM that's because it's higher quality - there's no argument - if you're saying that "35mm is better but it doesn't appear as sharp and detailed as something shot on HD" then it means when you watch the movie it's better quality. What we're talking about isn't always shooting directly onto HD - but the transfer. I stand by what I've said which is that a HD transfer of a 35MM film brings out all the detail in the film. You may well be able to scan "6000" lines, but at the end of the day, that holds more then is required to have all the detail and image quality - much more.
And there isn't ugly "too sharp" shots in Superman Returns. Every method of filming has its limitations, and you must work with those limitations to create the end product. One thing I do notice a huge difference in is black and white filming. For instance, The Elephant Man was shot onto black and white stock, and because of this it looks immeasurably better then if it was shot on colour film and transferred to black and white. You can tell when you watch the movie how beautiful it is to be shot directly onto black and white stock. And you can tell when a movie is shot on colour film and has just been converted to black and white.As far as renting goes, "who's gonna fly it kid, you?" Telecine operators are well-paid because they are extremely well qualified. You'd have to have a professional at your disposal to get worthwhile results.
U SAID IT! 
.
here