[tig] Fw: 4K for DI - Unappealing image quality

Christopher Noellert chris
Mon Apr 12 22:00:38 BST 2004

On 4/12/04 8:43 PM, "Steve Shaw" <digital.praxis at virgin.net> wrote:

> thanks to Pat Howley of MTI for supporting the TIG.
> --
> Here's something to mull over.

Here's something else to mull...

The Domino that you soap boxed for so many years was 3K in big canvas.  It
was also 8bit yuv with dynamic rounding when used against the D1.  Far from
the 2K 10 log "standard" kodak was pushing at the time, that was not nearly
enough in the eyes of Quantel, or yourself if memory serves.

The thing is Steve, it doesn't bother me that you change your mind, it's the
fact that you present it in a way as to suggest that the rest of haven't
thought about it.  It also feels like you're trying to find some technical
justification for what I would call a massive shortcoming in an up and
coming DI system.

The real point, Steve, the point you're missing, is not to match what is
possible today from the chemical process, but what is actually possible.  We
should strive to be better than the lab process, not just meet it.  That's
totally the wrong thinking and some kind of warped convoluted justification
for the fact that the IQ can't play 4K in real-time, or realistically work
with it in any way, shape or form.

Also, I do a considerable amount of 4K scanning.  On the original Genesis35,
later big canvas on the Domino (sorry 3K) and lately on the Northlight, and
I just don't agree with that.  4K can resolve a wide shot on 35 that just
looks fuzzy in 2K.  I don't need a waveform, or vector scope to see it.
Just my eyes. 

Sorry if I've offended, but your approach needs a little work.


PS: I bought 2 IQ's and I think they are great machines.  But everything has

Chris Noellert
Frithiof Film to Video. AB
Sturegatan 58 
114 36  Stockholm

Tel: +46 8 545 678 78
Fax: +46 8 545 678 79
Mob: +46 735 32 00 03

More information about the Tig mailing list