(no subject)
Oct. 22nd, 2002 12:16 amOn the Sci-Fi channel right now, they're showing one of those Twilight Zone episodes that was shot on video tape. For some reason, these episodes have a smooth quality to them. It looks like it's shot at a higher frame rate than anything I see on TV nowadays.
Whenever someone explains TV, they say the cathode ray scans over the screen 60 times per second (in the US). But it scans each frame twice to get a higher resolution, so you only get 30 frames per second. But it seems these Twilight Zone episodes were taped at the full 60. The motion is smoother than even modern color video.
I wonder why they stopped doing that; it looked so much better.
Rumor has it that, around the time digital film was first coming to theaters, someone had released a film format and projection system that could show a movie at 48 frames per second instead of 24, and only used 50% more film because it eliminated wasted space. I sure wish that had taken off.
Video gamers care about frame rates; they spend time and money to get Quake 3 to render at 80 frames per second. It's a shame moviegoers don't feel the same way.
Whenever someone explains TV, they say the cathode ray scans over the screen 60 times per second (in the US). But it scans each frame twice to get a higher resolution, so you only get 30 frames per second. But it seems these Twilight Zone episodes were taped at the full 60. The motion is smoother than even modern color video.
I wonder why they stopped doing that; it looked so much better.
Rumor has it that, around the time digital film was first coming to theaters, someone had released a film format and projection system that could show a movie at 48 frames per second instead of 24, and only used 50% more film because it eliminated wasted space. I sure wish that had taken off.
Video gamers care about frame rates; they spend time and money to get Quake 3 to render at 80 frames per second. It's a shame moviegoers don't feel the same way.