|
|
Post by William Martin on Oct 27, 2003 17:57:02 GMT
when supressed frame TRs are vidfired is there any way of making them "videoised" or is this beyond the proces at the moment?
and does anyone know what are the basics of vidfire
|
|
|
|
Post by Andy Henderson on Oct 27, 2003 20:38:45 GMT
I think (I hope!) I speak for many people who've viewed this and wondered what your questions means? Couldn't you re-post it on the Restoration Team site? The basics of Vidfire must surely be in an FAQ. As for the original question, there would be no difference in creating a 'video look' for any type of film recording. The fact it is missing every other frame is in fact a strange advantage (of sorts!).
|
|
|
|
Post by John R on Oct 28, 2003 0:21:44 GMT
The upcoming 'Dr Who - Reign of Terror' VHS has some episodes in suppressed-field format, so you can see what it looks like in November. It'll still look a bit "steppy" though, since the film frames only recorded about 190 lines of vertical resolution, and there's nothing that can be done about that.
|
|
|
|
Post by Brian Fretwell on Oct 28, 2003 21:40:00 GMT
I asked Peter F if these would give better results due to there not being as much bluring (from both fields being recorded) on this type of telerecording some time ago. He said that that aspect would be better and that moving objects would show as less stepped than stationary ones. Some good things - some not so good.
|
|
|
|
Post by Andy Henderson on Oct 28, 2003 23:00:59 GMT
I should have written 'The fact it is missing every other field in fact a strange advantage (of sorts!). '!!!
|
|
|
|
Post by William Martin on Oct 29, 2003 16:16:19 GMT
Thanks all  intraframe estimation apparently |
|
