Page 4 of 4 FirstFirst 1234
Results 31 to 36 of 36
  1. Collapse Details
    #31
    Default
    Quote Originally Posted by NorBro View Post
    Thinking about the history of video production makes you really appreciate the wonder of cinema and film and what people have been able to create with it for the last century.

    It's all really interesting the more I think about it because for a very long time moving images solely depended on access to limited technology, your financials, and your understanding and knowledge of properly handling what you just captured (film or digital). [Still does with digital today but it's much easier.]

    With color, there are creations from each decade that are visually superior, but looking back I think there was a lengthy IQ stagnation for a very long time. If you muted the audio and focused on the visuals, your brain would recognize the change in people, the clothes, the collection of matter - but the resolution and colors, collectively, barely improved until more resolution was introduced and available to be seen.

    Cinema aside (because of the gauges and stocks), television continued to appear slightly sharper, a bit more saturated, and maybe overall more pleasant - but you could also easily mix and match a variety of work from each decade if you were unable to identify the time period.

    The turning point with widely available high-definition screens (with modern broadcasting) and the ALEXA were possibly the greatest achievements in this industry's history. Such defining tools and the best major improvements in visual image quality consuming and acquisition.

    ___

    On a side note, it's funny how life works. With the exception of cinema's best-of-the-best:

    Pre-ALEXA --> Mostly everything looked the same because of limited technology and money.
    Post-ALEXA --> Mostly everything looks the same because of practically no barrier to entry and superior technology.

    ___

    Visually, everything is so incredibly boring today. Everyone's work looks the same on YouTube.

    Another IQ stagnation, IMO.

    I'm realizing that the older I become the more I find myself really loving film and classic cinema (I guess that happens to a lot of us), but I'm also very interested to see what happens with 8K and beyond.

    It is interesting. I wonder what a future film stock would even look like. Seems like Kodak hit its peak with Vision3. I sometimes can't tell the difference between things shot on Vision3 and digital. It's as if the two technologies converged at the same era in time.

    I have a love hate relationship with standard definition video. The love comes from the nostalgia. It's the resolution I used for most of my life. But it's not a strong sense of nostalgia because on the flip side, it annoys me that we didn't have anything better for so long. That everyone just stuck with SD. That even when analog HD formats where being developer in the 1980s there wasn't a bigger push for it. Especially since people had a benchmark to compare it all to in the form of film, with its better resolution, dynamic range, and color. For decades.

    At the same time, if we decided to stop now at 4K HDR and just chill for next four or five decades, I think I would be alright with that. Probably even prefer it. The quality is so high I don't think we would be missing anything by not having 8K TVs or higher. I think we've hit that point of diminishing returns. I don't see the value in going higher. Better quality TVs in the form of MicroLED or whatever, sure. But I'm kind of hoping we settle down on a new standard definition pretty soon. I want my cameras and editing gear to last me longer and my older productions to not be outdated by their resolution the way my first feature shot on DV has been.


    Reply With Quote
     

  2. Collapse Details
    #32
    Default
    Quote Originally Posted by DLD View Post
    The one is 1991 was called LX-1 (I just looked it up ... again)
    It was the LX-1 in Japan but the L1 in the Americas (Canon Museum). I remember it when it came out. It could use any of Canon's stills lenses --- which on its 1/2" CCD were all highly telephoto.

    Quote Originally Posted by roxics View Post
    Here is a picture of me in 1995 holding up a picture of the camera I wanted at the time. The Canon L2 I believe.
    Yes, the L2 came out in 1994, so you're probably right (Canon Museum).

    They were both Hi8, which was sometimes touted as better than its rival, S-VHS. I think the image quality of the two was roughly the same, but Hi8 had digital audio. I saw a lot more indie people and low-budget pros choosing Hi8. The only disadvantage was its dropout rate, as already mentioned.

    I remember seeing the Sony EVW-300, a Hi8 camera in a broadcast-style body, for those that couldn't afford Betacams. I think it was about $10,000.

    Hi8_3CCD-camcorder_Sony_EVW-300.jpg


    The successor to the L2 was the very popular XL2, this time in the DV format.

    canon-xl2.left.master.1576684641045.jpg
    Last edited by combatentropy; 03-01-2021 at 06:20 PM.


    Reply With Quote
     

  3. Collapse Details
    #33
    Default
    A slight tangent about broadcasts and broadcast cameras.

    Prior to 1966 WC, World Cups were broadcast on the radio, with filmed matches then occasionally shown in a highlight form.

    In 1966 WC in England, matches were shown live in black&white and without instant replays (in the US, the first instant replay is credited to the December, 7th, 1963, Army-Navy game on CBS).

    In 1970, the matches were televised in color, where available, with an instant replay of goals and important saves from the second camera behind the goal.

    That was the case in 1974 as well, but with a higher quality video. (I assert)

    1978 WC added the main camera replay to the behind-the-net replay.

    In the 1984 Olympics, ABC came up with the super slomo but I don't recall it making to the WC's (it could have been a proprietary invention).

    1986 WC added the reverse angle to the first and the behind-the-net cameras. But the main cam still missed the offside calls, if its operator didn't rotate fast enough or zoomed in too far.

    In 1990, the goal line corner camera was added to the midfield line camera, with its own replay capabilities. Likewise, the number of the replayed moments kept going up.

    1994 WC in the US added a bunch of cameras, including the one operated on the sidelines.

    2002 was the last WC televised in SD 4/3.

    2006 was in OTA HD on ABC but only in SD on ESPN and Univision.

    2010, 2014 and 2018 were HD on every channel n the US ... given a dreadful level of the American commentary, I watched most of the matches in Spanish. I am not fluent in Spanish, so its commentators dreadfulness went over my head. 2014 was supposed to have been also recorded on F-55's in 4K but I have never seen any of it in 4K. DirecTV does broadcast the English Premier League in 4K and Fubo allegedly streams it in 4K as well.


    Reply With Quote
     

  4. Collapse Details
    #34
    Director of Photography
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Posts
    1,848
    Default
    Quote Originally Posted by combatentropy View Post
    The successor to the L2 was the very popular XL2, this time in the DV format.

    canon-xl2.left.master.1576684641045.jpg
    Uh oh! You jumped over the XL1 and XL1s!
    Charles Papert
    charlespapert.com


    Reply With Quote
     

  5. Collapse Details
    #35
    Default
    Thanks, you're right! It was the XL1 that was so popular for so long. Then the XL1S came out with some minor improvements. Was the XL2's major difference its 16x9 sensors? I myself never owned one. It sounds like you knew it better than me, especially based on an article I just unearthed from 2003: XL1S and P+S Technik Mini35 on Seinfeld / Levinson Shoot, by Charles Papert


    Reply With Quote
     

  6. Collapse Details
    #36
    Default
    Quote Originally Posted by combatentropy View Post
    Thanks, you're right! It was the XL1 that was so popular for so long. Then the XL1S came out with some minor improvements. Was the XL2's major difference its 16x9 sensors? I myself never owned one. It sounds like you knew it better than me, especially based on an article I just unearthed from 2003: XL1S and P+S Technik Mini35 on Seinfeld / Levinson Shoot, by Charles Papert
    The XL2 added 24p recording. I had an XL1 in 2001 and also shot my first feature on an XL1 in 2003. Today we're stuck with a 60i source for that feature.


    1 out of 1 members found this post helpful.
    Reply With Quote
     

Page 4 of 4 FirstFirst 1234

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •