Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Log in
  • Hey all, just changed over the backend after 15 years I figured time to give it a bit of an update, its probably gonna be a bit weird for most of you and i am sure there is a few bugs to work out but it should kinda work the same as before... hopefully :)

720p@120fps or 2K@96fps? From 35mm or S16mm part of the sensor?

720p@120fps or 2K@96fps? From 35mm or S16mm part of the sensor?

  • 720p@120fps from the S16mm part of the sensor

    Votes: 26 10.7%

  • 2K@96fps windowed (or 100fps for us PAL guys!) from the S16mm part of the sensor

    Votes: 49 20.1%

  • 2K@96fps scaled (or 100fps for us PAL guys!) from the 35mm part of the sensor

    Votes: 169 69.3%
  • Total voters
    244
Emanuel said:
Martin and Floris, PAL vs. NTSC is not more an issue but 50Hz vs. 60Hz is not gone. 24fps is an "Edison legacy" even if the "poor" :) inventor probably didn't notice the difference beyond the 18fps. But with the talkies, we lost the flickering proof. Our lighting setups would appreciate.
Click to expand...

hey, a started another thread in order to introduce some of the problems we would have to face with "only" 96p and not 100p:
http://www.reduser.net/forum/showthread.php?t=3461
 
Thanks Jan.

E.
 
Anders Holck said:
The main difference is that the Mysterium chip can only do 60 fps in full 35mm crop.
2K@96fps scaled is impossible, because you are scaling from 4k which is 60fps max.

As the imager chip can do up to 120 fps at 2k cropped, it's (according to Jim) now possible to do 2K@96fps cropped with the limit being the compression power on the FPGA.

As many as have voted to the last option in this poll, it's not possible, unless they reengineer the imager.
Click to expand...

You are correct. #3 is not an option. But we are looking at the 2k (cropped) at 100fps possibility.

Jim
 
I think I have an idea of how you could take advantage of the 4K@60fps to output 2K@240fps using the full size of the CMOS at full 35mm crop.
Interested?
 
Jannard said:
You are correct. #3 is not an option. But we are looking at the 2k (cropped) at 100fps possibility.

Jim
Click to expand...
Jim,

Thanks for your PAL care -- we need it!

On the #3 option, I hope at least the philosophy behind and beyond this "my" option can be.
Likely it was and has been for more than 130 voters representing more than 72% of us.

As well, I think you should be happy with the results.
It seemed you had thought you'd give up your wanted 2K@96fps and now you/we have these results (90% is a lot).

E.
 
Thom said:
Bringing up a very old concept, what about shooting 2K worth of cropped pixels, just in an academy wide aspect ratio to maximize usable pixels?

How fast could we look at driving that?
Click to expand...

This would be an extremely useful function for us cinema shooters.
 
Emanuel said:
Jim,

Thanks for your PAL care -- we need it!

On the #3 option, I hope at least the philosophy behind and beyond this "my" option can be.
Likely it was and has been for more than 130 voters representing more than 72% of us.
Click to expand...

The message is clear.
 
Jannard said:
You are correct. #3 is not an option. But we are looking at the 2k (cropped) at 100fps possibility.

Jim
Click to expand...

That's why I voted for number 2, number 3 isn't possible, so why vote for it in the first place?
 
There is a lot of misinformation over here and over there. Possible or not, to have or not to have 35mm acquisition, there's the question.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top