Xref: utzoo sci.electronics:10731 rec.video:11212
Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!samsung!caesar.cs.montana.edu!ogicse!decwrl!amdcad!pepsi!phil
From: phil@pepsi.amd.com (Phil Ngai)
Newsgroups: sci.electronics,rec.video
Subject: Re: HDTV for what?
Message-ID: <29557@amdcad.AMD.COM>
Date: 19 Mar 90 20:39:48 GMT
References: <416@walt.testeng.amdahl.com> <7067@ucdavis.ucdavis.edu>
Sender: news@amdcad.AMD.COM
Reply-To: phil@pepsi.AMD.COM (Phil Ngai)
Distribution: usa
Organization: Advanced Micro Devices, Inc. Sunnyvale CA
Lines: 20

In article <7067@ucdavis.ucdavis.edu> sorka@ucscb.UCSC.EDU (Alan Waterman) writes:
|The typical resolution
|of 35mm is about 10000X8000 with about 7 bits per primary. I can see the
|improvement that 70mm brings and I don't even have 20/20 vision. 

As I understand it, the resolution delivered by 35mm motion pictures
is nowhere near that of a still image. The registration of the
projector limits the quality. If the projector jitters the same
amount for 35 and 70, then 70 will look sharper because the relative
amount of jitter will be less.

HDTV was supposed to be close to the delivered resolution of 35mm
motion pictures, I believe.

Perhaps dave@imax or poynton@sun would like to comment.

--
Phil Ngai, phil@amd.com		{uunet,decwrl,ucbvax}!amdcad!phil
Boycott the census! With the history of abuse census data has,
can you afford to trust the government?