RE: [AV Media Matters] Video to film for preservation-some clarif ications.

[e.ha.zwaneveld@nfb.ca]

Greetings,

jeffkreines@mindspring.com [mailto:jeffkreines@mindspring.com]:

Noted:

Isn't the Teledyne a triniscope device, with three monochrome monitors
(filtered to R/G/B) with their images combined with mirrors and beam
splitters?  Or did they also make an EBR?

Response: Thank you Jeff, indeed, the Teledyne was  based on laser scanning
technology, using a black box that separated the red, green and blue
components of a videotape image. They modulated the writing light provided
by three lasers. These light outputs were then combined  into a single light
beam, whereafter it was then mechanically scanned at the vertical and
horizontal TV rates, focused onto the film plane by a multi-faceted spinning
mirror. The picture quality is acceptable, with reservations.

More recently, as described by Richard F. Dubbe and Edward W. Reed, Jr., in
the Journal of the SMPTE, March 1966 issue, the Electron Beam Recorder (EBR)
was introduced. It brought the film inside the vacuum chamber, where the
electron beam was used to expose the film directly by electron bombardment.
This technology, capable of more than 600 lines on 16mm film, remains in use
today, and avoids the phosphor afterglow of the laser scanning technology,
and the fixed noise patterns inherent in phosphor faceplates. Its quality is
very good. The transfer services using this technology are the most
expensive as well.

With regard to Jim Lindner's comments:
Many observations affirm my point, some would benefit from a few more
clarifications below as I don't believe that video will be and can continue
to be viewed as it was once intended to be:

The integrity of the viewing experience for video:
For our preservation investment, video and data recording offer no answers
other than continuous content migration, hoping that all data can be
preserved across the media iterations and generations. Preserving video as
data or as analog film images is better than not having it at all, or
finding out that it exists only as very degraded and fuzzy video. It is not
the real experience, but one that fits the internet content management and
electronic business paradigms in which we operate today.

But even when the signals can be preserved, the integrity of the
presentation context is no longer preservable either. With the introduction
of Digital Television sets and projection devices, and computers capable of
receiving and displaying video and movies, the displays used to see video
are defined by the computer industry, whose display technology acts as a
disruptive technology from the perspective of the broadcasting industry.
They produce much higher resolution, and are computer monitors and data
projection devices, and their inherent characteristics are also
significantly different from traditional video display technology. The
computer industry is driving the video display industry today and theirs are
the tools used to have the video experience of the future.

Are 24p and 48p archiving solutions for video signal preservation?
Obviously as Jim notes, 24 or 48p do not hold a solution for traditional
29.97 frame rate video signal preservation, whether as video or film is
irrelevant. I did not argue that these would apply to legacy video. It can
also be argued that it holds no solution for the archiving of film. But in
the paradigm of digital asset management systems, such digital forms of
video and film content are unavoidable and in fact desirable. 24p production
material originated in video or film form can actually be preserved as film.
It can also be sourced again as digital video to be viewed in its form or
the electronic derivatives thereof. And that is progress worth noting. And
it is being demonstrated that a virtual film exhibition experience can be
achieved with electronic cinema which is based on HDTV technology. It also
is a disruptive technology that disturbs the traditional borders within
which the film experience is held to find its setting. It is not the real
thing, but eventually when it has fully developed, it will be
indistinguishable from the film experience. This as a result of the
telecommunications paradigm which drives the future film distribution
industry, entering the marketplace with a lower quality experience at an
irresistable reduced cost and lower profit margin.

For an informative discussion of 24p and its viability in the international
setting, specially 50 Hz or 25 fps, see an article by Milan Krsljanin of
Sony Broadcast & Professional Europe, entitled: "Is 24p a viable global
interchange format?", in Image Technology, (BKSTS) October/November 1999,
pp.6-9.

Best regards,

Ed H. Zwaneveld,
Technological Research and Development,
National Film Board of Canada
May 2, 2001
Tel: +1-514-283-9143