Video

I guess this is more argument for 70mm films. :P

Hmmm? Different colors at different positions on an array... imagine if instead it was different colours at different points in time too close together to distinguish.

So they had ability to fly from one star to another and yet they had no 4k cameras. Yeah right.

thanks

Thanks for the video, Camon! I learned a lot. Can you also help me understand the mathematics here a bit more? Specifically why does running the luminance values through a power expression distribute more data in darker areas?

Is this method still up to date for the latest version of Davinci Resolve? Is this will also work for Instagram Reels? Awesome video btw, I really trust your technical abilities 👌

commenting on an older video here, But I can't help but point out, AI has come a long way recently. I don't think its too far a stretch for AI to render "perfect" upscales of everything. Maybe even a feature to make VFX look more realistic. someday. Although there's a million other films I'd rather see worked on than the prequels.

Great video! If I want to simply use Slog3 footage and export in HDR, I simply use ACES with the proper colour input and export in HDR? What are the settings you use in the export tab to export in HDR? Thank you a lot 🙏

Holy shit it’s Scott the Woz

2:33 🐱

Say hello to AI Upscaling

Why are you shouting so much?

This was incredible. Thank you for this.

VLC player will play everything. 😆 What a Legend!

Fantastically useful tutorial. Thank you very much.

plus episode 2 and 3 were shot on 16:9 1080p cameras that could only capture 4:2:0 and 4:2:2 respectively. then cropped to 21:9 for about 720p total resolution. so even without all the 3d rendering fx needed they would be stuck at a low resolution

Tbh when it comes to resolution it’s not that important. A 1080p image next to a 4k image look almost identical. You really have to get close to see the extra subtle details in most movies. The one thing that is noticeable is hdr/dv. When done correctly some movies look amazing and definitely worth an upgrade over 1080p.

This video is amazing thanks so much. Coming from a Premiere background making a DCP in Resolve seems a lot easier. I was just wondering: If I don't select use interop packaging, does that automatically make SMPTE? Also with the 5.1 in Resolve, can I just select 5.1 mix or do I have to make the timeline a 5.1 mix timeline? Lastly does the timeline have to been Flat or Scope resolutions or can it be 1920 x 1080? Also is it possible to create a DCDM in Resolve? Thanks so much this is soo helpful.

such a cute, talented, smart pants twink

Is because quadpixel arrays cant generate a more detailled image with an upscaler. Each "subpixel" has limited color information. This is what give us percieved contrast and detail in images

They could re-render the scenes assuming they didn’t delete the files.

Many very good points, but also some missing information. For example the human eye has a resolution limit somewhere between 5k and 6k given the given area crop. A second issues is that viewing distance directly impacts resolution perception.

Was the example shot comparing video, digital and film wilderness trails scout camp in ohio?

I'd rather watch a good old movie in low resolution than a modern movie that's terrible. Why is it that a lot of new movies are CGI diarrhea

Why a don't understand is that it's supposed (what I learned) to be sub pixel green, red and blue that code either in 8 or 10bit color information for the most common camera. So how does it come out black and white ?

nvr say nvr

I was part of the remastering team of Faraway Downs/Australia, and all I could think of while I was doing it was "damn, how screwed is the prequel trilogy?"

It’s even worse for Episode 2. To get the familiar 2.40:1 aspect ratio that the other films were presented in, they cropped down the HD image. So the native resolution of Episode 2 isn’t even HD.

It’s not the resolution that will hold the first digitally shot films back, but the colour detail since better sensors and colour spaces only came properly into being in the 2010´s

you are probably the only guy who I would buy a course from… keep it up pls

I only acknowledge 1 to 6 rest is non existent

I can’t lie this is kind of the reason I stopped buying 4K discs, 1080p blu rays are as good as they need to be for me and massively cheaper to accumulate

100% there will be "AI" (but of course not really AI) upscaled digital remastering.

Very educational, nice presentation! But now, a year later, we've got AI up-scaling technology starting to make its presence felt that could turn your conclusions upside-down. I've done my own experiments with AI up-scaling photos to see the value and how good it is becoming. When it comes to video, I've got to admit I'm an old crank who thinks any time you go above 1080 you're getting into diminishing returns, in terms of actual value to the audience. So, trying to generate 4K movies is not an urgent concern to me. But man, just look at all those TV shows that were produced in NTSC (standard def) video! We've already been through a lot of drama with the remastering of some (TOS and TNG) vintage Star Trek series, which produced good results but was very costly. I'd love to see the technology developed that can run a series like, for example, Babylon-5 through generative AI that can bring it up to clean-looking 1080 resolution, and maybe even generate extended background to fill in the 16:9 aspect ratio. I don't know how far that process can be pushed before it starts to break down, but it's an experiment I'd love to see attempted. Or how about this. . . A full restoration of Metropolis? I think about as much has been done with that film as we can hope from conventional conservation methods. There are badly damaged scenes that could be regenerated. There's even at least one scene still entirely missing where replacement footage could be generated using an AI model.

As a video technician myself, this channel is amazing and deserves way more subs! Very clear, concise and entertaining explanation, was worth watching despite already knowing most of the things.

TLDR, they are re-scans.

There were only 6 movies

"teleciny" LOL

That Cotton-eye-joe joke killed me. RIP

CZcams recommending this to me after watching the "remastered trailer" for TPM is crazy

wow

While I get you’re simplifying here, the 35mm prints of a film actually have numerous generations between the original element (often referred to as the negative) and the version shown in theaters (referred to as the release print). This is because film in most cases captures an inverted image of anything recorded on it, so the initial version (the negative) requires a copy to be made of it to be viewable. (This is done by literally putting a film strip on top of the other film and exposing it to light to get an inversion of that inverted image, thus recreating the original picture.) So, at a minimum, the chain was like this: Generation 1: Original Camera Negative (The highest-quality original source for the film, so it was handled as little as possible. Image looks inverted.) Generation 2: Interpositive (Inverted copy of the Camera Negative, image looks normal) Generation 3: Internegative (Inverted copy of the Interpositive, image looks inverted) Generation 4: Release Print (Inverted copy of the internegative, image looks normal) Because of this, each of those generations has deterioration, and the lower the generation is of the film, the better the overall image quality is.

Been a fan of Hank Green for years. Great to know he's now teaching tech as well as science

A large percentage of modern films have been shot on the Arri Alexa which shoots in 1080p and they still look great.Pure resolution isn't all that matters.

This is why it's a tragedy that "28 days later" was filmed with a shitty digital video cam, only something an advanced AI could "remaster" it. But I guess its crappy resolution is part of its charm.

So basically film is better

Even with the volume right down, you’re still shouting at me.

I used to skip computer science classes and go to art classes at uni - so I could learn about both. I am glad to have found an intersection of Art and Technology explained so well. Thank you.

I get it for sake of simplicity and the premise of the video, but I think it's wrong to ask "what is the resolution of film?" because film doesn't have a resolution. At least not one that is quantifiable with same means as digital image. It's kind of like asking "how many frames a second do our eyes see?" It's a whole different category that runs by it's own rules.

I'd also imagine movies being shown in theaters are a whole lot less compressed than a CZcams video. That and a whole lot of other things go into making a professional production look a whole lot better.