Ken Hart wrote:
> "Green Xenon [Radium]" <glucegen1@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
> news:480e9386$0$3361$4c368faf@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> Ken Hart wrote:
>>> "Green Xenon [Radium]" <glucegen1@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
>>> news:480e43da$0$4092$4c368faf@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>>> Ken Hart wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> As for the characteristics of the film, a finer grain film will
allow a
>>>>> quicker change in density, allowing a higher frequency sound to be
>>>>> recorded for a given speed of trans****t.
>>>> What is the finest grain that can be achieved?
>>> Generally speaking, the lower the film speed (the sensitivity of the
film
>>> to light expressed as "ISO"), the finer the film's grain. Check with
the
>>> manufacturer to determine the finest grain, usually expressed as line
>>> pairs.
>>> I have never used a film in the manner you are exploring, so I can't
give
>>> exact answers; I can only answer in terms of 'pictorial' use of film.
>>
>> Can a film with a lower ISO handle a louder sound without clipping than
a
>> film with a higher ISO? I ask because I get the feeling that if there
>> grains are finer, the film can record more levels of amplitude -- just
>> like a 16-bit audio file can handle 65536 loudness levels while an
8-bit
>> audio file can handle only 256 loudness levels. I could be very wrong
>> though. Not sure if this is a good analogy at all.
>
> Yes. a finer grain film should be able to handle more discretely
different
> loudness levels, however, the film developement will determine will the
> first and last loudness level will be. (There are films which are
designed
> to render exposure as either black or white- such films, while very fine
> grained would yield little dynamic range.) To continue your analogy
(which
> isn't really far off), imagine setting all the lower bits to one (or
zero).
> Or imagine setting the higher bits all to zero (or one). Under
developement
> or over developement could cause this. Additionally, (just to throw a
> curveball into your analogy!), the bits in the middle are not evenly
spaced.
> I think that if you check out the response curve of different films,
this
> may become more clear, or hopelessly muddled! Film doesn't have a
straight
> line response to the amount of light hitting it. Whether that response
> matches audio's log curve, I don't know.
>
>
>
It seems here that a finer grain density can handle both a louder volume
[without clipping] and higher frequencies [without aliasing] than a
coarser grain.
Does an audio track with finer grain density have any disadvantage when
compared to an audio track with coarser grain? I wouldn't think so at
this point but I could be wrong.
|
