On Mon, 21 Nov 2011, Rhialto wrote: > On Sat 19 Nov 2011 at 05:34:56 +0000, William Levak wrote: >> The device is called a kinescope, a monitor and film camera in one >> piece of equipment. The monitor screen is fixed at the focal plane >> (is that the right term?) of the film camera, and yes, they are >> definitely synchronized. This was a common way to record TV shows >> before tape was developed. > > One thing that sometimes went wrong with the synchronisation is which > fields it synchronized with (it would de-interlace by recording 2 tv > fields onto one film frame (I hope I got the terminology right here)). > For signal that originated from a tv camera it would't matter too much, > I imagine, you would possibly see interlace comb effects in either > synchronisation. But if the signal was originally filmed, you could get > fields from two originally different frames and then you would get > interlace comb effects where there were none before. If the film was made at the originating studio, then the synchronization could be studio's synchroization signal, and decent quality film was possible. But, kinescope recordings were notorious for poor quality recording. wlevak@sdf.lonestar.org SDF Public Access UNIX System - http://sdf.lonestar.org Message was sent through the cbm-hackers mailing listReceived on 2011-11-21 06:00:02
Archive generated by hypermail 2.2.0.