Talk:Motion picture film scanner
 | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||
| |||||||||||
December 2005
editThe original text of this article read a lot like an advert for a particular motion picture film scanner. It's still in there, commented out -- if anyone can find some salvageable information in there, please do. --Alynna 23:51, 4 December 2005 (UTC)
- It has been fix, I think, thank you for your feedback.Telecine Guy (talk) 21:33, 14 November 2016 (UTC)
No. The should not be moved to Telecine. Telecine are real time scanning to SDTV or HDTV. Scanners can be real time or as slow as a a few frames per second and go to data files (DPX). —Preceding unsigned comment added by Telecineguy (talk • contribs) 06:15, 16 April 2007
- Sorry for the delay in responding. I proposed the merger because Motion picture film scanner is basically a stub, and Telecine has a lot of really good information and is quite encyclopedic. Most of the information in Telecine applies to all motion picture film scanners. Do you have a citation for your claim that telecines must be real time and end in a television format? The spirit datacine certainly supports higher than HDTV resolutions (4k), and I believe it runs slower than realtime. Do you claim it's inappropriate to be listed in Telecine? In my (quite limited) experience, the term telecine does not imply realtime scanning.
- Regardless, though, the question of whether [nearly] all motion picture film scanners are telecines or not, does not decide the merger. Perhaps its better to have the result of the merger be Motion picture film scanner, and for Telecine to redirect there (I would not think so, but perhaps?). I'm also a little troubled at the nature of the specific information in Motion picture film scanner; surely there are plenty of scanners that produce other file formats than DPX and TIF, and the use of SANs seems basically irrelevant. The article seem to read more like a spec sheet for some manufacturer's model than an encyclopedia article. jhawkinson 18:08, 19 April 2007 (UTC)
- Spirit Datacine, C-Reality/DSX and Millennium are three Telecines that can be duel use; telecine and scanners. But the Motion picture film scanning to DPX files is an option to all three. They come only as Telecine (SDTV-HDTV) and scanning is an upgrade to them.
All the other Motion picture film scanners are just that scanners, not telecines. The new Spirit Datacine 4k can come in a scanner only mode, thus it is not a telecine at all, in this configuration (most likely why they call it a Datacine, not a telecine). To call these Motion picture film scanners a telecine is an error.
- I agree the front ends of the two are a like.
- I will work to update Motion picture film scanner with the above info.
- Your feedback helped me to see that more detail is needed on Motion picture film scanner page. Thank you. 24.205.90.210 02:13, 26 April 2007 (UTC)
Oppose - they have some overlap, but are very different based both on their method of operation and their outputs (and restricting principles). Girolamo Savonarola 11:10, 28 April 2007 (UTC)
Just noting here that User:The Anome removed the merge tags today. Consensus does seem to be against the merge. I still think that even if they are not the same, both articles need to do a better job explaining the differences if they have any right to be seperate articles, rather than 1 article about two similar technologies... jhawkinson 03:59, 18 May 2007 (UTC)
Having some first-hand experience with telecine and scanners, I can see both ways: I think that these topics are much too similar to justify separate entries, but the question is, similar in which perspective? They're very distinctive for a datacine engineer, but quite the same for the general public. At the same time, the more I think about it, the less possible it is to merge the articles. Calling a telecine a datacine, and vice versa, is a factual error.
The difference is akin to capturing a document with a camera and a flatbed scanner. Both telecines and datacines have to deal with stable transferring of optical film to electronic signals, and in the digital age, to a stream of digital bits. But telecines, by definition ("tele...vision"), are confined to video specs (which also implies running in real time).
If anything, there can be a "film capture devices" page, but that'll include still photography film scanners, motion picture film scanners, telecines, and optical printers.
Binba 20:56, 11 November 2007 (UTC)
- Thank you to everyone that help edit the page, looks a lot better. Glad no merge, that was not a good idea.
- I fixed the lack of References and added a Photo gallery todayTelecine Guy (talk) 21:36, 14 November 2016 (UTC)
External links modified (February 2018)
editHello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Motion picture film scanner. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
- Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090618124959/http://www.dft-film.com/scanners/scanity.php to http://www.dft-film.com/scanners/scanity.php
- Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090825152043/http://www.finalcolor.com/history4colorists.htm to http://www.finalcolor.com/history4colorists.htm
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).
- If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
- If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 11:10, 6 February 2018 (UTC)