cem@intelca (04/25/86)
> I have a number of graphic scenes which are displayed on a RGB monitor > (the system is an IRIS workstation, manufactured by Silicon Graphics). > I want to create an animated sequence from the scenes by transferring it > to another medium ( either film or possibly video tape). Could anyone > out in net land give me some information on either equipment that would > help in this task or information on how this is usually accomplished. I > would like to eventually transfer this to video tape so that it could be > shown at a conference on the application of graphics to numerical > simulation. > > Mark R. Simpson > Philips Laboratories The simplest way to do this (and sometimes the least satisfactory) is to use a 35mm camera to take pictures of the screen in seqence. Use a exposure of 1 sec for the best results. (Be sure to turn down the room lights!) The way we did it at the Image Processing Institute was to write out the data on a DicoMed Image recorder. It had a 4K X 4K crt that exposed directly to film. For animated sequences we used the 35 MM "cine" format sometimes referred to as half frames. This gives quite good results but can be very expensive. (~$160,000 for computer, recorder, cameras, etc) As a compromise Polaroid makes something called the Polaroid Pallette that exposes film from video signals. It is somewhat cheaper ($3000) but when I saw one they were taking the video from an IBM PC which may or may not mean its video resolution is limited. --Chuck -- - - - D I S C L A I M E R - - - {ihnp4,fortune}!dual\ All opinions expressed herein are my {qantel,idi}-> !intelca!cem own and not those of my employer, my {ucbvax,hao}!hplabs/ friends, or my avocado plant. :-}
henry@utzoo.UUCP (Henry Spencer) (05/13/86)
> The simplest way to do this (and sometimes the least satisfactory) is to > use a 35mm camera to take pictures of the screen in seqence. Use a exposure > of 1 sec for the best results. (Be sure to turn down the room lights!)... Photography off the screen can be quite satisfactory if done right. The animated sequence in Star Trek II was done that way. Doing it right is more complicated than just point-and-shoot, though. See Tom Duff's posting of a few months ago for details; he was one of the Lucasfilm computer folks at the time, and was involved. -- Join STRAW: the Society To Henry Spencer @ U of Toronto Zoology Revile Ada Wholeheartedly {allegra,ihnp4,decvax,pyramid}!utzoo!henry
dave@onfcanim.UUCP (Dave Martindale) (05/16/86)
In article <6693@utzoo.UUCP> henry@utzoo.UUCP (Henry Spencer) writes: >Photography off the screen can be quite satisfactory if done right. The >animated sequence in Star Trek II was done that way. Another example: "Tony de Peltrie", the story of the piano player that closed last year's SIGGRAPH film show, was shot directly from a monitor. They did have some problems due to the fact that the monitor kept drifting, causing colour shifts.
williams@vu-vlsi.UUCP (Thomas Williams) (05/20/86)
{}
Pictures off the monitor are fine, however with a limited color table
multiple exposures seem necessary (once for red, once for blue and
once for green components). This way you should have about 16 million
different possible colors even if your terminal only supports a 256
shades at a time. BUT will this work properly; has anyone tried it?
How about exposure times, camera settings...? I'd be most appreciative
for any information.
-taw