[Linux] Screencasting and pixellation
Michael Beal
linux@flux.org
Sat, 20 Jan 2007 10:37:53 -0800 (PST)
--0-536514017-1169318273=:53689
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
I get the idea behind screencasting but a feature length film? The practicality of making a feature length film via screencasting is great. Use Blender or Gimp to make some beautiful pictures, script the playback of the pictures in full screen to produce motion and do a screengrab to build the video. Pipe it all through ffmpeg or mjpegtools, mplex the soundtrack and "Viola!" we have a movie! Sounds great!! However, I sort of see a flaw in this idea when it comes to the Big Screen...
PC screens are stuck at 72 or 96 dpi, depending on system settings. Even the best nVidia Quadro cards, like the one in my CAD station at work, are bound by this limitation. Without using an ultra high end video card set at it's absolute highest setting to minimize/eliminate pixellation, how does one oversome the 72/96dpi limitatipn when translating the digital output to celluloid? Certainly celluloid frame size has a lot to do with the level of pixellation present when converting from digital to "analog", if you will.
Furthermore, if dropped frames are an issue now at, say 1280 by 1024, how much worse will that issue become when using the ultra high end graphics card set at 3200 by 2400 to reduce pixellation?
Don't get me wrong, I love the idea of the whole screencasting thing. There's nothing better than levelling the field from my perspective. If everyone in the world could become a DIGITAL film maker, how much better would Hollywood's movies become? How many more genres of film would exist? The "let's make a fast buck" film would become non-existent and movies with substance would become the norm. I'm not sure, though, that the average home computer can handle the on-the-fly image rendering necessary to take a 19 inch, 1280 by 1024 image and make it realistically viewable on the average theatre screen.
Michael
---------------------------------
Never miss an email again!
Yahoo! Toolbar alerts you the instant new Mail arrives. Check it out.
--0-536514017-1169318273=:53689
Content-Type: text/html; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
I get the idea behind screencasting but a feature length film? The practicality of making a feature length film via screencasting is great. Use Blender or Gimp to make some beautiful pictures, script the playback of the pictures in full screen to produce motion and do a screengrab to build the video. Pipe it all through ffmpeg or mjpegtools, mplex the soundtrack and "Viola!" we have a movie! Sounds great!! However, I sort of see a flaw in this idea when it comes to the Big Screen...<br><br>PC screens are stuck at 72 or 96 dpi, depending on system settings. Even the best nVidia Quadro cards, like the one in my CAD station at work, are bound by this limitation. Without using an ultra high end video card set at it's absolute highest setting to minimize/eliminate pixellation, how does one oversome the 72/96dpi limitatipn when translating the digital output to celluloid? Certainly celluloid frame size has a lot to do with the level of
pixellation present when converting from digital to "analog", if you will.<br><br>Furthermore, if dropped frames are an issue now at, say 1280 by 1024, how much worse will that issue become when using the ultra high end graphics card set at 3200 by 2400 to reduce pixellation?<br><br>Don't get me wrong, I love the idea of the whole screencasting thing. There's nothing better than levelling the field from my perspective. If everyone in the world could become a DIGITAL film maker, how much better would Hollywood's movies become? How many more genres of film would exist? The "let's make a fast buck" film would become non-existent and movies with substance would become the norm. I'm not sure, though, that the average home computer can handle the on-the-fly image rendering necessary to take a 19 inch, 1280 by 1024 image and make it realistically viewable on the average theatre screen.<br><br>Michael<br><p> 
<hr size=1><a href="http://us.rd.yahoo.com/evt=49938/*http://tools.search.yahoo.com/toolbar/features/mail/">Never miss an email again!<br>Yahoo! Toolbar</a> alerts you the instant new Mail arrives.<a href="
http://us.rd.yahoo.com/evt=49937/*http://tools.search.yahoo.com/toolbar/features/mail/"> Check it out.</a>
--0-536514017-1169318273=:53689--