EnigmA Amiga Run 1997 July/EnigmA AMIGA RUN 20 (1997)(G.R. Edizioni)(IT)[!][issue 1997-07 & 08][EAR-CD IV].iso/lightwave/lwmlist/95.lightwave-10/001504_owner-lightwav…mail.webcom.com_Fri Oct 27 11:00:56 1995.msg

Internet Message Format | 1995-11-07 | 4KB

Received: by mail.webcom.com
    (1.37.109.15/16.2) id AA204056855; Fri, 27 Oct 1995 11:00:56 -0700
Return-Path: <[e-mail]>
Received: from shell.monmouth.com by mail.webcom.com with ESMTP
    (1.37.109.15/16.2) id AA203956834; Fri, 27 Oct 1995 11:00:34 -0700
Received: (from rcohen@localhost) by shell.monmouth.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id NAA12685; Fri, 27 Oct 1995 13:53:57 -0400
Date: Fri, 27 Oct 1995 13:53:56 -0400 (EDT)
From: Robert Cohen <[e-mail]>
To: Brian Dady <[e-mail]>
Cc: Lightwave Post <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: GLOW and FIELD RENDERING QUESTION
In-Reply-To: <Pine.SUN.3.91.951027062805.10939A-100000@netcom11>
Message-Id: <Pine.BSD/[e-mail]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Sender: [e-mail]
Precedence: bulk

On Fri, 27 Oct 1995, Brian Dady wrote:

> On Fri, 27 Oct 1995 [e-mail] wrote:
>
> > On Thu, 26 Oct 1995, Robert Cohen <[e-mail]> wrote:
> >
> > >My original point, was that since the human eye cannot detect an on to
> > >off sequence of light (or image) which is faster than one tenth of a
> > >second,
> >
> >     This has got to be wrong, since I and many/most of my colleagues have no
> > problem seeing "flash frames" in the edit suite, and they are only 1/30th of
> > a second.
> >
> >
> > >Robert Cohen <[e-mail]> sent this message.
> >
> > [e-mail] sent this message.
>
> I don't know if Robert's assertion is correct, but logic tells me a flash
> frame is a single frame of white inserted in a sequence of frames and
> that is *not* an on-to-off sequence as he stated.

In editing video which was recorded with two camera, I often rely upon
the flash of a camera to "syncronize" the camera two footage since we
don't use time code.  In many cases, a flash can be seen while viewing in
real time, but cannot be found when single framing through the footage to
set my 0 point.  The reason you cannot see these frames is that they
happened in between frames and that the last field or the first frame
captured the flash with the first frame of the second field.  When you
single frame with a VCR, you are viewing only matched frames (the two
fields which comprise that one frame).  I would be at a loss if I had to
tell you exactly how long in duration that a photographers strobe is, but
I would guess that is is faster than 1/30 of a second.

Why would not a photographers strobe represent an on to off sequence?  It
would for the strobe itself... But not for the footage which contained
it, granted.  We are not really talking about the on to off sequence of
the subject matter either.  I am talking about the on to off of the
visual data which comprises the moving picture in the NTCS format.

>
> ===============================================
>  Brian Dady --* Video Magic / modeller    ///
>  Santa Clara,   California / animator    ///
>  Email:  [e-mail] / S/W dev  \\\///
> ======================================\XX/=====
>
>
> --
> Brian Dady <[e-mail]> sent this message.
> To Post a Message           : [e-mail]
> Un/Subscription Requests To : [e-mail]
> (DIGEST)                 or : [e-mail]
> Administrative Items To     : [e-mail]
>

***************************************************************************

Robert Cohen / Ocean Township NJ    Lightwave Animator / Video Editor

          [e-mail] / [e-mail]

***************************************************************************

--
Robert Cohen <[e-mail]> sent this message.
To Post a Message           : [e-mail]
Un/Subscription Requests To : [e-mail]
(DIGEST)                 or : [e-mail]
Administrative Items To     : [e-mail]