Cinema - Paper- Google Glass

When old films been enlarged thousands of times on to cinema screen , why paper enlargers are not happy even with 50cms enlargements and when they are very happy with family on pradovit slide show.

I think paper is limited with gallery light and there is no such dark gallery which will show projector shots.

May be someone can hire a cinema screen and sell his photographs showing on giant cinema screen , this seems to me best.

Or people can find a google glass or whatever it is and see the scans like cinema screen. I think last one is the best one , we can spend to an google 50 dollars and see every apug picture on giant screen.

I think if another 50 dollars goes to video camera , you can shoot silent movie or with 5+1 Dolby and if you can this is the truth. Technology is there.

I found many glasses 3d or 2d promises to give cinema screen effect , I think some fancy optics are inside , I think they first made them for pilots and 40 years later , they are under 50 dollars.

Cinema is lot harder compared to photography , it is a immense problem to even evenly rotate a digital on tripod.

I read a newly found 1911 Oscar Barnack 35mm movie camera at leica site. I think he was ill and somewhat lazy to laten leitz cinema lens production another 50 years.

Amazingly Leica got a Oscar at 2014 with their cine lenses

Motion pictures depend of what is known as the persistence of vision. One of the side effects of this optical illusion is that defects such as grain in one frame are partially cancelled out by successor frames. Therefore the eye perceives more detail than is actually there. So if you enlarged one frame of a film you would see the same granularity as a still film of the same ISO speed.

Gerald C Koch said:

... grain in one frame are partially cancelled out by successor frames. Therefore the eye perceives more detail than is actually there. So if you enlarged one frame of a film you would see the same granularity as a still film of the same ISO speed.

Click to expand...

This
As a former cinema projectionist, this is it. I was working when Gladiator was released, and we showed it on a 500 foot screen. Gladiator was both a master class in cinematography / photo composition (imo) and *incredibly* grainy. Watch the skies and the sandy ground. On the 500 foot screen the grain would be the size of my fist, or more likely my head. But, since no grain stayed visible for more than 1/24 of a second, and no two successive grains were in the same place, so it didn't matter.

Same effect when a client wants a frame grab from a 24p video. Even with progressive video and great compression, individual 1080 frames look like crap (though 4K has improved this). Motion blur can be particularly bad, too - but you want motion blur in a film or video, in most cases.

Thank you friends , this information was one of the most exciting one I have ever found.

Grain but not head or fist size is interesting with digital cameras , when you look through from digital camera , you see lots of grains are partying , I love to see this but when you press the shutter , there is only one ugly clean soulless shot remains.

I think someone with 35mm camera can record same scene on 36 shots and project it massive big when 36 shots jumping one to another just like a tape echo.

This seems to me very interesting , no grain but cinema vision.