[!@#$%!]

Originally Posted by akprodr

cmos grabs a whole frame at a time; ccd grabs a frame line by line by line. Why do you care? The easier example is a flash bulb going off--the fraction of a second the flash illuminates the scene, you'll see that part bright and the other part dark. look at this http://vimeo.com/3385757

But you'll run into the same problem with the projector--some fraction of the time, there will be light projected the other fraction will be dark--your eyes won't see it but the camera will.

There will still be an issue with CCDs but less so than cmos. Your camera will probably advertise why kind of sensor it uses right on the unit.

Sounds like there are other places in OZ that'l do the B&W.

Now I'm thinking about buying one of those Bolexs I see on craigslist from time to time... Yeah, like I have time or money for that...

<fraction of a second later> No, no I'm not. One of my peeves with film is the frame rate. I'd rather have more frames per second than less. But you with yr 25fps television would probably not notice.

Do you know what frame rate you'll be shooting? Standard 18fps or 24fps?

whoa there brother, that was backwards-- CMOS grabs line by line, hence the rolling shutter issue found in many CMOS cameras--sony ex1s, some new pannys, consumer-lever "HD" cameras, etc . google for a video demo.

CCD grabs the whole but in quality cameras it's split in R/G/B ("3CCD") & then recomposed, so each sensor grabs a full frame in color-- no rolling shutter there.

k

the other things is beware of the bolex: they are sweet, but i worked with one last year and fuck, it's the developing that gets pricey-- even if you nab an academic/student discount, runs at about $40 per 2 minutes of developed film. plus working prints, plus getting a steenbeck to edit, the pain, the pain. a motherfucking money pit, i'm settling for video for good.

i'd stick to film for things like handpainted film & stuff like that but that's about it.