Re: Eclair Cameras: To Julian Willamson

[Pierre Samuel Rioux <samro@total.net>]

speaking correctlyJulian, I appreciate your comment, it is Ok with Raymond and he accept a way to protect the quality of this list.
Best regards
Pierre Sam
 ----- Original Message ----- 
 From: Julian Williamson 
 To: EclairACL@topica.com 
 Sent: Friday, November 14, 2003 12:44 AM
 Subject: Eclair Cameras: speaking correctly


 Pierre:

 I, for one, am always grateful to read your posts whether they're spelled correctly or not.  I applaud your participation in a forum that is in a language other than your native one, and I have some understanding of the difficulty this poses.  Though I know I shouldn't draw broad inferences just from your posts, your efforts to communicate on this forum in English make me think more highly of French Canadians rather than be tempted to make fun of you or anyone else.

 julian williamson


   From: Raymond <roelrich@shaw.ca>
   Reply-To: EclairACL@topica.com
   Date: Thu, 13 Nov 2003 19:21:12 -0800
   To: EclairACL@topica.com
   Subject: Re: Eclair Cameras: Kodak's Future





   I am also French Canadian, but I learned how to speak and spell, so people would not make fun of other French Canadians. Learn the language like we did.

   Raymond 


     ----- Original Message ----- 
     From: Pierre Samuel Rioux <mailto:samro@total.net>  
     To: EclairACL@topica.com 
     Sent: Thursday, November 13, 2003 2:54 PM
     Subject: Re: Eclair Cameras: Kodak's Future

     Hi
          2 reasons wy the film still have a future !

     First many movie theater can not spend 120,000 $ on digital projector per screen. They could buy a new 35mm head projector for 12 to 14, 000 $.

     If we shot at 30 or 48 frp and project that at the same speed the film qualité could increase dramaticly at a level the digital could not reach before 10 years. This could bring back techniscope 2frp it is only used for take, but it reduced the film speed in haf 45 ft per minutes not 90 tf so if you used a speed of 48 frp 2X the film cost will be the same but you increase the quality.

     Now we are in a hybride situation we used many processe to produce it is creatif. At the end the film production will cost more in digital. 

     They have film solution possible it not need to be Imax, just increase the speed the idea with techniscope the projector need to run at the same speed 90th per minut at 48 frp. We could bring this idea to 16mm also with a kind of techniscoop done with a 16mm film with perforation on 2 side but the super 8 hold and take only 1/2 of the image and increase the speed to 30 or 48frp.The fack is the image market go on wide.

     What Scare me !  if pepole got a better quality to wach video at home ( digital theater at home ) and the industrie do not ajust to increase the quality in movie theater the film is dead.For customer going to the movie must be a experience, if you got better quality at home you stay home.

     Pierre Sam
     Sorry for my english I am french Canadian

--^----------------------------------------------------------------
This email was sent to: elroro@propagandaindustries.org

EASY UNSUBSCRIBE click here: http://topica.com/u/?a84xYK.bdbHPA.ZWxyb3Jv
Or send an email to: EclairACL-unsubscribe@topica.com

TOPICA - Start your own email discussion group. FREE!
http://www.topica.com/partner/tag02/create/index2.html
--^----------------------------------------------------------------