▲ | sublinear 18 hours ago | |||||||
If it's to be archived it's going to end up encoded as pixels. I think the question was more about the capture of fine detail. A scanner will digitize much more image detail than any capture of the projector output. Although, reading the article it seems an emphasis was placed on color accuracy. I'm not sure if a scanner is necessarily as good at that. | ||||||||
▲ | kmoser 14 hours ago | parent | next [-] | |||||||
If you're archiving motion picture film, there are no pixels, only film stock. The archive process may include digitizing, but even then you still have to deal with the original film media, which is the primary task of a film archivist. | ||||||||
| ||||||||
▲ | cameron_b 16 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | |||||||
There are some scanners good at that but not at the scope of a 2 hour film. The other factor is that a projector is the first part of allowing others to view films, and getting the light source nailed down could open the doors to making new prints of those films - a different path to archiving. |