Talk:Negative pulldown

Reorg

I've been doing some work on the film-format pages.

I'm planning to:

Change the name of this page to Comparison of 4 perf, 3 perf and 2 perf pulldown.
Add a diagram, showing 2,3 and 4 perf pulldowns - similar to the diagram that I added on Super 35.
Create the following articles (and move the information to them).
- Techniscope (breaking the existing redirect to this page).
- Univisium.

I'll probably do this in the next 24 hours - but if anyone has any comments or objections - please post them here.

Megapixie 03:01, 24 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

By all means! Be bold! :) --Girolamo Savonarola 06:17, 24 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Negative pulldown

I've never heard that term used - anywhere, ever. I can't even find the term on google. I'm going to move it back:

Searching for negative pulldown: http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=Negative+pulldown&btnG=Google+Search
Searching for 2 perf: http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&lr=&safe=off&q=2+perf+-wikipedia&btnG=Search
Searching for 3 perf: http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&lr=&safe=off&q=3+perf+-wikipedia&btnG=Search

Megapixie 23:16, 9 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I wanted to use Pulldown, which used to redirect straight to telecine due to the 3:2 pulldown. Therefore, the current pulldown page now disambiguates to either here or there, depending on what is being searched for. Since the pulldown relates to a film negative pulldown, I called it negative pulldown. Perhaps it should be retitled Film pulldown, but the old title was too clunky. That, and the article generally refers to all common forms of pulldown - so might as well just have an article on the term at large instead of just the specialized uses. It will make the subject more comprehensible, IMHO. Girolamo Savonarola 07:39, 10 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Negative Area?

This article uses "negative area" a few times but does not explain what this is. An explaination would be convenient, since it contributes to the name of the process - negative pulldown TheHYPO (talk) 18:26, 21 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Aspect Ratio?

The image shows 3-Perf Super35 to be 0.98"x0.574" which is 1.7 aspect, but the text says that 3-perf is 1.78:1. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.21.46.3 (talk) 19:56, 5 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

There appears to be a typographical error there, which I don't know how to correct. The measurement in inches is listed as 0.574 but the correct number should be 0.547 if you convert from the metric 13.9 mm. That gives an aspect ratio of 0.98 / 0.547 = about 1.79, nearly perfect for 16:9 video. Mattb715 (talk) 16:12, 18 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Notable Examples?

Could editors please add notable examples of short and feature films made wholly or partially with either 2-perf or 3-perf? The article states "there has been a resurgence" - please can this be verified with reference to recent commercial applications? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Entsal007 (talk • contribs) 21:51, 9 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

3-Perf Height is Confusing

The 3-Perf height (in both inches and mm) in the diagram indicated "A comparison of 4 perf, 3 perf and 2 perf 35 mm film formats." is confusing. 0.574" <> 13.9mm, but 0.547" == 13.9mm. 173.226.123.97 (talk) 00:59, 18 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Height of a frame

At the beginning of the article the fact that all "perf" measurements refer to the HEIGHT should be so stated. I went several paragraphs deep before I realized you were not measuring width of a perforation and frame. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 110.164.140.223 (talk) 10:52, 22 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Organization Suggestion

The primary organization of this page is by film gauge instead of pulldown format, which gets really confusing. One result of this is that the difference between vertical pulldown and horizontal pulldown is never really explained clearly.

It seems to me a more logical way to organize this page might be:

Vertical Pulldown

Technical description

- 35mm
  - 2-perf
  - 3-perf
  - 4-perf
  - Other
- 70mm
  - Standard 65mm
    - Ultra Panavision 70
    - Showscan
  - Dynavision
Horizontal Pulldown

Technical description

- 35mm
  - VistaVision
  - IMAX

Anyway, thanks for your work on it. I did find it helpful. 71.217.32.199 (talk)

External links modified (February 2018)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Negative pulldown. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060713061542/http://www.aaton.com/products/film/35/3perf.php to http://www.aaton.com/products/film/35/3perf.php

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 11:37, 15 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]