Where is all the HD video of the first and second tours?

[Angel]

Sure looked like a full film crew in Edmonton in '80. I suppose it could've been roadies with prop cameras, but this is the band that came up with Brown M&M's to test if riders were being paid attention to. Who the fuck knows. If it's out there somewhere, I fucking want it!

[Nitro Express]

I was at 2 of the 3 Oakland 81 performances... There were the same professional film crews at both shows filming the whole time. This was in the days when there were no huge diamond screens and live shots being projected on a screen during the show... So huge film cameras were not a normal concert component.

There was also a ton of extra gear and several techs in the main soundboard area in addition to the normal mixing board and lighting control equipment. I clearly recall seeing a rack of 1 or 2 inch tape reels in the soundboard area the 1st nite I was there and passed by it trying to fight my way to the front...

I think some of the fastest sprints I ever ran were across the venue floor and to the barricade at concerts. Got to be up front. We would camp out for hours like the idiots do now for Black Friday.

[Hardrock69]

I was never there to get at the head of the line, and was not even fast enough to beat the hundreds who were all ahead of me, so I just tried to get as close as I could without being crushed.

[ELVIS]

I was never there...

For once you tell the truth....

[Hardrock69]

You are not here now.

[ELVIS]

Dork...

[guitard]

Funny seeing folks post about modern stuff that wasn't even invented ... Simple reason for no HD video of early Van Halen... wasn't invented yet. Even more simple... camcorders weren't available until around 82/83. Prior to that it was a 2 piece operation with separate unit for sound & video.

HD video can be sourced from both video and film - to include film shot long before HD video was created. The film "Gone With The Wind" was filmed in the 1930s and there is a 1080p blu-ray version of it available - sourced from the original film reels.

It's a simple matter of the number of lines of resolution in the film. And even though it was shot decades ago - a lot of film has enough lines of resolution in it to source HD video from it.

[DLR Bridge]

Well explained, Guitard. When I first got my HD TV a couple of years ago, the first thing I watched was an HD version of It's A Mad Mad Mad Mad World. It almost looked as if it were filmed recently. Amazing, the restorative HD abilities out there today.

[ELVIS]

And even though it was shot decades ago - a lot of film has enough lines of resolution in it to source HD video from it.

Film does not have lines of resolution...

You're talking about TVL (television lines) resolution which has to do with alternating light and dark vertical lines...

Old school CRT technology...

Film has nothing in common with lines of resolution...

[ThatArtGuy]

Film does not have lines of resolution...

You're talking about TVL (television lines) resolution which has to do with alternating light and dark vertical lines...

Old school CRT technology...

Film has nothing in common with lines of resolution...

I know what you're saying, Elvis, but there is some sort of basis for how much resolution you can get out of film. It is similar to scanning photos. Sure, I can scan a wallet-size photo at 2,400dpi, but is it going to make it look any better? It definitely wouldn't be as good as scanning a 13x19" photo at 300dpi, which is actually print resolution.

So, scanning film that's 70MM is going to look gorgeous at 4K resolution; or even 8K resolution. Scanning a 8MM wouldn't nearly have the detail at 4K resolution to warrant the file size.

TAG

[ELVIS]

Yeah, but TVL was a limitation on film as opposed to where HD and especially Blu-ray makes it shine...

[Hardrock69]

Because yes, scanning film negatives is the same as scanning photos.

You can scan at higher resolutions to convert to digital, just as with audio.

Next up in the general progression of things is the 4K racket. We got done wif DVDs. Then Blu-Ray came along. Now it is on it's way to being old news. This year you will be able to get really good 4k TVs for under a grand during the holiday crush sales.

[twonabomber]

And no 4K source to run through it. Money well spent!

[guitard]

Film does not have lines of resolution...

You're talking about TVL (television lines) resolution which has to do with alternating light and dark vertical lines...

Old school CRT technology...

Film has nothing in common with lines of resolution...

If you are comparing apples and oranges, you have to come up with something to use as a basis of comparison, and in the film/video industry, that's done using Modulation Transfer Function (MTF). MTF uses lines as a basis for comparison. Hence why I said lines.

But you are correct in saying film by itself does not have lines of resolution.

[Droomer5150]

I know what you're saying, Elvis, but there is some sort of basis for how much resolution you can get out of film. It is similar to scanning photos. Sure, I can scan a wallet-size photo at 2,400dpi, but is it going to make it look any better? It definitely wouldn't be as good as scanning a 13x19" photo at 300dpi, which is actually print resolution.

So, scanning film that's 70MM is going to look gorgeous at 4K resolution; or even 8K resolution. Scanning a 8MM wouldn't nearly have the detail at 4K resolution to warrant the file size.

TAG

Yeah, I think it's something like 8mm=720p, 16mm=1080p, 35mm=4k, 70mm=8k