Talk:Kinescope

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The word kinescope should not be confused with the Kinetoscope, Edison's early motion picture viewer. Walloon 23:50, 26 November 2005 (UTC)

Whoever changed "35mm" to "27mm" has some 'splainin to do, as Ricky Ricardo might say. I've changed it back to "35mm". Walloon 01:23, 5 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] "kinoscope"

Yep; there's an article called "kinoscope". I'm assuming this is just a misspelling of kinescope, and it should be merged and redirected here. There's not much content over there, though there are some headings that might benefit this article. And redirecting "kinoscope" to here would help out people like me who dont kno hou to spel two gud.KarlBunker 23:23, 1 February 2006 (UTC)


This may only be a semantic distinction, but "kinescope" generally seems to refer mostly to the practice of preserving live television broadcasts on film; is there a point to using the phrase "tape-to-film transfer" to discuss the ongoing use of similar technology? In particular, the work of the Image Transform organization during the 1970's and 1980's advanced the quality of film transfers through the use proprietary circuitry and methods. In the days before "digital cinema" workflows, early computer animation sequences (e.g., Disney's "Tron") were transferred to film in this way; and Frank Zappa's "200 Motels" feature was imaged for theatrical release from videotape originals. Does this discussion expand the topic inappropriately? Vidwit 17:06, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Visual Aid

Ok, I get it, you stick a camera in front of a tv screen and bam you got it, but all the same I would like to see a picture of a kenescope or a diagram if someone has one. Might help explain some of the questions im left with like how do they acomplish the frame synch or how do they compensate for the curvature of early crts. Thanks. 71.136.15.131 06:26, 4 February 2007 (UTC)Sandy

I have added a link to a photo of a kinescope recorder. — Walloon 07:24, 4 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Why was 24fps the standard?

Some kinescopes filmed the television pictures at the same frame rate of 30 full frames per second, resulting in more faithful picture quality than those that recorded at 24 frames per second.

It would be great if the article could explain why all kinescopes, starting from the first unit produced, weren't rigged to capture at 30 frames per second. There's no technical reason why not, is there? The only reason you'd rig it to capture at 24 fps is if you were depending on showing the film in movie theaters. All playback units could have been run at 30 fps to match. I can't think of any actual reason why they should have compromised the quality by capturing at 24 unless they really thought that showing the film in theaters was important. Tempshill (talk) 06:00, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

Well, no, all playback units could not have been run at 30 fps to match. Existing telecines and film chains in television operations rooms were designed to run only at 24 fps. They would have to be regeared to run at a different speed. Cheaper to design one camera at the network that did a 60 field to 24 frame transfer, than to replace or regear hundreds of existing telecines at television stations. — Walloon (talk) 06:35, 28 March 2008 (UTC)