memories
-
quite a beautiful and sensual actress
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6qW7842Rn8Y
another one:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=igOagPXQQT0
-
-
-
-
WTF?
-
for bollywood stars, fann wong is better
-
hahahha
-
she is amazing for the 80s... unfortunately i dont have any pics in google i can find...
-
veri old movie lol.... but the tree trunk looks familiar....
-
Originally posted by F ker2009:
veri old movie lol.... but the tree trunk looks familiar....
Btw that tree trunks looks like trees from the 1980s in singapore.
btw u think its old, the same youtube clip in full is available in HD like resolution. during the 1980s, there were using kodak or technicolour for India. The colors were astonishing
Here:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lAYNpFSAMHg
nowadays u find indian HD movies, DTS sound, special effects ect..With the exception of AR Rahman ( who has not strayed away from Melody). the rest are crap.
In the 80s, technology is was limited, so the actors and actresses have work harder to put in more emotion and expression in their acting and singing. and there was synthesized music ( 80s style) in those days too..
-
Originally posted by Master -_-:
Hey, don't abuse the pic of Beyonce! -
Originally posted by noopi:
for bollywood stars, fann wong is better
oic u live f f fann wong. you like ffhahaha
-
Originally posted by flapdoodle:
quite a beautiful and sensual actress
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6qW7842Rn8Y
another one:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=igOagPXQQT0
her expresison not bad.
-
Originally posted by flapdoodle:
Btw that tree trunks looks like trees from the 1980s in singapore.
btw u think its old, the same youtube clip in full is available in HD like resolution. during the 1980s, there were using kodak or technicolour for India. The colors were astonishing
Here:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lAYNpFSAMHg
damn sharp HD !..how did they do it?... i tried creating many youtube clip but cannot achieve this..how man?
if u say its 1980s, there was no HD in source material.
-
Originally posted by ☃®:
damn sharp HD !..how did they do it?... i tried creating many youtube clip but cannot achieve this..how man?
if u say its 1980s, there was no HD in source material.
The youtube that i showed may have been ripped from a dvd that has digitally remasterd from the original 70mm film print which itself is a hyper HD material.those days using 70 mm film print.
When u look at a film print under microscope, u will see small hyper sharp images. Nearly all movies shot on film is effectively higher resolution than HD (I think most moves from film are scanned at something like 4,000-5,000 lines , while the highest HD standard currently is 1080 lines). Most of the 80s and 90s Indian movies were shot in these hyper resolutions, hence the reason why u see bright colours and lightings.
And even most old movies shot on video/other formats were shot on "camera" that was higher quality than 1080p ( current Sonys). The difference is that the shift from analog to digital needs to be start all from scratch. HD is not new technology. it existed since the 1950s in analog format ( which is film print)film print always had a much higher resolution . Yeah, the whole point of current HD tech is that it's closer to film quality than SD. and to bring the old film quality high resolutions to digital format . But the digital format takes up processing power and storage technology. so it has to evolve slowly through years ( 720P to 1080 p ect). the whole idea is to shift the old film print technology in all its glory to new digital format to save it from wear and tear. and also new terms like "colour bit" and "colour" resolution, "gamut" mean nothing new at all.. they are referred to how accurate a digital picture is to the original source film print.
-
Originally posted by flapdoodle:
The youtube that i showed may have been ripped from a dvd that has digitally remasterd from the original 70mm film print which itself is a hyper HD material.those days using 70 mm film print.
When u look at a film print under microscope, u will see small hyper sharp images. Nearly all movies shot on film is effectively higher resolution than HD (I think most moves from film are scanned at something like 4,000-5,000 lines , while the highest HD standard currently is 1080 lines). Most of the 80s and 90s Indian movies were shot in these hyper resolutions, hence the reason why u see bright colours and lightings.
And even most old movies shot on video/other formats were shot on "camera" that was higher quality than 1080p ( current Sonys). The difference is that the shift from analog to digital needs to be start all from scratch. HD is not new technology. it existed since the 1950s in analog format ( which is film print)film print always had a much higher resolution . Yeah, the whole point of current HD tech is that it's closer to film quality than SD. and to bring the old film quality high resolutions to digital format . But the digital format takes up processing power and storage technology. so it has to evolve slowly through years ( 720P to 1080 p ect). the whole idea is to shift the old film print technology in all its glory to new digital format to save it from wear and tear. and also new terms like "colour bit" and "colour" resolution, "gamut" mean nothing new at all.. they are referred to how accurate a digital picture is to the original source film print.
ok thnks.
-
Originally posted by 798:
yr vid is just crap compared to mine. Get lost.