Wilt wrote in post #15053942
The MPEG spec committee and the JPEG spec committee need to collaborate on a single, common spec. Or, they need to cooperate to make a suitable convertor. The real problem is the relatively low res of MPEG...scarcely a 2k pixel image! You'd get real garbage JPG resulting from the movie frame right now.
I would think that if still cameras could be given incredible buffer capacity (many hundreds of times what we have now), and could shoot RAW files continuously at 30+ frames per second at full resolution, then we would basically have video frame rates with full-resolution RAW "edit-ability".
There would not have to be MPEG, JPEG, or any other pegs. Just hundreds of thousands of RAW files, the very best of which could be selected out of the sequence and edited meticulously.
Maybe this view is over-simplified because I am not a technologically-minded person in the least.
It seems, at least to me, that all we are lacking is the technology to record and process this huge amount of data in an incredibly short time period. But if you look at where we were 15 years ago, and where we are now, it doesn't really seem impossible to expect this kind of technology sometime within the next 10 or 20 years, does it?
NOTE: Of course, the current mirror / shutter system in todays DSLRs would have to be abandoned, and replaced with a mirrorless system. Geez - how would we still be able to have a fully optical viewfinder with that?
"Your" and "you're" are different words with completely different meanings - please use the correct one.
"They're", "their", and "there" are different words with completely different meanings - please use the correct one.
"Fare" and "fair" are different words with completely different meanings - please use the correct one. The proper expression is "moot point", NOT "mute point".