Recent breakthroughs in technology have made it

This topic has expert replies
Legendary Member
Posts: 1574
Joined: Fri Jan 28, 2011 2:52 am
Thanked: 88 times
Followed by:13 members
Recent breakthroughs in technology have made it possible that high-definition digital video cameras are able to capture material with a degree of fidelity that nearly compares to 35-millimeter film and to project it digitally in theaters with no resulting loss of image quality.

(A) it possible that high-definition digital video cameras are able to capture material with a degree of fidelity that nearly compares to

(B) it possible to have high-definition digital video cameras that can capture material at a degree of fidelity almost like that with

(C) it possible for high-definition digital video cameras to capture material with a degree of fidelity nearly comparable to that of

(D) possible high-definition digital video cameras that can capture material at a degree of fidelity almost like

(E) possible high-definition digital video cameras able to capture material with a degree of fidelity that nearly compares to that with

[spoiler]OA: B vs C, which one is better and why??? and also which one is wrong and why????[/spoiler]

Junior | Next Rank: 30 Posts
Posts: 22
Joined: Sun May 29, 2011 8:29 pm
Location: Cupertino, California
Thanked: 1 times

by crh » Sun Jul 10, 2011 12:30 am
I find B better. [spoiler ]to have || to project [/spoiler]
Cameras don't project hence the ||ism should NOT be to capture and to project

What's the OA?

Senior | Next Rank: 100 Posts
Posts: 68
Joined: Sun Apr 11, 2010 3:22 am
Followed by:1 members

by gsinghal » Sun Jul 10, 2011 2:26 am
IMO C

Parallelism is there.... high definition cameras to capture.. and to project... Comparison is also better... Comparable to that of instead of almost like that with is better.
Here we are comparing the material taken through hd camera to the material of 35 mm film.

In B.. parallelism is broken... cameras that capture... and to project... it should be.. and that project..


Thanks
Gautam

Legendary Member
Posts: 1574
Joined: Fri Jan 28, 2011 2:52 am
Thanked: 88 times
Followed by:13 members

by aspirant2011 » Sun Jul 10, 2011 6:56 am
gsinghal wrote:IMO C

Parallelism is there.... high definition cameras to capture.. and to project... Comparison is also better... Comparable to that of instead of almost like that with is better.
Here we are comparing the material taken through hd camera to the material of 35 mm film.

In B.. parallelism is broken... cameras that capture... and to project... it should be.. and that project..


Thanks
Gautam
Hi Gautam,

Is there a idiom also possible to or possible for???? Like we have idiom for responsible I.e responsibility to and responsible for

User avatar
GMAT Instructor
Posts: 641
Joined: Wed Jul 22, 2009 3:07 pm
Location: Madison, WI
Thanked: 162 times
Followed by:45 members
GMAT Score:760

by Jim@Grockit » Sun Jul 10, 2011 9:32 am
Another key difference is what is actually possible; in one, it is possible for cameras to capture, while in the other it is possible to have those cameras.