Recent breakthroughs in technology have made it possible for high-defi

Seems most people are getting this question very easily, but I found this one particularly challenging.

When undertaking this problem, I got stuck between balancing parallelism and modifier errors. Although it makes the most sense to use "to project" to keep it parallel with the prior "to capture", I didn't think it made sense that cameras were capable of projecting into theatres. Cameras can only capture, and cannot project. Therefore I eventually decide to eliminate my initial Answer Choice D.

However, that leads us to the modifier "for projecting" which is equally awkward. This would lead to "breakthroughs... have made it possible for projecting them digitally in theatres..."

First of all, what is the "them" that is being projected? From context, it could be the scenes, but it could also be the cameras. Therefore there's an issue with this pronoun.

I ultimately struggled to pick between these two issues.
Would appreciate if anyone could shed some light on why "to project" is correct in this context and why it is acceptable for "cameras to project"

dear GMATNinja, GMATNinjaTwo, VeritasKarishma, AnthonyRitz, CJAnish, MartyTargetTestPrep,AndrewN,VeritasPrepBrian

this seems not easy for me, because I cannot discern the problem of B, and I am struggling between B and C, evenly I picked up B just because without is better than with no.

please help.

thanks in advance.

I think that this is an excellent question that contains a number of grammatical concepts that are critical to understand for test day.

Note the use of the placeholder 'it'. In this sentence 'it' does not actually stand for any particular noun or pronoun.

There is also parallelism being tested. We can see the 3-2 split in the answer choices quite clearly: "...digital cameras to capture...to project them" is the correct construction

Additionally, there are some pronoun usage errors in the incorrect choices.

A. for projecting them digitally in theaters with no loss of image quality
B. for projecting them digitally in theaters without having image quality lost
C. to project them digitally in theaters without their losing image quality
D. to project them digitally in theaters with no loss of image quality (Correct)
E. to project them digitally in theaters without it losing its image quality

A few questions for the community:
RE: Verb tenses - I often seen verbs like "have been" or "have made" (in this sentence). What verb tense is that? Is it simply the past tense? Which of the two words "have" and "made" is the main verb and which is the helping verb?

RE: "it" - is the placeholder it the same as the expletive it? I know that it doesn't stand for any noun or pronoun, but does it stand for anything else?

Recent breakthroughs in technology have made it possible for high-definition digital video cameras

to capture scenes with a degree of fidelity nearly comparable to that of 35-millimeter film and
to project them digitally in theaters with no loss of image quality

Must be (D) for correct parallelism usage distinctly showing the features of the camera.....

Hi experts,

Between C and D, D just seemed to be more concise. But is there anything fundamentally wrong with C? Not the biggest fan of the possessive gerund, but it doesn't necessarily seem incorrect here -- unless we interpret it as "[actively / continuously] losing image quality"

C. to project them digitally in theaters without their losing image quality
D. to project them digitally in theaters with no loss of image quality

option (C) is having "their", which I think is referring to "Scene".
Why technically option (C) is wrong.

GMATNinja Can you please guide in this case?

Hi GMATNinja

I chose D but Im not sure about C.

C.to project them digitally in theaters without their losing image quality
D.to project them digitally in theaters with no loss of image quality

For C, what is the issue?
1.parallelism
If its parallelism, it means we do need to put both "to...." and "with......."?
to capture with....... // to protect with.......
2.redundant
"their "
because it already stated "them", so we should not have "their"?

Hello Teitsuya,

We hope this finds you well.

Having gone through the question and your queries, we believe we can resolve your doubts.

Your observations are broadly correct; Option D is superior to C, as it is more parallel and concise. However, the redundancy in Option C is not tied to its use of pronouns; rather, the entire phrase "without their losing image quality" is needlessly wordy and indirect, leading to awkwardness in Option C.

We hope this helps.
All the best!
Experts' Global Team

A. for projecting them digitally in theaters with no loss of image quality
for projecting isn't conveying the tight meaning therefore out

B. for projecting them digitally in theaters without having image quality lost
having image quality isn't the right tense therefore out

C. to project them digitally in theaters without their losing image quality
their isn't having the right tense therefore out

D. to project them digitally in theaters with no loss of image quality
The meaning along with the tense therfore let us hang on to it

E. to project them digitally in theaters without it losing its image quality
'it' isn't having the right reference therefore out

Therefore IMO D

GMATNinja

are the two choices, (A) and (B) wrong for illogical parallel? basically "for projecting" is parallel to "made it possible *for* camera to capture."
I know the referent for pronoun "them" can come before the antecedent, but the order of the // in A and B muddles the meaning.
is it the recent breakthroughs (plural), the (cameras)? or the scenes...that are being projected because of the technology breakthroughs?
another variation of this problem is structured such that "make it possible to have high definition digital camera" parallel to the and "to project...". is that wrong for deviating from the intended meaning despite the parallelism? to have is // to project?

Note that I did read the prior post about the the struggle between choosing "to" and "for" but it did not address the pronoun and what is doing the projection as phrase in A and B.