16mm or...

  • Thread starter Thread starter iriscape
  • Start date Start date
I

iriscape

Guest
hello. I'm going to this summer film school, and i was wondering since i really want to take 16mm, should i?...or should i go with digital?...since digital is the "future" as "they" say. I just don't want to feel outdated or something, if i go 16mm. I figure if i do take 16mm, i can always learn digital filmmaking on my own, along with editing, (still trying to figure out how to use Final Cut Express). Any intake on this? thanks.

--Iris
 
Indie, you such a film lover!

Go where your heart leads you, iriscape. There are differences in shooting film and video, but picking up one will aid you in picking up the other. If you want to go 16mm, then go with it.

Poke
 
I'm with indie... I'd say 16 is totally the way to go. Here's a couple reasons that come to mind:

Lighting for both Film and Video is important, but people tend to "get by" without putting as much thought into lighting for digital, whereas with film it's absolutely necessary at least 90% of the time to light the shot, if not just bounce or diffuse some of the existing light.

Editing film is more challenging (and therefore more satisfying when finished) than digital editing, and it also keeps you limited (usually) to the kinds of things you can do. Learning in this manner will help curb some of the potential desires to want to use all those "hollywood transitions" that come with almost every Non-Linear editing package, most of which you'd never see in a 'hollywood' film.

Film tends to pick up more subtle details than digital (in almost every case) ... not only is this a good thing because it is nicer to watch, but from a learning standpoint it will get you to focus on the details early on, rather than later in your filmmaking career.

Finally, film is basically the origin, the root of the craft, afterall we don't necessarily want to call ourselves DVmakers, personally I think filmmaker sounds much nicer. But like any industry, it's good to know the history of the craft before moving into the present/future.

When I went to school for radio and TV broadcasting we spent 3 months learning how to breathe and talk. I've been doing that since I was a year or so old, but it was still a necessary step of the process. Could I have been a radio broadcaster without this Breathing 101 type stuff? Sure. Would I have been as good? Doubt it.

I've been a Nightclub/mobile DJ for 9 years, I'm probably one of the most capable 'beat-mixers' in the twin cities (so I've been told numerous times by people who very well might know..) If I were teaching someone to beatmix (which I hate doing, because for some reason nobody else seems to 'get it') I would first teach them how to count. Then teach them how to find a beat. etc.. all very basic rudimentary music theory that is a good foundation for the ultimate skill they seek.

There's plenty of other reasons I'm sure, but that's just what popped in my head right now. Ultimately the choice is your own, but I would think the best advice anyone can give you is that if you are truely interested in a subject (filmmaking or otherwise) you should learn all you can about it. Even if the majority of that is "old information" or "old technology" it helps to build a more sturdy foundation for the things you may be more interested to learn in the future. If the foundation stuff is things you want to learn anyway, well that's just all the better then!

Good luck to you.
 
digital may be the future but it is defintly still far away. the technology is getting good but its still not nearly as good as film. Film seems expensive to a small budget but the industry(hollywood) film is the cheapest thing on set.
 
thank you all for the great advice. i'm satisfyed....i will definitly be going with 16mm. thanks again.

--Iris
 
Iris,

Welcome!

My vote, also, goes with 16mm. Along with the points brought up already, I find that because 16mm is expensive, one tends to be a better editor (in terms of narrative content). You really can assess what is most pertinent to your piece ,'do I really need to include flashbacks(possibly a couple hundred bucks in raw stock and processing) of greasy foods during my exposition on farts when some ambient sound effects would do the trick?'. :lol:

Seriously, digital may be the medium of choice for most in the future, but, I think it's always valuable to learn the history of whatever artform you choose. If you were a 2-dimensional artist, you're still gonna know about color combining.
 
Iris, I'm guessing you're doing a summer program with the New York Film Academy. I worked for them for a few years in their Orlando based program. If I guessed right and you want to know more, send me a personal message.

I'm a film snob. I'm not afraid to admit it. So of course I'm going to recommend going with 16mm. In my expirience film is harder to shoot and more expensive when you're out on your own. Just try getting your hands on a 16mm film camera. I would say the educational environment is the best way to get your feet wet with film.

I'm not totally against the digital realm though. No one actually cuts film anymore (though I think it's a good way to learn to edit) everyone uses computers, so it will be more practicle for you to learn a decent editing program. With a digital video class you will probably deal with sound recording, something I doubt they will get into as much with film. Sound is a very important part filmmaking and that will also be a very valuable thing to learn.

Still I say go with film, you can always find a friend with a digital camera to teach yourself later. How often do you get to work with film?
 
They said that about still film too. That Digital Cameras will replace regular film. and I believe Kodak was going to stop selling film and switch to Digital technology. but either they changed there mind or there is alot of back stock still left. because I still see Kodak 35mm film on store shelves.

I think people will demand film no matter what. Digital may change mainstream but Im sure there will be a few theatres left who use standard film.

of course if there isnt a high demand for film it will either be harder to find because few companies will want to manufacture it because of high cost or it will be extreemly expensive.

Go with the heart. You can always learn digital later.
 
bird16 said:
Iris,

Welcome!
Click to expand...
thanks for the welcome. :)

ktdamien said:
How often do you get to work with film?
Click to expand...
i've never actually worked with real film...i'm a newb. I'm going to socapa. hopefully it'll do some good for me. and i'm still saving for a camera. :D

Poke said:
Damn ... all you people are so stuck in the past!

Iris, way to go with your heart.

Poke
Click to expand...
Thank you.

--Iris
 
Anyone on this forum will tell you, that I am probably the resident advocate for Hi-Def being the future of indie film making. However I agree with everyone else and say, go 16mm. The skills and knowledge you'll acquire shooting on film will make you a much better digital practitioner if and when you decide to work in that format.
 
i'm also going to be attending socapa. I was also told to learn to work with real film before moving on to digital.

--Good Luck.
 
Kind of off the subject a bit. Whats it like living in the New York area? I visted there in 1983 and never got to go into the city but My stepfather and I stood on the shore of New Jersey looking across what I assumed was the Hudson Bay. I remember the Giants Stadium and going into Jersey City where idiots were throwing bottles at our rig (My stepfather had a small fleet of Moving Trucks that he leased and worked for Atlas Van Lines). Anyways, I remember seeing the World Trade Towers and was excited about seeing them up close.

sucks what happened. Living in the San Francisco area has alot of different area's for filming. Forrest, Hills, Mountains, Foggy Coast, Hot Inland area and some areas that look almost desert like. I understand before there was Hollywood and the movie studios chose LA to be the centerpoint for movie media that San Francisco was actually the first area of choice. Just wondering what kind of landscape the east coast offers and if you have to travel far to get the right location? I want to visit NYC when the New WTC has its ribbon cutting ceremony. How is that building coming along anyways? can you see it rising up yet or are they still working on the foundation?
 
Digital! But that's just me...I mean come on, 24fps digital is awesome and inexpensive! Plus, you can always get it transfered to film later on... but this is just my opinion and it looks as though im outnumbered. ^^
 
bensmerglia said:
Digital! But that's just me...I mean come on, 24fps digital is awesome and inexpensive! Plus, you can always get it transfered to film later on... but this is just my opinion and it looks as though im outnumbered. ^^
Click to expand...

inexpensive? if you are talking about transfering digital to film you should just shot on like 70mm the transfer of digital to film is so expensive you should just start off with film defintly much less expensive
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top