HD is destroying cinema now that any moron with iMovie and access to YouTube is out there making unreedeeming DTDVD crap that is making it harder for true CINEMATIC AUTEURS to stand tall. Film is art; HD is what I take after a large, delicious meal.
Digital VS Film? Seriously!
- Thread starter learnfilmonline
- Start date
I agree with this, though an all out oil shortage could change this very quickly.
My point, is that the horse is still worth something, especially off-road, like in woodsy mountainous terrain. I actually want video to evolve and supplant film. It's close, but all other things being equal, film triumps over video when selling at a film market. Again - all other production aspects being equal. As Adam Chapel pointed out, video is associated with the glut of amateur product, but film is not, simply because it is a more specialized process. I can tell you that my shot on film features were an easier sell than my digital features, even though I thought the digital movies were better.
Personally, I jumped over to HD, wholeheartedly. I like the whole non-linear editing process, along with the ability to grab extra shots at a moment's notice. Can't do that with film. I'm fine with how JUMPER and PLANET TERROR look.
As far as film being dead, I'll believe that is the case when features shot on film can't sell.
I'll Believe that when they get to IMAX quality. (and that, in my opinion, is going to be a while...).
and even after, there is still that quality.... this look that it gives us, that people will go back for, maybe not the really old film cameras, but whats out now.... i doubt that they will ever be seen as unusable, especially IMAX.
just like how now, some features are using digital to get a new edgy look (crank high voltage etc etc), people would go to film for a different look if digital got mainstream in high end productions.
It's not going to be about the medium in the future--digital will reach a level where it will be able to mimic anything it wants...film...digital...it doesn't matter. Software will allow our digital movies to be anything they want to be. Why go back to film, when with a click of a button, you can add a 'film' preset?
And as far as getting to IMAX quaility...do you mean digital? I don't think that's far away at all. How much resolution can we kick out now in raw data...4k...5k? How much resolution do you need to project on IMAX? I don't think we are that far away...in fact, we might even be able to do it now, correct?
And honestly...IMAX has nothing to do with the success of a medium. Do you think people care about IMAX? In the future (not far off) we are going to be streaming our movies directly to our HDTVs in our living rooms at home...that is the way of the future--not IMAX.
woah, didn't mean to insult you man...
but even with that, there will still be people who use film to make features.... whether its a old fashion guy, or some one with one of those high class guys who want to do something retro and go all out and use real film, it will be there.
its not like we should eliminate film just to eliminate it.... both can coexist, not like it'll hurt anyone (except the businesses that have invested in making film)
and as for IMAX, sur there are people that care, hell if i had to choose between watching something in IMAX or in a regular movie theater, you can bet ill go IMAX....
IMAX is supposedly a huge hassle though from what i hear, extremity heavy, and you can only capture about 3-4 minutes on a reel of IMAX film (again what i hear not know from experiences, just reading a few things and movie making documentary etc etc.). So if we can do it right now (i don't doubt it, it is probably just a lot more expensive, and not handy for all most any producers, please prove me wrong it would be nice to know) probably a GREAT thing.
Check this out.
http://motion.kodak.com/US/en/motion/Products/Customer_Testimonials/Bill_Dill/index.htm
http://motion.kodak.com/US/en/motion/Products/Customer_Testimonials/Archive/index.htm
I think seeing this may open up some eyes on what is really going on. My 2 cents.
PS I shoot HDV and Ultra16mm stock and I just see it as another option for the aspiring filmaker.
http://motion.kodak.com/US/en/motion/Products/Customer_Testimonials/Bill_Dill/index.htm
http://motion.kodak.com/US/en/motion/Products/Customer_Testimonials/Archive/index.htm
I think seeing this may open up some eyes on what is really going on. My 2 cents.
PS I shoot HDV and Ultra16mm stock and I just see it as another option for the aspiring filmaker.
Last edited:
The "instant gratification" crowd loves HD. You get to see it right away, and don't have to develop it, etc. Film is like baking a cake and watching it in the oven vs. buying a Twinkie
There's a financial component as well, I can afford to shoot digital, not film. At this point, I'm paying $5/hr of footage - period. If I had to pay the 2.5 minutes for $45 price tag to shoot super8 and edit digitally, I'd have to take up latch-hook or crocheting instead as my creative outlet. I shoot it like film and don't review the footage until import.
I'm patient and willing to wait 'til dailies to see what we've captured that day. So for me, the reason is purely financial.
I'm patient and willing to wait 'til dailies to see what we've captured that day. So for me, the reason is purely financial.
These links are on a Kodak site...pushing the film medium. Of course it's going to be bias and skewed. Yes, the speakers make great points...and points that might be true now...but will not be true in short time.
These clips show film enthusiasts discussing the pros of film...but not one mention of the cons--and there are a lot of cons in comparison to digital.
Capturing digital 4k images gives us plenty of wiggle room, and having this data on tape doesn't mean the archive time is far less than on film...
I think these are great vids...but very skewed (and on a Kodak site).
Cheers.
Last edited:
There are other comments listed under the "KODAK" site that is not as biased toward film. I recommend you watch them all and then make a fair judgement. If finances is your limit, then we all have to work within our means. But let you all know there is a resurgence of 16mm filmmaking to be aware of. Especially in the Ultra16mm format. Post houses are now adapting to the format in addition to super 16. Companies like Cinelicious in L.A. have adapted a solid Ultra16 telecine DI format and output to a hard drive with a prores422 HQ codec for HD FCP editing. And Camera techs are beginning to convert old 16mm cameras into the new Ultra format. Not to mention, Kodak came out recently with their "Vision 3" series of film stock that is quite nice. HD is a great and different format. Look how much the RED camera has made a splash. Many independent studios uses the RED for their cameras of choice, using high end Cooke lenses and outputing it out digitally, but to think it is ultimate format to replace film altogether is not correct at this time. Maybe down the road when technology finds a way to do everything film will do, then I see it happening. But right now, film is staying for quite a long time. Especially since a lot of major hollywood features are still shooting film over HD. You may have read, in the trades, that there is a lot of TV shows are shooting HD. A lot of times they are lower in budget and a pilot show. I just wanted to open up some eyes and giving film a second look for HD programing, it is afterall the standard to what videography is compared to.
Oh, absolutely...film isn't going away anytime soon...but it is being slowly phased out (I think). And let's think about the independent filmmaker...far more films are being made by indie studios, and most of these studios are using digital. For the obvious reasons of course--film is too expensive. And if it remains so, it will always be shirked for the digital medium.
I'm not a film hater at all...beautiful work has been done on it, naturally...but it's just not cost effective for the little guy (at all), and with cameras like RED producing images just as wonderful as 35 and 16...why go film, when you can save loads of money by going digital? And I honestly don't think the term 'archiving' plays any part in an indie filmmakers mind when they choose to shoot their film.
Let the big dogs use film...they waste money like nobodies business. I mean come on...they pay actors seven-figure checks for a single movie. Every single thing about the finances of big-budget film is bloated out of proportion. It's not even based in reality. No one needs to get paid that much money...no piece of equipment should cost as much as film gear. It's ludicrous.
Naturally the indie or amateur filmmaker can't play these reindeer games--because as I said, the numbers aren't based in the 'average' persons reality. That is why I'm so happy to see that digital has caught up to film in terms of quality. Hollywood must be shaking in their boots to know that indie film is blasting its way towards their ivory tower.
Let Hollywood have their big nationwide releases...let them have their monopoly on marketing and distribution...but it won't be long before indie film makes a dent in audiences worldwide that will shake the very ground the bigwigs work on.
Cheers.
I'm not a film hater at all...beautiful work has been done on it, naturally...but it's just not cost effective for the little guy (at all), and with cameras like RED producing images just as wonderful as 35 and 16...why go film, when you can save loads of money by going digital? And I honestly don't think the term 'archiving' plays any part in an indie filmmakers mind when they choose to shoot their film.
Let the big dogs use film...they waste money like nobodies business. I mean come on...they pay actors seven-figure checks for a single movie. Every single thing about the finances of big-budget film is bloated out of proportion. It's not even based in reality. No one needs to get paid that much money...no piece of equipment should cost as much as film gear. It's ludicrous.
Naturally the indie or amateur filmmaker can't play these reindeer games--because as I said, the numbers aren't based in the 'average' persons reality. That is why I'm so happy to see that digital has caught up to film in terms of quality. Hollywood must be shaking in their boots to know that indie film is blasting its way towards their ivory tower.
Let Hollywood have their big nationwide releases...let them have their monopoly on marketing and distribution...but it won't be long before indie film makes a dent in audiences worldwide that will shake the very ground the bigwigs work on.
Cheers.