Film Vs Digital, the DEBATE

I can't say that I think FILM will die. However, I'm very confident that Digital will SKY ROCKET in the next few years and be hugely integrated in film making.

For people so adamant about FILM I think you might be overlooking that Digital in the future is not just going to be your XL2 and DVX's. They will be HIGH powered Digital movie cameras, I'm sure, that will be able to do what FILM does, you know, so think it over... :)

But keep one thing in mind... Are we talking about cost? Because even though I think DIGITAL will have a huge place with Film making in the future, I think as independent movie makers, financially, we'll be back to square one, because companies will be creating HIGH END digital movie cameras that the average consumer will not be able to touch ... again ... just like FILM! :crybaby:
 
Film As A Future Tool

Film As A Future Tool

I was a professional Director of Photography for small 35mm film features .
Digital video has turned me into an avid student .
My short answer is .
You still must use film to
- Cover Exterior Long Shots
-Cover events at a high frame rate .
-Shot high detail which would generate morey patterns .
-get a distribution agreement as an independant filmaker
(this is very debateable but given same rating on content)
the filmed project will get picked up first .:violent5:
Film MUST stay around as a TOOL .
Any one who has been through the hellish world :Drogar-Evil(DBG): of compression codecs knows that no matter how well you did on the shot you are(as of post production) in the hands of a mathematician :furious3: as to the results of your final image. .
It is my opinion at this point, that -
With film there is a closer understanding of what happened when you did something right and something wrong .
Hopefully we will keep film around as a TOOL .
Instead of killing it off as part of some marketing plan .:kali:
Cheers
Bruce
 
Last edited:
good and valid statement/opinion, but i would like to know more about when you say cover exterior long shots, why is film better, or for recording at high frame rates, and what is morey patterns.

kewl man.
 
Digital is still not as good looking as film. None of the cameras are...including Genesis.
Eventually there will be a digital camera that is as good as film....but until then film is still king.
 
Regarding Long Shot-
If you have every seen a long shot with figures walking in the sun where the key light to fill ratio is over 100 to one then you will see the following.:
1) In any video, (projected ) the image breaks up at about 50 to 100 foot projection throw .
It starts to look like a de- evolving techno image i e squares blurrs , mush ..etc .
When I referr to throw -That is ,projector to screen distance .
I assume that since some of us are going to see our films at festivals ,that a theater presentation is still important. .
With film -even with high speed film(herein I refrence high speed as grainy structure film )- or forced developed film-

That film gains grain but it is quite nice and provides an etherial interface between us and the subject and the ethos being imparted .
For an Example look at the first shots in Kubricks "Eyes Wide Shut"
Clearly Kubrick was not going for fine grain(clinical clean look ) yet the effect is pleasing.
Film is a result of direct physics light, chemical,optical etc ,

It is almost the incarnation of natures or Gods work on an image .

Once you are in the world of compression your project is another automated BIG MAC.

I may be wrong on the spelling but morey patterns are wierd halos set up by the video camera trying to capture a subject with diagonal lines .The fovion chip array is thought to be the answer to this
But go out right now and price a fovion camera compared to a bolex or aan arri 2c -- YOULL SEE!!!

Often in tvc production they march the costumed stand in before the video camera tro check for the nasty morey patterns it will cause ,
Dont get me wrong Digital is great for TV Broadcast or for viewing on a monitor.....
But
Projected images in a theater?
Or long shots of the Grand Canyon in video digital?
The expense of getting to a location should include a bolex with 16mm and 7245 just to cover the shot so you dont have to cry later .:furious3: :badputer: :kali: :violent5:
Sorry if I sound passionate .:violent5:
But we are all losing a Big TOOL if we lose FILM !!
Cheers
Bruce
 
Last edited:
Bruce Morgan said:
I may be wrong on the spelling but morey patterns are wierd halos set up by the video camera trying to capture a subject with diagonal lines .The fovion chip array is thought to be the answer to this
But go out right now and price a fovion camera compared to a bolex or aan arri 2c -- YOULL SEE!!!
Click to expand...

Well, this 'problem' has been in video since the beginning. It is a result of the interference between the scanlines of the TV image acquisition process namely 480 visible lines for NTSC, slightly more for PAL. In the case of standard 'DV' one has 480 scanlines, and 720 samples across a line. This yields a very corsely quantized spatial area that has 'problems' with any pattern that is close to the spatial period of the CCD array.

Or any series of lines that have a distance smaller than a certain number of pixels will exhibit 'problem' patterns.

In the case of 'film' while it is true that the random placement of the silver 'grain' does not give rise to this sort of problem, many films these days while shot on 'film' are digitized, processed, and then returned to film for distribution. They are 'spared' some of the problems by having the digitization process have such high spatial quantization, as well as value 'depth' quantization, that the resulting digital image can be filtered for 'line spacing' that would cause problems. The resulting 'filtered' image, while actually 'blured' results in a projection which is not preceived as having these digital artifacts.

One can not do this with the current NTSC/PAL type devices, because they simply do not have the resolution to do so.

This is in a similar vein of processing as in audio where one creates a low pass filter which prohibits 'high frequency' digitization noise from being folded into the audio channel.
 
Anhar Miah said:
Guys, Digital Vs Film

Superman anyone?

Anhar
Click to expand...

There are a growing number of films which have been shot digitally, Robert Rodriguez has been a for runner in such technology... however, these films are done with cameras that ordinary mortals can not afford. There is more 'resolution' in 16mm film than in the ordinary, ie priced for ordinary persons, digital video camera. That of course does not mean that crappy shooting film technique can make any differences margnial... just there is a potential there that current low cost dv can't achieve.

Then there's the expense of 'film', negative stock, processing, positive projection stock, more processing... and if one things managing little cassette tapes is 'horrendous'... think of reels of film...

I personally have been 'advocating' the end of film since the Hunt Brother's tried to corner the silver market, and as a 'side effect' drove the price of film up, and from which they never fell after the brothers bailed, and lost a significant amount of their fortunes.
 
from what i remember, the guys in barrandov prague had HD cams that also outpuded to film at the same time, i was like WTF!
 
love film, love it. Love the look and the feel of the stuff. I don't think video is as close yet, but it is certainly getting there. I think the D-20 might just be on the level that we see film...that CMOS sensor is something else.
 
I forgot to mention a film problem .
-In all fairness to Digital -which I deem to be the first and great NEW TOOL
as compared to
Film
the soon to be Secondary and Threatened with extinction OLD TOOL .....

In film- optical and contact printing , of bi packed film elements the tech service folks often ran into a strange but very simple phenominon called -
"NEWTON RINGS"
These were specular and recorded occurances which were the result of the multi primatic effect of having two layers of tri acetate base joined together while light (from the printer ) passed through the bi packed elements
NOW LETS SEE SOMEONE USE THIS ABBERATION AS A NEW SPECIAL EFFECT !!
Cheers
Bruce
 
Last edited:
High speed

High speed

:furious3: :furious3:
PaPa said:
good and valid statement/opinion, but i would like to know more about when you say cover exterior long shots, why is film better, or for recording at high frame rates, and what is morey patterns.

kewl man.
Click to expand...
:furious3: :kali: :badputer: :violent5:
Forgot to mention my other
FILM AS A TOOL REASON
In answer to your question
Film vs Digital
on high speed or slow motion photograhy .
In my film camera inventory
I have acess to cameras which record an event at between 60 fps and 500 fps (pin registered!!)
so with this amount of FILM aquisition in such a short space of time
It is technically incumbant upon science and medicine to keep such film recording devices around .
Still I could be unaware of how vast the leap has been in digital photography -
So if anyone knows of a digital camera which records 1,000 to 14,000 frames per second - Then please add a post I love to learn about what is out there .
Cheers
Bruce :dankk2:
 
Last edited:
But Bruce, no one in the industry questions specialty rigs.. thats the realm of the
hoobyist guy thats looking for a do-all, one camera system.

We dont think it odd to use one camera for studio work, but go to another
system for handheld/steadicam. We may shoot plates for vfx vista and process
at a different rez. The digital tools are now in the aquisition toolkit and can be
intercut. Digital Intermediate is something that is desireable. Film is on the
way out, except for the specialty situations you mention. We're still gonna
crash cars with modified eyemos and 2Cs in em. We're still gonna shoot our
ultra high speed on film, but thats just the practical nature of a practical
art.

Hehe.. and this is coming from a film diehard. I still need to sell my 2C/PL
hardfront rig... but I keep thinking I've got one project left in her.
 
A refinement on my observation

A refinement on my observation

Greggl said:
But Bruce, no one in the industry questions specialty rigs.. thats the realm of the
hoobyist guy thats looking for a do-all, one camera system.

We dont think it odd to use one camera for studio work, but go to another
system for handheld/steadicam. We may shoot plates for vfx vista and process
at a different rez. The digital tools are now in the aquisition toolkit and can be
intercut. Digital Intermediate is something that is desireable. Film is on the
way out, except for the specialty situations you mention. We're still gonna
crash cars with modified eyemos and 2Cs in em. We're still gonna shoot our
ultra high speed on film, but thats just the practical nature of a practical
art.

Hehe.. and this is coming from a film diehard. I still need to sell my 2C/PL
hardfront rig... but I keep thinking I've got one project left in her.
Click to expand...

Thanks for the reflection .
I agree withthe overall
But possibly I gave a wrong impression.
I need to say that all the above that I have mentioned is to say
DIGITAL FILMAKING IS HERE AND I AM HAPPY-the cost and ease is very real .
BUT
It is my observation that-
unless you have the infrstucture of George Lucas and the development background of Mr Edwin Catmull-see tha latest book "DROID MAKER" bu MICHAEL RUBIN ....
THEN
you should, as a underfinanced indepedant filmmaker
be aware of the weak spots in digital filmmaking
and
AUGMENT YOUR DIGITAL coverage with -my example a bolex h16 +switar lenses with 7245 (kodak fine grain)
for exteriors shot in Key light to fill ration of 200 to one .
I agree with your point on - no one system fitting all needs...
That is why I have acess to a dvx100a , a studiop bnc 35mm , ten high speed 16mm cameras ,and
an arri 2b35mm and ten eyemos 35mm...
and a pile of film stock ....
So I need to clarify again
USE FILM AS AN AUGMENTATION TOOL OR BACK -UP TOOL
because DIGITAL filmmaking as we prosumers or indepentant filmamkers have acess has -weak spots in the technology .

Hopefull that makes more sense out of my overall remarks
and what i am aiming at .
Cheers
Bruce

PS I am still waiting for someone to tell me that hvx200 footage (or any digital prosumer footage) can be digitally projected at more than 50 feet with good results .
At that point I sell one of my 35mm projectors .
 
Last edited:
Bruce Morgan said:
PS I am still waiting for someone to tell me that hvx200 footage (or any digital prosumer footage) can be digitally projected at more than 50 feet with good results .
At that point I sell one of my 35mm projectors .
Click to expand...
Hey Bruce,

We're digitally projecting our new HVX short in L.A. on the big screen in August. I don't have the exact dates yet, but it may help to bring clarity to your question!
 
Great !!!
What are the dimensions of your anticiapted screen and the size of the theater ?
I would love to attend !!
cheers
Bruce
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top