35mm vs. Red
- Thread starter pmark23
- Start date
Film really is a better medium. Its just so rich. You cant understand until you see dalies....
Anhar_Miah
Veteran
The information on film is analogue, digital will always be a discritised approximation, so even if all things where equal it will not be as eloquent as film...
dvxhutch
Well-known member
How can you call it a DEAD topic? It's shaping up to be one of the prizefights of the new milenium...
In the RED corner....GEORGE LUCAS, FRANCIS COPPOLA, ROBERT RODRIGUEZ, MICHAEL MANN, DAVID FINCHER, BRYAN SINGER.
Full frame HD technology is less than 10 years old and yet it's already converted some of the best directors in the world. And it's developing at a rapid pace.
Yes, 35mm is beautiful, but so is going to sleep not worrying whether you've "got" the shot, as Fincher and Rodriguez put it.
I couldn't think of a more ALIVE topic. The battle's on!
Mattykins
Cute Member
Where did you get all of those names from?
Lucas doesn't shoot RED, nor does Coppola, nor does Rodrigues, nor does Mann...
Just using digital cinema doesn't equate to RED. There is a massive difference between a cine-alta and a Red camera system. The fact is, film isn't dead. I wasn't saying I only use film. I do shoot digital. But you won't see me shooting a huge film with an HVX. Not knocking an HVX...but a cine-alta, a Viper, a Phantom are better cameras suited for the job.
Lucas shot star wars on a F950...not a RED. That is a couple hundred thousand dollar difference. Where you might touch a RED, odds are you will never hold an F950. Coppola the same, cine-alta, Rodriguez shot with the Genesis which is a cinealta F35 panavised.
A RED is a far cry from an F23, F35, Dalsa, Viper, or a genesis.
Lucas doesn't shoot RED, nor does Coppola, nor does Rodrigues, nor does Mann...
Just using digital cinema doesn't equate to RED. There is a massive difference between a cine-alta and a Red camera system. The fact is, film isn't dead. I wasn't saying I only use film. I do shoot digital. But you won't see me shooting a huge film with an HVX. Not knocking an HVX...but a cine-alta, a Viper, a Phantom are better cameras suited for the job.
Lucas shot star wars on a F950...not a RED. That is a couple hundred thousand dollar difference. Where you might touch a RED, odds are you will never hold an F950. Coppola the same, cine-alta, Rodriguez shot with the Genesis which is a cinealta F35 panavised.
A RED is a far cry from an F23, F35, Dalsa, Viper, or a genesis.
Rakesh Jacob
Veteran
You know I still use a typewritter. And a manual one at that!!! Screw that electric bullcrap. I like the analog feel of the mechanical keys and the BING that lets me know when to return!!!
Then I scan it into photoshop and digitize it with OCR and output to an itermediate format and copy and past it into the forum. EVERY SINGLE ONE OF MY POSTS IS DONE LIKE THAT!!!! Microsoft word cannot make my thoughts come to life like a manual typewriter and ribbon can.
Typewritters will never die, word processors is for wussies and most of you have never used a manual typewriter and have no idea what I'm talking about so your opinions are sooooo woefully ignorrant and inferior to mine... sorry just telling it like it is.
Then I scan it into photoshop and digitize it with OCR and output to an itermediate format and copy and past it into the forum. EVERY SINGLE ONE OF MY POSTS IS DONE LIKE THAT!!!! Microsoft word cannot make my thoughts come to life like a manual typewriter and ribbon can.
Typewritters will never die, word processors is for wussies and most of you have never used a manual typewriter and have no idea what I'm talking about so your opinions are sooooo woefully ignorrant and inferior to mine... sorry just telling it like it is.
Last edited:
Mattykins
Cute Member
Well John, way to be mature.
When did I say I only shoot film and film is the only way to go? Please, point me to said post. I do shoot 16mm, yes. It is cheaper for me because I have access to cameras. Is it cheaper for everyone? No. Do I use digital cameras. Yes. I have used HV20's to Panavised F950s.
Film won't die. Look at what is being made in Hollywood. Mostly film with Viper, Cine-Alta, and Genesis thrown in. Maybe in the independent market, yes.
I am saying that comparing an HVX to a Genesis, or a RED to a cine-alta is like comparing lemons to peas. Nothing similar about them at all. Different recording methods, different use, different costs. Different animals entirely. I only commented that none of the film makers Hutch mentioned shoot RED.
Read up on it, the price difference alone with a RED to a Genesis (well, F35 since you can buy those) are huge.
Please, point me to any mention I made that said anyone who shoots digital is a wussie? Fact of the matter is 99% of those that bash film have never shot a foot of it, or even held it.
Rather than paint me an ass, I think you successfully made yourself sound like an idiot as well as a jackass.
When did I say I only shoot film and film is the only way to go? Please, point me to said post. I do shoot 16mm, yes. It is cheaper for me because I have access to cameras. Is it cheaper for everyone? No. Do I use digital cameras. Yes. I have used HV20's to Panavised F950s.
Film won't die. Look at what is being made in Hollywood. Mostly film with Viper, Cine-Alta, and Genesis thrown in. Maybe in the independent market, yes.
I am saying that comparing an HVX to a Genesis, or a RED to a cine-alta is like comparing lemons to peas. Nothing similar about them at all. Different recording methods, different use, different costs. Different animals entirely. I only commented that none of the film makers Hutch mentioned shoot RED.
Read up on it, the price difference alone with a RED to a Genesis (well, F35 since you can buy those) are huge.
Please, point me to any mention I made that said anyone who shoots digital is a wussie? Fact of the matter is 99% of those that bash film have never shot a foot of it, or even held it.
Rather than paint me an ass, I think you successfully made yourself sound like an idiot as well as a jackass.
Rakesh Jacob
Veteran
I was just yankin your chain dude, I'm sorry LOL
It just popped in my head and I thought it was funny.
Sorry for being a jackass LMAO!!!
It just popped in my head and I thought it was funny.
Sorry for being a jackass LMAO!!!
Anhar_Miah
Veteran
Johnny I've used a typewritter when I was younger and have fond memories of it, and I don't see the problem, in fact its faster, the time from typing to printing is zero 
and there is also pen and paper, ironically Microsofts latest and greates (ala "Tablet PC") was in effect an overgrown pen and paper.
Anways use the best tool to get the job done, digital or film, but don't mistake one for the other.
and there is also pen and paper, ironically Microsofts latest and greates (ala "Tablet PC") was in effect an overgrown pen and paper.
Anways use the best tool to get the job done, digital or film, but don't mistake one for the other.
Rakesh Jacob
Veteran
Johnny I've used a typewritter when I was younger and have fond memories of it, and I don't see the problem, in fact its faster, the time from typing to printing is zero
and there is also pen and paper, ironically Microsofts latest and greates (ala "Tablet PC") was in effect an overgrown pen and paper.
Anways use the best tool to get the job done, digital or film, but don't mistake one for the other.
I reject your simplistic over simplifications Anhar and I would have responded sooner and with more detail but seriously my ribbon is getting dry and I have a hangnail. This is painfull. The lattitude my words have... well you can't tell, I mean after all the scanning, OCRing, copy-pasting, etc. It looks like crap on the forums. I mean forums are the Youtube of written language after all.
Anhar_Miah
Veteran
Well, clearly you have not seen the latest hack, the typewriter to PC keyboard conversion:
http://www.multipledigression.com/type/
and YES it does really work.
http://www.multipledigression.com/type/
and YES it does really work.
Rakesh Jacob
Veteran
SWEET JESUS that is awesome! This like the first time I saw footage from a mini35! . Wait, that better not be one of them cheap ass DIY home made typwriter adapters. They have horrible resolution and edge to edge typing is terrible, I have to return 2 to 3 inches from the margin. The words are like all super dark in the center and really faded and grey as you move to the edges.... Don't get me started.
Oh and is it static or vibrating. Better not be spinning, you could chip a nail, seriously, not good!
Anhar_Miah
Veteran
I think this conversion kit is as as good as the "Letus" guys, they reckon they will have a better conversion called the "Type Extreme", it will have wireless, yea no more PS2 or USB connection 
Rakesh Jacob
Veteran
I think this conversion kit is as as good as the "Letus" guys, they reckon they will have a better conversion called the "Type Extreme", it will have wireless, yea no more PS2 or USB connection
Sweet! A Bluetooth typewriter!
I might embrace this whole whatamadoodle computer-keybord thing after all.
Now tell me what's this I here about a 386DX processor, 40MHZ???!!!!! MY GOD HAS INTEL LOST THIER MINDS? That type of processing power will surely cause a temporal rift in spacetime.
And WTF is an emoticon :huh:, sounds like a queer Transformer.
Last edited:
Anhar_Miah
Veteran
no, no noo, an emoticon is just the the lesser evil of an emotibot, you see where as an emoticon is a poor representation of our emotions, an emotibot is much worse, an emotibot is a lawyer, eg a person disguised as having human emotions but in fact stiff as a robot.
Rakesh Jacob
Veteran
Like the dialogue in a Star Wars prequel? Damn that evil genious that is George Lucas!!! Behind that teddy bear physique, flannel shirt and grandfatherly beard lies an EMOTIBOT that replaced the real George Lucas who made the original trilogy, it all makes sense now...
Anhar_Miah
Veteran
yes, yes thats right, there are many a emotibots in Hollywood not just restricted to lawyers, such as sylvester stallone, Steven Seagal,except Arnold schwarzenegger hes just a real robot.
See if you can spot any more emotibots today..
See if you can spot any more emotibots today..
Rakesh Jacob
Veteran
dvxhutch
Well-known member
No they don't, they all shoot HD. You had broadened the topic from RED vs 35mm to film vs digital.
I simply can't follow your logic. Why don't Hollywood shoot HVX? Well why don't they shoot 16mm? Simple: 35mm still looks better than anything.
But you're not taking into account TECHNOLOGICAL PROGRESS. Film stocks are getting better incrementally, digital technology is moving ahead in leaps and bounds. You are quite right that the sentence "Film is dead" is innaccurate. Rodriguez was presumptuous. PASSION OF THE CHRIST looks eons better than APOCALYPTO, but most people wouldn't realize ZODIAC wasn't shot on film. And the BENJAMIN BUTTON trailer looks amazing.
Yes I have shot film. Frustrating. Can't see what you've truely shot straight away, and shooting just a few takes on each shot is limiting. But if you love working with it, awesome. I find the DVX to be a nice approximation of 16mm, let alone the HVX.
What will the RED SCARLETT be like when it arrives? Where will digital technology be in 10 years? It is such an incredibly exciting time to be a filmmaker and Coppola's dream of a 12 year old being able to make a Studio movie with a camera and computer is becoming closer to reality.
Last edited: