Give me Arri! or Pani, hell just give me Kodak Vision Series and 35mm! Actually Ill even take a Super 16. Now that I think about it Ill take a Bolex 16! lol
I've always wanted to see a large-format theatrical presentation, something like Ben-Hur or West Side Story. Seeing it on the big screen in its native format would just be mind blowing - I can only imagine!
In the 80s, I saw the theatrical re-release of "Lawrence of Arabia" projected in 70mm. Shot in 70mm--not bumped up. The theaters had to rent the 70mm projectors. 60 ft. screen. Newly struck prints. Awesome. But film is a pain. You need an army of people. I'll stick to digital. It will only get better and better.
depends on the type of film i was doing.. if it was effects laden id shoot on the viper filmstream or dalsa origin.. if it was straight shoot and cut id go for super 35
if money wasn't a problem, I would purchase 3 sony hd-dubyaz. then break up into 3 units on a big digitial motion picture with likeness of that of Lucas' video village plasma screen set up and direct, as I drink my coffee, an adventure movie that would probably flop.
[quote author=TC link=board=Offtopic;num=1097291741;start=0#11 date=10/09/04 at 01:45:30]Always thinking Rich... It's inventive minds like yours that keep the industry moving.[/quote]
I would definitely shoot that mofo in film, but like IAL if there was tonnes of cgi or effects I would viper it up!
Something to be said for film, has a much more organic look to it, no matter what you do to digital. It's not about resolution, it's about quality. It's the same reason you don't always paint with water colour but use oil paints or acrylic. Has oil taken over everything because it can make a more detailed image? nooo... same thing with film vs. digital...
[quote author=THiNSPiRiT link=board=Offtopic;num=1097291741;start=15#18 date=10/09/04 at 22:49:23] It's not about resolution, it's about quality[/quote]