Wolfenbarg
Member
They did that last year, and the year before that. All people did following that was get hung up on the gear. People are so gear crazy that there are people who refuse to shoot with anything less than a camera with a super 35 sensor because they hate the image of 'lesser' cameras despite the fact that the largest grossing film of all time was shot with cameras that had 2/3" sensors. I can't even tell you how many people I know who went out and bought a Canon DSLR after seeing amazing images with them and were immediately shocked and disappointed by how terrible the purchase was because they couldn't make the same images. It wasn't the camera's fault, but the modern spec based momentum machine turned it into a camera fault. This documentary is trying to dispell that notion, it's so much more than just a shootout.I would love to see a test done in the vein of the scientific method next time reduce the variables and show us the real cameras, or make packages for each level of filmmaking and allow multiple DP's use the packages to film the same set up to show the differences in packages.
28 Days Later is an excellent film. It wouldn't be better if it had been shot on film, even if it didn't age as well.Perhaps so, but I've never heard of Celebration, so does that say something as well? Also, it's a pretty well-known complaint that 28 Days Later looks terrible on Blu-ray, even if the reason it doesn't look any better isn't well known.