ever since CD i’ve never every used music-cassettes (tapes) again. why? coz there’s no reason for it
i agree with scarface "Celluloid will never die."
i don’t know very much about shooting digital but i know enough about digital photography…
i am an amateur photographer and i don’t like to use a digital camera because there is a magic in the film you can’t find it in a digital camera…
if someone is using a film he has a second thought about taking a picture when you use a digital camera the most times you don’t do that. you just take 10 pictures and you keep what is best for you. you don’t study the picture…
that’s just my opinion for photography i don’t if it’s the same at shooting a film
[quote=“claudia11”]
because there is a magic in the film you can’t find it in a digital camera…
[/quote]
maybe if you have a 2000 bucks mirror-reflex 15 megapixel digi-cam you’ll discover the magic 
[quote=“The Seb”]
maybe if you have a 2000 bucks mirror-reflex 15 megapixel digi-cam you’ll discover the magic 
[/quote]
you should bye me this canera to help me understand this magic… 
just watched Collateral. you can achieve really impressive cinematography when shooting digital. it all looked so sharp, so vibrant etc
and watching the Collateral making of, there’s another benefit of shooting in HD: you can shoot longer takes. coz when you’re shooting on film, you usually run out on a magazine after 10 minutes and with HD they can shoot like almost an hour, so there’s no interruption and infinite takes, that’s something that benefits the acting a lot, coz it gives them more room to be creative, coz you dont have to concentrate on the technical limitations anymore
Ok, so seriously…what’s one good reason to use film besides it’s a LESS lazy way to make a movie. Just screw it. Sorry, but there’s no purpose…when digital has so many advantages.
Ebert’s opinion on the issue:
Additionally, Ebert took the very unique stance of advising theatre operators, “I’m going to ask you not to rush headlong into digital cinema.” As the first voice in a long time at any exhibition convention to come out supporting celluloid over digital projection, he stated, “Hollywood has not spent one dime studying…how digital images enter the human mind.”
“There’s a theory that people enter a hypnotic state when watching video,” he explained. "It gives a different experience [than watching film]…When you replace celluloid, you may be giving [movie patrons] an experience that they didn’t know they’d be getting.
Quite passionate about the issue, Ebert said that when the inevitable conversion to digital took place, people were “going to lose celluloid magic.” What people would get instead, he insisted, were images that would be “cold, but technically perfect.” "
Source: <LINK_TEXT text=“http://www.boxoffice.com/shows/showest/ … oeper.html”>http://www.boxoffice.com/shows/showest/2002/ebert_roeper.html</LINK_TEXT>
i am just defending film cause it really is the most logical way nowadays.
But you should all know that i love celluloid film to death and everyone started talking about digital i was worried, but it seems like the way that the industry is going and i am okay with that now. There will always be the memories and the films that were shot on film and film probably wont die, just now it isnt the only choice.
Oh, and digital is more expensive in that the equipment cost a shitload, but it aint in that you dont pay for film while shooting.
[quote=“Angel”]
i am just defending film cause it really is the most logical way nowadays.
But you should all know that i love celluloid film to death and everyone started talking about digital i was worried, but it seems like the way that the industry is going and i am okay with that now. There will always be the memories and the films that were shot on film and film probably wont die, just now it isnt the only choice.
Oh, and digital is more expensive in that the equipment cost a shitload, but it aint in that you dont pay for film while shooting.
[/quote]
Yes, there’s always that feel of film that seperates people from reality, but nowadays you can even edit footage to look like that! You edit digital footage to make it look like a 1960’s film if you want. What do you mean Digital costs more than shooting film?
Whats fucked up about digital is that loads of guys put the: “look at all the cool digital shit I can do with my computer” into the movie.
The matrix part deux and trois are examples of that. It aint about the fantasy, but about showing off.
Shooting digital should be contributing to the movie, not downgrading it to a “look how cool I can make this and this look” type of flick…
I trust RR and QT with this, because they put their love for movies first, not their love for being a genius filmmaker and showing off with that.
The ways of making a movie should always contribute to the movie. Not the other way around, where the movie is just an excuse for showing of some stupid uninteresting digital possibilties.
[quote=“tarantino_is_god”]
Whats fucked up about digital is that loads of guys put the: “look at all the cool digital shit I can do with my computer” into the movie.
The matrix part deux and trois are examples of that. It aint about the fantasy, but about showing off.[/quote]
That has nothing to do with “digital”. All the Matrix movies were shot on film. I think you are confusing “digital” with CG effects. Anyway, by saying what you are saying, you are just demonstrating the inherent problems with any movie regardless of medium. Is it possible to make a bad “digital” movie? Of course. But it’s just as easy to make a bad “film” movie. All in all, it all comes down to story. I think everyone agrees with that. The medium the story is shot on is basically irrelevant. It digital is cheaper, easier, faster to shoot, easier to manipulate and edit in post, then great. Go for it, if that’s what important to you. Otherwise, use film or make cartoon flipbooks or whatever else you can afford or aesthetic you want to capture. Good luck to every present or potential filmmaker. Now there’s just more tools to play with!
this is similar to discussions about vinyl
if anyone on here listens to like any punk bands many still release stuff on vinyl, and many people prefer in that community but outside of it not many people use vinyl
Don’t call it film call it philm. Phoney Film.
[quote=“Black Mamba!”]
Yes, there’s always that feel of film that seperates people from reality, but nowadays you can even edit footage to look like that! You edit digital footage to make it look like a 1960’s film if you want. What do you mean Digital costs more than shooting film?
[/quote]
No! I didn’t mean that. Digital is way cheaper. But there was discussion about digital costs, and digital equipment i think costs more. But in the long run, it is way cheaper.
I dont see what most of you have against digital. I am this close from starting a feature-length underground indie film and i am shooting digital. I aint paying for film costs, when i have a mini-DV that looks perfect converted onto DVD or VHS anyway.
on another note, people love shooting digital with Rodrgiuez because they just keep filming and the whole process moves fast.
after all, we’re not talking about 400 bucks digital DV or digital8, we’re talking about digital high definition, where a camera costs at least a 4 digit number and the result looks AT LEAST as stunning as Collateral. i mean, forget film folks, the time is over. i know its a nostalgic thing, but the time is over, you can have everything you want with film you can have with digital. just too many advantages and not ONE REALLY SERIOUS argument against it, honestly
Here’s a great article on the digital issue:
<LINK_TEXT text=“Artichoke, Turmeric and More Strange Flavored Water Products | Time … -1,00.html”>http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1172229-1,00.html</LINK_TEXT>
In this month’s Sight and Sound (UK magazine) there is a letter about how digital projectors in cinemas have the same problems as digital television. In one London cinema the digital projection suddenly fucked up on a French film that the subtitles not only became out of sync with the dialogue but they started to jutter about the screen.
No, I won’t forget film. Give me scratches on the print over the digitally projected image suddenly becoming pixallated any day. If digital is so wonderful and is just as good as celluloid then why does Quentin Tarantino collect prints?
My guess is that ‘Grind House’ is being shot digitally because it is probably easier to fake 1970s exploitation cinema looking film on such a system than it is (ironically speaking) with actual film.
No No Jeff I completly agree with TarantinoGod, he has a point. Movie makers will be prone to get extremely fucking lazy and try making a digital production more juicy by adding on more and more crap since the whole fucking medium became so much less cumbersome and now they’ll have all this new time to manipulate the end result. It doesn’t matter if The Matrix was shot on film or not. He means THAT ugly factor will take control hold over harder earned substance once the movie becomes so much easier to fool around with and then not having to think out your delima consequently reducing its impact, like claudia11 mentioned about a 35millimeter camera searching for a (meaningful) shot. I know exactly what TG means. As a matter of fact The Presendent of the MPAA said it himself at was it last years oscars, something like,“The incredible progress of technology will be meeting head on with cinema as an art form.” With that CGI is just some kind of high tech paint brush. Now what are you going to do with this shit? That’s the question. Side not here. I made a short slasher movie on DV and believe you me I thought and thought and thought it out before even TOUCHING that camcorder. So that’s what’s going on, you know: the story boarding, writing, brainstorming, to not do less of either qualities because you can, un like film were you atleast HAVE to know where the fuck you’re going place the camera BEFORE you get there. Let me also say that if I were to of just have a working idea and then figure it out later at the moment kind of thing because it’s MY THING AND I’M LIKE HIP GUY THAT INVENTS ON THE FLY OUTSIDER, “Fuck You I Shoot Like An Outlaw Fuck ball!”- that kind of mentality, well that wouldn’t of worked even though it was free to do because WE HAD NOTHING. I’m talking fuckng trees and two actors and NADA but a GREAT BIG FUCKING STRAIGHT RAZOR and that’s exactly what I fucking EXPLOITED so we HAD to have a plan MUST have a strategy when you’re working with fucking trees! Shit for one these guys don’t got all fucking day waiting around for almighty ass-fuck to get going-although HOLLYWEIRD is laughing at that one-THEY GET PAID TO FUCKING WAIT!! But not if any of you fuckers are going to make an independent movie, uh uh bubba, you best be General Fucking Patton on THAT fucking set!!! You gotta be FAST. Of course to get in the shooting preparedness a little more deeper, Stanely Kubrick said that your re-inventing while your on the set. That’s saying a hell of a fucking lot being that thorough a person to begin with. Last item here on this DV biz. A borrowed laptop comming from a borrowed camcorder from your local Public Access can fool the eye more than you would think it would if you get obsessive about whatever the fuck your project is. I shit you not. The thing I did which is very very short looks like something I assume between 16 or 8 mil shot in black and white and after adding on all kinds of slow motion sequences-that would cost a fucking ton cuz U gotta crank it up to slow it down, you could almost be conned into thinking it. But this is still DV so if you plan on going big get the goods-the 24p panasonic for under 2 grand is a real good choice, this moves over to the movie making forum. For what it’s worth though I got a killer glossed over art film effect from the basic i-movie post feautre that comes standard on a mac, same goes for the slow-mo sequences. Gee I guess I’m proud of it. Why shouldn’t I be, cuz it was done with tape?? Think Sin City Fuckos.
typical cases of new technology paranoia i read in here…
“oh no, we don’t need CDs, we have vinyl!”
“oh no, who needs cars when we have horses!”
“oh no, who needs the internet, if i can send my friend a letter?”
go on complain, the technology will mature and in a couple of years you’ll all be using it and nobody’s gonna shed a tear about celluloid.
that’s progress people, wether you like it or not
Fucking A