Jump to content


Photo

HD/ Film


  • Please log in to reply
6 replies to this topic

#1 Mario C. Jackson

Mario C. Jackson
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 138 posts
  • Student

Posted 05 December 2005 - 04:17 PM

Hey guys for one of the films I am shooting in January the director is giving me the option of shoot on HD and then blowing up to 35mm, or shooting on Super 16. What ar the advantages and disadvantages of both. I just want some input before I make my final decision.
Thanks
Mario C. Jackson
  • 0

#2 Dominic Case

Dominic Case
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1357 posts
  • Other
  • Sydney Australia

Posted 05 December 2005 - 06:01 PM

What ar the advantages and disadvantages of both.

This has to be one of the most posted-about topics on the internet - at least in the cinematography field B)

Why don't you do a Google search (or even just search this site for example here ) and see what people have already said, rather than expect them to repeat it all.
  • 0

#3 Michael Collier

Michael Collier
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1262 posts
  • Gaffer
  • Los Angeles, CA

Posted 05 December 2005 - 08:36 PM

Well there are tons of variables here.

16 mm drawbacks for me are:

*too much grain
*high depth of feild
*proccessing/handeling nightmares



But there are drawbacks to HD as well. So I would ask you, which are you more comfortable with. You will get a speed increase from not having to load film and work like that, but you will be slowed down in your setups, those highlights are killers in video.

Drawbacks of HD for me:

*same depth of field in a 2/3" chip unless you get a GG adaptor
*Low exposure lattitude and poor handling of highlights means your lighting must be more precise
*Without GG addaptor you usually get one zoom lens to work with, no primes.

Also what is your HD budget look like? I would take a viper or a camera aimed at HD cinema before a cinalta or one of the ENG models. If your photography is like mine, where selective focus is more than key, its essential you may look into getting a pro35 addaptor and work with primes and maybe a cine zoom.

An advantage of HD is it guarantees some form of DI. no film scanning headaces, just pop open the color correct tool in avid and your good to go. Monitors and vectroscopes should be on hand to help guide your lighting and exposure which always gives you a nice comfy feeling knowing what your getting.

I would go with HD, but thats because I'm more familiar and comfortable with it. Of course if it was the choice between 16mm and HDV, I would go 16mm.
  • 0

#4 Mario C. Jackson

Mario C. Jackson
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 138 posts
  • Student

Posted 06 December 2005 - 11:04 AM

Michal
Thanks for your input. I have been doing alot of research on both. I have shot on film about 4 times and I have never shot on HD. I have gaffed on a HD shoot but never as DP. I am leaning more towards 16mm because I love film and its latitude. Nevertheless I have tons of more meetings with the director and my gaffer before I make my final decision.
Thanks
Mario C. Jackson
  • 0

#5 Stephen Williams

Stephen Williams
  • Sustaining Members
  • 4708 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Europe

Posted 06 December 2005 - 11:19 AM

Hey guys for one of the films I am shooting in January the director is giving me the option of shoot on HD and then blowing up to 35mm, or shooting on Super 16. What ar the advantages and disadvantages of both. I just want some input before I make my final decision.
Thanks
Mario C. Jackson


Hi,

I've never met anyone who regretted shooting on 65mm/35mm/s16 saying it would have been better on HD.

Stephen
  • 0

#6 John Holland

John Holland
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 2248 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • London England

Posted 06 December 2005 - 11:59 AM

Hi,

I've never met anyone who regretted shooting on 65mm/35mm/s16 saying it would have been better on HD.

Stephen

I can second and third that . john holland.
  • 0

#7 Laurent Andrieux

Laurent Andrieux
  • Sustaining Members
  • 1527 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • France

Posted 06 December 2005 - 05:15 PM

Yep, I've always heard people saying that if they had the choice they would shoot film better than HD, but since I've been coming around these forums, I've found people thinking differently, Mr David Mullen being not the last one.

I would just say that your question is a bit different from the standard question of " film vs HD" since you've already given a few parameters, but I would like to consider the following points :

- What is the project going to end as ? Back to film on the large screen or tv ?

- What HD would you shoot with ? Just HDTV or top HD (Genesis, Viper, D20...)

If you had to go on the wide screen and would be given a choice for HDTV, I would shoot film.

If you go for a TV screen, I would nowadays prefer HD, may be...

Also, what do the figures give, for the whole project (shooting + post prod) on the money side ?

Do you have a "strong" post production, SFX etc. that is already intended ?
  • 0


Tai Audio

Media Blackout - Custom Cables and AKS

Gamma Ray Digital Inc

Wooden Camera

Rig Wheels Passport

CineTape

The Slider

Abel Cine

CineLab

Aerial Filmworks

FJS International, LLC

Paralinx LLC

Opal

rebotnix Technologies

Glidecam

Ritter Battery

Willys Widgets

Visual Products

Broadcast Solutions Inc

Metropolis Post

Technodolly

Tai Audio

Paralinx LLC

Opal

Gamma Ray Digital Inc

rebotnix Technologies

Wooden Camera

Aerial Filmworks

CineLab

CineTape

Broadcast Solutions Inc

Visual Products

Media Blackout - Custom Cables and AKS

The Slider

Glidecam

Ritter Battery

Rig Wheels Passport

FJS International, LLC

Willys Widgets

Abel Cine

Metropolis Post

Technodolly