Jump to content


Photo

What do I say to HD people?


  • Please log in to reply
59 replies to this topic

#1 Galen Carter-Jeffrey

Galen Carter-Jeffrey
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 129 posts
  • Student

Posted 03 May 2006 - 09:12 PM

I was talking to someone over the internet and he was being real rude to me. Saying stuff like Film sucks, HD is king etc...

First off what percentage of people use HD and film? Is it really that high? I thought that the only people who use HD are the people who don't have the budget for Film. I guess I am wrong.

Another thing I wanted to ask is, what do I tell people who are going on and on about noone shooting film anymore?

I am still in school so I really dont't have an opinon, I just like the way film looks. Although I understand that the cost is pretty heavy.

Edited by galeninjapan, 03 May 2006 - 09:13 PM.

  • 0

#2 Frank DiBugnara

Frank DiBugnara
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 168 posts

Posted 03 May 2006 - 10:56 PM

Just be honest and say that it is not important to talk about which is better because they are different. Everyone uses the painting analogy. You can paint a portrait with oils and water paints--both paintings, yet both different. What's important is to match the right tool with the right project...not only practically (budget, workflow, etc) but artistically (the look of the photography).

Given all that, you can say that you really like the way film looks (and that Kodak and Fuji keep coming out with new stocks and that Aaton and Arri keep coming out with new film cameras). Nobody can fault you for saying that you prefer blonds to brunettes.

Edited by FrankDiBugnara, 03 May 2006 - 10:57 PM.

  • 0

#3 Dan Goulder

Dan Goulder
  • Sustaining Members
  • 1259 posts
  • Cinematographer

Posted 03 May 2006 - 11:03 PM

Nobody can fault you for saying that you prefer blonds to brunettes.

Oh yeah, just try running that one by a brunette girlfriend.
  • 0

#4 Tenolian Bell

Tenolian Bell
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 907 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Brooklyn, NY

Posted 03 May 2006 - 11:59 PM

I wouldn't pay those people much attention. Its obvious they are not working professionals in the film industry.

At this point 90% of Hollywood produced films are shot on 35mm film.

There was a report last year that most of the feature films at Sundance were shot on film.

Most commercials are shot on film. Pretty much all music videos you see on MTV have been shot in 35mm.

Nearly all hour long dramas on television are shot on film.

Many film shows have experimented with HD but decide to stay with film.

There have been a few hour long dramas shot on HD but it seems they are quickly cancelled.

The one show format to signficantly go HD have been sitcoms. Mostly because they are in a controlled studio environment.
  • 0

#5 Rupe Whiteman

Rupe Whiteman
  • Sustaining Members
  • 336 posts
  • Cinematographer

Posted 04 May 2006 - 05:52 AM

[quote name='galeninjapan' date='May 4 2006, 03:12 AM' post='103456']
I was talking to someone over the internet and he was being real rude to me. Saying stuff like Film sucks, HD is king etc...

...tell him to get his head out of his ass.

Then ask him to list his ten favourite movies... they'll be shot on film.

By the way saying that film sucks and Hd is king is that really rude to you?! I can think of worse things!

Endeavour to persevere...

Rupe Whiteman
  • 0

#6 Dan Goulder

Dan Goulder
  • Sustaining Members
  • 1259 posts
  • Cinematographer

Posted 04 May 2006 - 09:57 AM

There was a report last year that most of the feature films at Sundance were shot on film.

I'm not surprised. I predicted a couple of years ago that since film festivals were now getting bombarded with literally thousands of DV submissions, there would be an eventual backlash, moving people over to film (for narrative features) just to stand out from the crowd.
  • 0

#7 Adam White

Adam White
  • Sustaining Members
  • 135 posts
  • Other

Posted 04 May 2006 - 12:11 PM

It doesnt matter whether a shots in super35mm, super8, hi8 or the latest HD - if you cant frame, focus and expose then its gonna suck

Just ignore the bloke, sounds like a bit of a fool anyway.

Personally, I think every format has something to offer and multi-formats in one feature is a common occurance - "Natural Born Killers" comes to mind. . .
  • 0

#8 John Pytlak RIP

John Pytlak RIP

    (deceased)

  • Sustaining Members
  • 3499 posts
  • Industry Rep
  • Rochester, NY 14650-1922

Posted 04 May 2006 - 12:26 PM

Kodak's website has good information in support of film origination:

http://www.kodak.com...d=0.1.4.3&lc=en

http://www.kodak.com.../fastFacts.html

http://www.kodak.com...d=0.1.4.9&lc=en
  • 0

#9 Galen Carter-Jeffrey

Galen Carter-Jeffrey
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 129 posts
  • Student

Posted 04 May 2006 - 01:40 PM

By the way saying that film sucks and Hd is king is that really rude to you?! I can think of worse things!


What happened was I was trying to sell a 16mm camera, and he emailed me and told me no one is going to buy it because nobody uses film anymore. I told him I liked the look of film and he said "What do you know you're only a student anyway"


I have worked on both film and HD sets and suprisngly the HD sets were not run as smoothly as the HD sets. In fact twice the hard drive crashed and they lost scenes!! :o


Oh well, to each his own. :)
  • 0

#10 Dan Goulder

Dan Goulder
  • Sustaining Members
  • 1259 posts
  • Cinematographer

Posted 04 May 2006 - 02:06 PM

Kodak's website has good information in support of film origination:

http://www.kodak.com...d=0.1.4.3&lc=en

http://www.kodak.com.../fastFacts.html

http://www.kodak.com...d=0.1.4.9&lc=en

My contribution for Film fact #11:
In the end, it all goes beyond easily quantifiable "numbers" and "resolutions". When it comes to film, you're talking about things on a chemical, atomic level, which goes WAY beyond digital measurements in terms of "pixels".
  • 0

#11 Andy Sparaco SOC

Andy Sparaco SOC
  • Sustaining Members
  • 203 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Chicago and most airline lounges

Posted 04 May 2006 - 03:25 PM

Question for John Pytlak:

How many gigs of data are effectively stored on a 400 ft roll of S16 film?

I have always thought it will get down to "storage". It will be a long time before magnetic storage will match the size/weight ability of photo-chemical "storage"
  • 0

#12 Chris Burke

Chris Burke
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1675 posts
  • Boston, MA

Posted 04 May 2006 - 03:52 PM

Question for John Pytlak:

How many gigs of data are effectively stored on a 400 ft roll of S16 film?

I have always thought it will get down to "storage". It will be a long time before magnetic storage will match the size/weight ability of photo-chemical "storage"



Exactly! Film is still the best storage medium going. It stores more info, quicker, cheaper than any other technology. It is photo chemical so there for, in the digitial realm, it would take a 4k res camera or bettter to truly match the image. Given that, the cost and hassle for storage of 4k plus imaging is staggering. Film still is the easiest and best. I go by the saying, "if it ain't broke, don't fix it". In terms of how many gigs, in HD terms, 11 minutes of uncompressed 10 bit footage shot at 24fps take about 87.72 gig. Super 16 is more in line with 2k imaging, so it would be even higher than that, probably a lot higher. I think around 300 gig. So film as a storage medium still wins out in terms of speed, cost per minute, flexiblity, longevity, archivability and so on and so on. I started out shooting digital and analogue video and have now gone all film. Film is an actual thing, not a collection of 1's and 0's exisisting in some virtual realm. When it comes to my art, I stick with the concrete, tried and true.
  • 0

#13 Tenolian Bell

Tenolian Bell
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 907 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Brooklyn, NY

Posted 04 May 2006 - 04:22 PM

I too wish the discussion of film or video could be framed by the needs of the particular production. Both have their unique advantages and its great to have choices.

Unfortunately marketing, hyperbole, and emotional loyalty get in the way. It is important we keep the discussion truthful and in the realm of our current reality.

I once heard this guy telling people HD is just as good as film and the only the reason Hollywood continues to use film as an expensive artificial barrier to keep most people out.

I told the guy the fact that you cannot afford to have Brad Pitt in your movie is the expensive barrier that keeps you from making a Hollywood film. Film itself has nothing to do with that.
  • 0

#14 Michael Collier

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

Posted 04 May 2006 - 04:57 PM

I'm not surprised. I predicted a couple of years ago that since film festivals were now getting bombarded with literally thousands of DV submissions, there would be an eventual backlash, moving people over to film (for narrative features) just to stand out from the crowd.


I think thats exactly what is happening. I myself am doing my first feature film, and the reason I went with film (given that I have an HD camera at my disposal practically for free) is that I have investors who want to make money. Film is easier to sell. Hands down. A film origination will make distrabutors more eager to buy and more willing to pay top dollar. That is exactly what I tell all my investors when I pitch the movie to them. I say yes, we are spending a lot more than we would with video, but we can make our money back easier. (also the story is 100% a film story. It needs a strong sense of contrast that video just doesnt provide. The highlights will be hot, the shadows deep deep blacks. No way any video camera could replicate what film would do. That said I have shot many HD and video features and its a pain. I spend more time fooling with the backlighting to get it to look good, but not blow out. Spend all that time and work and it looks like video, because you couldnt take 2-3 months to find investors to put up the 30-40K it would take to make a comperable film on 16mm film.
  • 0

#15 Daniel J. Ashley-Smith

Daniel J. Ashley-Smith
  • Guests

Posted 04 May 2006 - 07:13 PM

I was talking to someone over the internet and he was being real rude to me. Saying stuff like Film sucks, HD is king etc...

First off what percentage of people use HD and film? Is it really that high? I thought that the only people who use HD are the people who don't have the budget for Film. I guess I am wrong.

Another thing I wanted to ask is, what do I tell people who are going on and on about noone shooting film anymore?

I am still in school so I really dont't have an opinon, I just like the way film looks. Although I understand that the cost is pretty heavy.


If he was saying stuff like that, then he's obviously a complete prat who has no idea what he's talking about.

Don't get worked up over it.

Edited by Daniel J. Ashley-Smith, 04 May 2006 - 07:14 PM.

  • 0

#16 Keneu Luca

Keneu Luca
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 440 posts
  • Other

Posted 04 May 2006 - 07:19 PM

My two cents...

for those of us who do shoot film, lets say, for the sake of argument, that film will become obsolete in our lifetime, we will be able to say we have shot film, as opposed to everyone who easily dismisses it in favor of the newest digital wave.

Ive never owned a video camera, with exception to the Fisher Price PXL 2000. It was a gift when I was a kid...1990 I think. It introduced me to making movies. That thing was pretty cool, but most people never had even heard of them. You can still get em on ebay, they fetch a decent price. If you dont know, they shoot video on an analog audio tape!!! Crazy stuff.

Anyway....

But this isnt the reason why I shoot film. For fiction work, I think we collectively associate fiction work with film. It fits because that is, for the most part, always how it's been. Video was for sports and news and some docs.

Even when I watch stuff like "Collateral"...dont get me wrong, it does look good, but its certainly not film. And I am surprised by the (few) pro established fillmakers, like Michael Mann, who are crossing over. Hey, they can do what they want, and no matter how much I admire their work, they aint sellin me on pixels.
  • 0

#17 Annie Wengenroth

Annie Wengenroth
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 653 posts
  • Sound Department
  • Brooklyn, NY

Posted 04 May 2006 - 08:44 PM

The phrase I constantly find myself repeating when faced with any "Film Versus Digital" issue is this: Apples and oranges. In other words, there's no "replacement" about it, there's no "versus", there's no "better than", whatever. It all comes down to what kind of fruit you want. To really punch holes in these debates, you can interchange "orange" or "apple" with any mention of "film" or "HD" and realize how ridiculous it is. We are in a day and age where there are suitable applications for each of these artistic methods. Personally, I never listen when someone tells me how "dead" or "obsolete" a technology is. I go to work and play with film cameras and HD cameras. When I sit on the subway I listen to my Ipod. When I come home, I spin records. Just because a particular medium takes on a new priority in the art world, does not make it any less ideal.
  • 0

#18 Jim Murdoch

Jim Murdoch
  • Guests

Posted 04 May 2006 - 09:32 PM

It doesnt matter whether a shots in super35mm, super8, hi8 or the latest HD - if you cant frame, focus and expose then its gonna suck

Just ignore the bloke, sounds like a bit of a fool anyway.

Yes, I don't recall any "new Wave" of top-gun film editors suddenly appearing when the industry moved to non-linear desktop editing either. You still have to know how to edit, regardless of the actual technique you use to put your decisions into practice. This applies whether you're editing 35mm flm on Avid, or miniDV with Windows Movie Maker!
  • 0

#19 K Borowski

K Borowski
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 3905 posts
  • Camera Operator
  • I.A.T.S.E. Local # 600 Eastern Region

Posted 04 May 2006 - 09:39 PM

When I sit on the subway I listen to my Ipod. When I come home, I spin records.


: - )

To answer the title of the post (forget which movie this is from) "SAY NOTHING!" If they don't know why people still prefer film, they'll probably never figure it out. . . I'll never understand how, in a field dominated by visual imagery, people cannot tell the difference between the two. All one really has to do (although this isn't really a fair comparison between the two) is to watch a movie, and then the "making of" trailer on TV or on the disk. Even with the same lighting, it's like night and day between video and film. Granted there is filtration, different angles, etc, but there really is a huge difference, although HD certainly looks to be about on par with 16mm (in terms of resolution) now.

~Karl
  • 0

#20 Adam White

Adam White
  • Sustaining Members
  • 135 posts
  • Other

Posted 05 May 2006 - 02:31 AM

I have worked on both film and HD sets and suprisngly the HD sets were not run as smoothly as the HD sets. In fact twice the hard drive crashed and they lost scenes!! :o


I know this subject has been endlessly debated in many forum posts but, whatever a person may think of film camera's in this supposedly "HD world" it is a sad fact that many sets seem to loose focus without the demands of a film camera. producers seem to feel that the cameras light themselves and even that "awe area" (people leave the camera team be because they know they dont have a clue about the kit, which is helpfull) seems to disapear, which results in way too many people being in the way.
  • 0


rebotnix Technologies

CineLab

CineTape

Glidecam

The Slider

FJS International, LLC

Tai Audio

Broadcast Solutions Inc

Metropolis Post

Wooden Camera

Visual Products

Gamma Ray Digital Inc

Ritter Battery

Technodolly

Opal

Willys Widgets

Abel Cine

Aerial Filmworks

Paralinx LLC

Media Blackout - Custom Cables and AKS

Rig Wheels Passport

Paralinx LLC

Tai Audio

rebotnix Technologies

Opal

CineLab

Abel Cine

Ritter Battery

Willys Widgets

Broadcast Solutions Inc

Wooden Camera

FJS International, LLC

Technodolly

Glidecam

Visual Products

Media Blackout - Custom Cables and AKS

CineTape

The Slider

Rig Wheels Passport

Gamma Ray Digital Inc

Aerial Filmworks

Metropolis Post