Jump to content


Photo

Steven Spielberg & Martin Scorsese: the joy of celluloid


  • Please log in to reply
11 replies to this topic

#1 Freya Black

Freya Black
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 4161 posts
  • Other
  • Went over the edge... Central Europe

Posted 13 October 2011 - 05:24 AM

...and then, rather bizzarely the comments come and the digital people feel all angry for some reason. Maybe they feel left out or unloved or something, who can say! Anyway I think it's an interesting article:

Guardian Article
  • 0

#2 Dom Jaeger

Dom Jaeger
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1597 posts
  • Other
  • Melbourne, Australia

Posted 13 October 2011 - 08:11 AM

Nice article, thanks Freya.

I liked Spielberg's description of film grain as "the visible, erratic molecules of a new creative language", both photorealist and impressionist. And Keanu Reeve's perspective as an actor was interesting.

Still working on Goddard's comment - I guess he's saying that the move from analog to digital is a step towards regimentation and loss of individuality (ordered little pixels as opposed to free and scattered silver halide), which is the preferred environment of totalitarian power structures? Well, maybe.. :unsure:

Best was Dick Pope's description of his rainforest tribal shoot. Priceless!
  • 0

#3 Gregg MacPherson

Gregg MacPherson
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1880 posts
  • Other
  • New Zealand

Posted 13 October 2011 - 11:53 PM

Scroll down about 6 screens through the comments to see the first post by Leuan where he talks about the different brainwaves (alpha vs beta) observed in people watching film vs digital.
  • 0

#4 Keith Walters

Keith Walters
  • Sustaining Members
  • 2219 posts
  • Other
  • Sydney Australia

Posted 14 October 2011 - 04:59 AM

????
I'm sure I posted in this thread.
I think there were more replies too.
Or was a different one about the same subject, that's now been moved...?

Edited to add:
Nope, the posts were definitely there:

11 hours ago - Steven Spielberg & Martin Scorsese: the joy of celluloid .... Salinger, Keith Walters, Marty S, Christian Nelson, Benjamin G, Liam Robert Dawson, Tad Howard, ...

WTF?

Edited by Keith Walters, 14 October 2011 - 05:05 AM.

  • 0

#5 Phil Rhodes

Phil Rhodes
  • Sustaining Members
  • 11936 posts
  • Other

Posted 14 October 2011 - 06:27 AM

"The joy of celluloid", say two people who never have to pay for it or be involved in the inconveniences of it, and who are multimillionaires even if they did receive the invoices themselves.

I've said this before, but the biggest proponents of film tend to be the big cheeses who get to play with it but are never exposed to any of the inconveniences.
  • 0

#6 Marcus Joseph

Marcus Joseph
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 404 posts
  • Other
  • Sydney, Australia

Posted 14 October 2011 - 07:37 AM

"The joy of celluloid", say two people who never have to pay for it or be involved in the inconveniences of it, and who are multimillionaires even if they did receive the invoices themselves.

I've said this before, but the biggest proponents of film tend to be the big cheeses who get to play with it but are never exposed to any of the inconveniences.

Too true, but I guess Scorsese and Spielberg have already shot digitally, well Scorsese at least for live-action.
  • 0

#7 Patrick Cooper

Patrick Cooper
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 868 posts
  • Other

Posted 14 October 2011 - 07:54 AM

"The joy of celluloid", say two people who never have to pay for it or be involved in the inconveniences of it


Let's not forget Spielberg's foray into Super 8 when he was a kid!
  • 0

#8 Pat Murray

Pat Murray
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 129 posts
  • Other

Posted 14 October 2011 - 08:50 AM

Let's not forget Spielberg's foray into Super 8 when he was a kid!


Or the difficulties surrounding the shooting of Jaws before the Steadicam.

Taxi Driver was no walk in the park either as the cinematographer and director shot many scenes crouched in the back of a taxi cab trying to use as much natural light as possible.

It's a shame that art would be disrespected by such issues as money and convenience, even if it is the reality. The way it should be is both mediums should thrive giving movie artists choice. If it was just about convenience and money, we wouldn't have oil landscape artists anymore, people would just shoot a picture with a digital camera. It is, after all, cheaper and more convenient. How would we like to visit the Louvre and be confronted with a digital print of the Mona Lisa? The original trashed because it was too expensive and inconvenient to maintain as the artist intended.

To a true artist, it should be offensive all this talk of money, convenience and the underlining "get with the cool kids" attitude the companies producing digital are pushing/brainwashing onto their consumers to sell more and more product.

True, for the majors, it is show BUSINESS, but that shouldn't be considered acceptable to an artist and more needs to be done to promote film as art and not just a means to sell popcorn.

The ideal situation is not a zero sum game, but an industry where all mediums are available to the artists so that they can use the medium (digital or film) that best suits their project.

I don't want to live in an all digital world, nor do I want to live in an all film (analog) world.
  • 0

#9 Dom Jaeger

Dom Jaeger
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1597 posts
  • Other
  • Melbourne, Australia

Posted 14 October 2011 - 11:00 AM

I don't want to live in an all digital world, nor do I want to live in an all film (analog) world.


It's funny, in my family we have an iPhone, a Canon 5D, hell if I wanted I could borrow an Alexa for the weekend, but quite often I choose to spend $50 on 4 minutes of Standard 8 film and processing to record my daughter's first years.

Why? Because I absolutely love the process and the aesthetic, and because I know that if I store them well those rolls will still be there for my daughter and maybe her kids long after I'm gone, easily viewed on my Bolex projector or transferred if need be.

My mum just unearthed a roll of Pathe 9.5mm footage of her from 1938 when she was 4 years old and it's perfectly viewable, which just reinforced my attitude. Hours of footage I recorded on digital cameras only a few years ago are already lost because the files were too big to sort through and the equipment to store them too short-lived.

And even if the archival issues surrounding digital capture are eventually sorted out, I'll still want film as an option simply because it's beautiful and tangible and somehow more real. Also the cameras are so much cooler. B)
  • 0

#10 Brian Drysdale

Brian Drysdale
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 5069 posts
  • Cinematographer

Posted 14 October 2011 - 11:19 AM

"The joy of celluloid", say two people who never have to pay for it or be involved in the inconveniences of it, and who are multimillionaires even if they did receive the invoices themselves.

I've said this before, but the biggest proponents of film tend to be the big cheeses who get to play with it but are never exposed to any of the inconveniences.


I'm not sure about inconveniences, it just takes longer, but the kick you get is that much higher when you view the rushes.

I've had to buy my own film stock and pay the lab bills pre NLE days, so it's not multi millionaire stuff.
  • 0

#11 Marcus Joseph

Marcus Joseph
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 404 posts
  • Other
  • Sydney, Australia

Posted 15 October 2011 - 05:33 AM

The joys of seeing film you've waited maybe a week to see and actually finding it to be not so bad is one of the most enjoyable aspects for me. I can think for days about the complexity of all the decisions made rather than see everything immediately.
  • 0

#12 Gregg MacPherson

Gregg MacPherson
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1880 posts
  • Other
  • New Zealand

Posted 02 November 2011 - 09:57 PM

I don't know if anyone looked at the comments posted by by Leuan in that Guardian article. For me it brings up
some ideas that are crucial for considering the differences between film and digital.

I didn't yet try to explore the experiments he refers to. Some experiments were made measuring brain wave activity
for pople watching film vs digital motion pictures.

Film watchers had higher alpha waves. These waves are normaly associuated with subjective experience, like
meditation, maybe some contemplative experience. I think there was some speculation about the function of the
alternation between the complete projected film frame and the black screen with the closed shutter. Do we fall into
a subjective state, transcend, between the film frames? To me this is analogous to how experience itself can be
described. It's all in the gap.

Digital watchers, showed an increase in beta waves, the waves associated with active experience objective
experience. These styles of experience, the objective vs subjective, may not be simultaneously compatible.

So my imediate thought was that digital media as an unstoppable modern trend is part of the movement to a more
objective and particular world. It's a wold where subtlety, subjectivity and wholenes are harder to find. It's a world
populated by increasingly discrete and separated looking things, that have an increasingly hard time finding
connection or relationship or a comfortable sense of context or belonging.

The fact that this modern trend is expressed everywhere or is unstoppable does not mean that it is in every sense
good.

So will some artists enjoy the then exstinct film medium. I think so. Maybe I can suggest that artists are of two
kinds. There are those who sense or anticipate the coming changes in the world, and even if those changes are
destructive, offer a facinating portal or intuit insights into the future qualities of experience.

There is another kind of artist, at least in theory, who's function is to remind us of our nature, whether it's emotional,
spiritual, or basic sense of identity as human beings.

As the wave of digital overwhelms us, those working in the film industry have to adapt and survive. But I'm hoping that some artist will use this medium indefinately.

Cheers
Gregg.
  • 0


Rig Wheels Passport

Glidecam

FJS International, LLC

CineLab

Abel Cine

Paralinx LLC

The Slider

Technodolly

Ritter Battery

rebotnix Technologies

Opal

Tai Audio

Media Blackout - Custom Cables and AKS

Gamma Ray Digital Inc

Wooden Camera

Broadcast Solutions Inc

Visual Products

Willys Widgets

Metropolis Post

CineTape

Aerial Filmworks

Glidecam

Technodolly

Gamma Ray Digital Inc

CineTape

The Slider

Tai Audio

FJS International, LLC

Ritter Battery

Media Blackout - Custom Cables and AKS

Metropolis Post

Opal

CineLab

Aerial Filmworks

rebotnix Technologies

Rig Wheels Passport

Paralinx LLC

Willys Widgets

Broadcast Solutions Inc

Visual Products

Abel Cine

Wooden Camera