Film or Digital?

[kennyboy13]

Now ive been reading about the comparison beetween actual film and digital and was wondering how mnay of you use film and how does it compare to digital??

:)

[WesScog]

I use film, it's expensive, it takes forever to know if you exposed everything correctly, and the equipment is heavy, unwieldy, and disallows me from getting shots that I would like to get.

But, it looks fantastic, and I believe the discipline that it requires of me has made me a better digital cinematographer than I would be without having used film.

[nooneimportant77]

i think it mostly depends on your budget.

i remember robert rodriguez (i know a bit about movies, but i hope he knows alot more) at a lecture saying somethig along the lines of... "after seeing what that could do, i made a list, of reasons to shoot film, and reasons to shoot digital. and the ONLY reason to shoot on film was for 'nostalgic reasons' "

and its pretty much true, if you have the cash you can shoot at 4 k, in 8:4:4, and it'll look pretty much like film. i was pretty surprised when i found out "Superbad" was shot digital. it was shot on a very nice camera called the "genesis 2" by Panavision.

[WesScog]

Digital is going to eventually totally replace film, film is a dying medium, it still has certain advantages, but the cost differentiation between the mediums is growing every year.

Digital is getting dramatically cheaper, HD CMOS chips are getting cheaper, and better, every year.

Within the decade there will be consumer cameras that will have most (if not more) of the capabilities of the RED ONE for under $1000.

[nooneimportant77]

^^ pretty much exactly what i'm expecting.

[HunnyBunchFilms]

I used a Super 8 camera for a few school projects. It was really challenging to use but at the same time very fun.

[delish23]

According to Brian Leon of Magic Film and Video Works (Telecine and negative cutting establishment in So Cal) the resolution for film is superior to that of HD video. So quality wise- it speaks for itself. (Then again, he does have a business to preserve, so of course he would say that). But you know, it's more expensive as Wes points out. Film or Video is better answered in context to whatever project you are making this decision for. Some projects call for film, others, video.

http://www.mfvw.com/index.html

[nooneimportant77]

^ as for the resolution thing, you can shoot at 4k, and now even 8k digital I believe. 35mm film is scanned at 4k (usually).

[_ray_biddle_]

I don't think it will be that long. I go to the Red site every day and dream.

$25,000 for a camera though, yikes!

I can't wait until I can use P2 cards and avoid tape all together.

Digital is going to eventually totally replace film, film is a dying medium, it still has certain advantages, but the cost differentiation between the mediums is growing every year.

Digital is getting dramatically cheaper, HD CMOS chips are getting cheaper, and better, every year.

Within the decade there will be consumer cameras that will have most (if not more) of the capabilities of the RED ONE for under $1000.

[kennyboy13]

Wow, great guys thanks.

[WesScog]

I don't think it will be that long. I go to the Red site every day and dream.

$25,000 for a camera though, yikes!

I can't wait until I can use P2 cards and avoid tape all together.

I am being VERY conservative with my estimates, I think it's more likely to happen within 5.

Especially with Red's Scarlet going to be announced in April at NAB.

But no, I think it's on the horizon, very very soon. The resolution of Cameras follows a trend similar to Moore's law. In a year you'll be able to buy more pixels for a dollar than you would now.

I think an important illustration with this is the infant Foveon sensor technology, where you can effectively triple the pixels you fit on a sensor, which is already being implemented in still-image cameras.

Now all we need is Foveon-based DISPLAYS and we'll be able to triple resolutions and increase color accuracy dramatically.

[nooneimportant77]

Now all we need is Foveon-based DISPLAYS and we'll be able to triple resolutions and increase color accuracy dramatically.

EXACTLY!

thats just like how when someone asks me if i can see the difference between blu ray and regualar dvd. i say "sure, on an 8 thousand dollar monitor" none of it really matters unless you're watching it the right way.

[mopman]

I have a feeling one day games will completely merge with video and we will just be living movies. I am not saying when but it seems at this rate of technology development it won't be that long. I would say it's completely within the realm of possibility that our children will be able to fly fighter jets and fight in wars all from the safety of our homes and it will look just like real life.

[kennyboy13]

WOW

[WesScog]

According to Brian Leon of Magic Film and Video Works (Telecine and negative cutting establishment in So Cal) the resolution for film is superior to that of HD video. So quality wise- it speaks for itself. (Then again, he does have a business to preserve, so of course he would say that). But you know, it's more expensive as Wes points out. Film or Video is better answered in context to whatever project you are making this decision for. Some projects call for film, others, video.

http://www.mfvw.com/index.html

I meant to comment on this earlier but forgot.

Film CAN have a higher resolution than a 1080 digital signal, BUT you have to take the TYPE of film, and the circumstances into account. Film doesn't always have a 20+ megapixel image, that's just in best case circumstances, i've read that it's more like 12 megapixels of data.

But you have to take the circumstances, quality of the lens, and film type and film speed into account.

A slow film with a much higher grain will have a sharper image fidelity than a faster grain with much bigger, more sensitive halide crystals.

The advantage film has over a digital cinema cam like the Red One, or the Dalsa, is slim at best, celluloid can only get a SLIGHT advantage over them, but only in specific circumstances with the fastest film.

Digital mediums definitely win out over film in low light circumstances though.

[kennyboy13]

Great. Thanks for the info, guys.

[mopman]

the most important thing to remember is that 99.999999% of all young aspiring filmmakers are using digital camcorders as their beginning camera's and they will be more comfortable with this method of filming.

[rrh]

...
A fast film with a much higher grain will have a sharper image fidelity than a slower grain with much bigger, more sensitive halide crystals.
...
Did you accidentally say this backwards?