Thanks Thanks:  0

View Poll Results: Should movies forever be shot on film or be shot on full digital?

Voters
22. You may not vote on this poll
  • FILM

    9 40.91%
  • DIGITAL

    13 59.09%
Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 37
  1. #1
    Join Date
    May 2002
    Location
    germany
    Posts
    4,031
    Credits
    1,105

    Movies : FILM or go DIGITAL?

    a "spin off" of this thread

    Should movies forever be shot on film (35mm) or they should be shot on full digital (HD digital example: SW EP2) ?

    IMO, like I said in the other thread, I want it on film (35 mm, 2.35:1), film simply gives more life to a movie by giving it this distinctive look only film can do....
    http://img53.imageshack.us/img53/6324/fightclubmlzq1.jpg

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Location
    Hawaii
    Posts
    668
    Credits
    1,105
    Well, they can do so much more with digital nowadays.

    And sooner or later everything will be Digitaly done. Even your food... :butt:

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Sep 2001
    Location
    Sweden
    Posts
    1,577
    Credits
    1,105
    digital, ppl like lucas is great for advancing the technology, just look at special effects and THX, the movie biz ows much to him. We are still at the birth of digital filming, no doubt it will become better and better, but only of ppl like lucas takes a chance and goes for it.
    "A celibate clergy is an especially good idea, because it tends to suppress any hereditary propensity toward fanaticism." / Carl Sagan

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Feb 2001
    Location
    nsw.bigpond.net.au
    Posts
    2,979
    Credits
    1,075
    Digital... cose like everyone says.. digital can do the same thing as 35mm and more!
    /!\ Certified Bandwidth Abuser || ([)(]) Dolby Digital me bitch! || Alicia Keys || Game Trailers || FaceBook user ||
    || All-time Favourite TV Shows: Battlestar Galactica (2003+), Dead Like Me, FireFly, Invader ZIM, Space: Above & Beyond, Veronica Mars ||

    [ -- Music Festival Whore! -- ]

  5. #5
    Join Date
    May 2002
    Location
    germany
    Posts
    4,031
    Credits
    1,105
    I can't believe i am the only real movie fan who think movies are called "Films" because they are shot on "film" and not to a tape or harddrive...

    I guess movies in the future should be called.. Best "Bit,Byte" for the year... what the hell happened to the artistic feeling of movie making which can only be seen in real "film" and not on fake computer data...

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Sep 2001
    Location
    in a galaxie far far away
    Posts
    2,038
    Credits
    1,095
    anything is possible with digital!!

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    Ontario, Canada
    Posts
    912
    Credits
    1,105
    Originally posted by tisoy
    I can't believe i am the only real movie fan who think movies are called "Films" because they are shot on "film" and not to a tape or harddrive...

    I guess movies in the future should be called.. Best "Bit,Byte" for the year... what the hell happened to the artistic feeling of movie making which can only be seen in real "film" and not on fake computer data...
    The artistic aspect is not lost. It's just everything is handled different. It's not better - it's different.

    Digital gives directors almost full control over every aspect of the footage. It's the next wave in quality. I'm sure there will be directors that film on film but it will have to be transfered to digital to be shown anyway.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    May 2002
    Location
    germany
    Posts
    4,031
    Credits
    1,105
    OMG...... i am the only person in this forum who thinks movies are a form of art which is dependent on the "film" as an artistic medium and not on some software compression algorithm or computer data that gives movie makers god like powers?.....

    Think of a painting, do u prefer a hand made painting using OIL or water color or done with photoshop and printed with your 6 color Canon printer?.....


    C`mon film is much better..... !!!!!


  9. #9
    Join Date
    Jun 2001
    Location
    Quebec, Canada
    Posts
    193
    Credits
    1,065

    Cool

    When DVDs first came out, the image looked too sharp and when you watched a movie, you lost all the "artistic aspect" of the movie. I actually thought VHS looked better. Now DVDs look better than before. The image is less sharp and the colors are more realistic. When you look at a digital film, the image is so detailed that it looses it's realism. Movies shot in film and transferred on DVD look great. In fact, I don't think they could look better. So Digital film doesn't do much good. Even though, in the other thread, I was surprised tisoy said he preferred movies shot in film, my vote goes to film.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    May 2002
    Location
    United States
    Posts
    1,558
    Credits
    1,070
    I prefer movies shot in film. I don't think digitally shot movies are the future. However, I do think films being shot on 35mm and then transferred to digital right away is the future. That way you get the realism and natural look of film, but the same digital freedoms as if it was shot on digital. That's what George Lucas should've done, and that is what they are doing for the two Matrix sequels, and the video quality in the teaser looks GREAT but unbelievably natural, unlike Star Wars. Movies are supposed to look real, not fake, which is what digital looks like.

  11. #11
    Join Date
    Sep 2001
    Location
    Sweden
    Posts
    1,577
    Credits
    1,105
    Originally posted by tisoy
    OMG...... i am the only person in this forum who thinks movies are a form of art which is dependent on the "film" as an artistic medium and not on some software compression algorithm or computer data that gives movie makers god like powers?.....

    Think of a painting, do u prefer a hand made painting using OIL or water color or done with photoshop and printed with your 6 color Canon printer?.....


    C`mon film is much better..... !!!!!

    most movies today.
    first shot on Film. Then into a computer. then back to film.
    So dont have any odd ideas of the purity of film.

    digital today.
    shot digital. then to film.
    But thats not the fair way to view it, a movie like attack of the clones should be viewed in a digital cinema.

    Digital cameras may not today have the capacaty to capture as many colors and as high dpi which a film does, but as long as we scan the film and run it though a computer we lose that anyway.

    besides, a movie like attack of the clones is not a fair movie to look at the things u have talked about. Remember, almost every shot got bluescreens and special effects. Its not really an "artistic movie".

  12. #12
    Join Date
    May 2002
    Location
    United States
    Posts
    1,558
    Credits
    1,070
    You lose color and dpi in the camera, not the computer. Example - if I watch a movie on my computer, or encode a trailer that was shot on film, it still has that realism. Just going through a computer doesn't take that away... being shot on digital and being processed or stored in a computer are two very different things. Did you know that when you watch a DVD those are computer files on the DVD? Like I said before, it should be shot on film, then immediately transferred to digital, just like the next two Matrix films.

  13. #13
    Join Date
    Sep 2001
    Location
    Sweden
    Posts
    1,577
    Credits
    1,105
    Originally posted by Mark Strube
    You lose color and dpi in the camera, not the computer.
    no, you lose in the transfer.


    Originally posted by Mark Strube
    Did you know that when you watch a DVD those are computer files on the DVD?
    really? damn i always thought it was Santas elfs that drew pictues on my monitor.

  14. #14
    Join Date
    May 2002
    Location
    United States
    Posts
    1,558
    Credits
    1,070
    What transfer? I'm talking about 100% digital movies.
    Originally posted by Gaumont
    really? damn i always thought it was Santas elfs that drew pictues on my monitor.
    Real mature.

  15. #15
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    Ontario, Canada
    Posts
    912
    Credits
    1,105
    Originally posted by tisoy
    Think of a painting, do u prefer a hand made painting using OIL or water color or done with photoshop and printed with your 6 color Canon printer?.....
    It depends on the talent of the artist, really. Anyone can create pure crap with either medium but they both need a master to create something unique and beautiful.

    Same thing goes with movies - anyone can "make a movie". Someone with some skill can make a decent movie and it takes something more to create a good movie. Film and digital are two different ways of doing it. Just because your movie is digital though, doesn't mean you have it easy.

Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Lord of the Rings trilogy, Star Wars, King Kong and Titanic in digital 3-D
    By Mithrandir01 in forum General Chatter - Movie Related
    Replies: 16
    Last Post: 03-04-2011, 11:11 PM
  2. Dolby Digital Plus (13.1)
    By trailergod in forum General Chatter - Non-Movie Related
    Replies: 11
    Last Post: 09-19-2005, 02:30 PM
  3. Coming to a Theater Near You: MORE Digital Films
    By trailergod in forum General Chatter - Movie Related
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 12-28-2003, 10:59 PM
  4. Top 10, sci fi movies
    By carl in forum General Chatter - Movie Related
    Replies: 10
    Last Post: 11-18-2003, 08:44 PM
  5. Film review: Tomb Raider 2
    By carl in forum General Chatter - Movie Related
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 08-24-2003, 10:24 AM

Bookmarks

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •