At first, it was a choice. Later, directors couldn't funds for anything in B/W. Now it is an exception used mainly as a stark contrast.

quote:

---

"The biggest question in the industry is not whether digital is coming — it is — but whether it will replace film.

"No," says Bob Harvey of Panavision. "This is a format, the same way film is a format. Depending on the script, or the way a director wants to tell a story, they could use [digital], or they could use film."

Adds Steven Douglas Smith, a cinematographer who has shot digital features: "This new format is not film. It is still digital. The look is unique. You can cheat and make it look as film-like as possible, but it's not film."

---

It's an artistic decision when choosing between film and digital. I intend on learning both... but above all, I think that learning film is imperative so that I an appreciate the advantages of digital. It's tradition.

From an editor stand point: The cool thing about all things "digital" (Mini DV, DVD and at least I think, Laserdisc) is that they all have "time code" on them when pressed. Time code is what is says it is, time-code It is "time" striped onto the video to make it easier for editors (and directors) to find certain points in the film. (Your DVD player can find scenes via time code, its really neat, check it out.) So, if everything was shot on this new "digital" stuff, it make the editors lives a big easier in editing, however I still remain the ever-funny traditionalist, film all the way, for now...

--Kyp
Writer & Film/Video Editor

PS: I don't think film will ever die, look at "tape/video" with all out new "digital" technology like CDs and MP3 players, and tapes are still produced. Even though they have been almost phased out, however that had taken almost 20+ years to do. With film, I believe that it will take longer and I don't think film will ever go away. But like Jeron said, it depends on what kind of movie you are making.

One more thing, remembers people, it takes a special kind of projector to show "digital" movies. The kind of stuff Lucas is talking about will cost millions maybe even billions of dollars for theatre chains (to replace all their old equipment), and trust me; they aren’t excited about paying those millions of dollars.

I am for two digital aspects in filmmaking, one is sound, the other is editing (mmmmm AVID suites). Other then that, my fear is digital video in movies leaves a lot of very respected and talented people obsolete in their work, and digitial projection is little more then a lazy boy excuse because most projectionists cant do their jobs properly anymore.

FIL, if taken care of (and its not hard to look after) can last an eternity and not suffer generation loss.

Dan (UK)
-- Proudly shooting his 2nd 16mm short soon

but won't 90% of all "films" still suck?

Back in the 1980's (man, that makes me feel so old saying that ) when digital cameras came out, there was this big hue and cry about the death of photography. Well, it just isn't true. Sure, digital imaging has come a long way, but it still can't beat a negative. I sure couldn't make 20"x30" enlargements from a floppy disc.

In my hobby of astronomy, much is made of the CCD (charged-coupled device) cameras that use a computer chip to record the image. Sure, whereas a CCD can get you an image in 2 minutes instead of 20, it's not much good for anything other than posting onthe internet or making some small prints. Film, on the other hand, might take longer (the 20 minute part - and it's hard to do), but I've got many enlargements over 11"x14" that look excellent.

Film will be here to stay for quite a while.

What did painters think when the invention of the photograph came along? And then moving film. And then sound. And then color.

From vinyl to tape? From tape to disc?

What did composers think when the synthesizer was invented? Probably the same as half as you: "Oh, crap--the world has entered a realm of sonic hell."

How many of you were ticked off when you had to upgrade from VHS to DVD? Could you say that you prefer VHS to DVD?

Digital film making (Or Digital *Movie* Making, if you prefer a more accurate term) is the next logical step. It's an evolution, and there's always resistance of that. There will an abandonment of older techniques, certainly, and there will be plenty of challenges to master the new medium. It's actually quite fascinating.

Some famous author--probably Goethe, though I'm not 100% on that one--said that in a society of mass literacy, you have a lot of worthless literature. I think the same applies to music and movies. You're always going to have movies that are made because they seem like better business investments than stories. Even the advent of digital movie making isn't going to rid the world of that. But i think when you have artists and authors that are committed to mastery of the medium, you will have those diamonds in the rough.

actually, are the 3 pics from Episode 2 that have been released any indication of the quality of the style of filmmaking Lucas is sing?

Yes, every medium has its' values and weaknesses. Allow me to be a little bit idealistic when I say that I think George Lucas of all movie makers, understands, or at least, is making an attempt to understand the weakness and compensate.

quote:

---

Originally posted by MattStar:
Everyone in the industry wants the new digital format (at least, I do, and I work at a theatre). It would save so much money and time, but there are two issues:
1) Security - The films must be protected to prevent copying and at this point with the technology progressing as fast as it is, I don't know if these films will be secure or not.
2) Conversion - This is the big one. It is going to cost the film chains millions of dollars to convert. The studios are going to have to assist the chains and I mean in a huge way (like provide up to 75% of the money needed, or it is not worth it for the film chains). The chains need to be firm about this because most of the savings will be in favor of the studios so a large initial output of money would pay dividends for years and everyone will make money in the long run.

---

You are talking about digital theater projection. Everyone else was (I think) talking about digital *photography*...a completely different issue.

Sorry, nothing can surpass nice pristine celluloid.

I recently saw Spike Lee's "Bamboozled". That film was purposely shot on video, then transferred to film. The plot was about television, so Lee wanted the film to have a "video" look. However, that look would be totally unacceptable for Star Wars 2. Lucas better be damn sure that it does look as good or better than that.

I have to go along with the idea that great works can be made in any medium. Just because Hollywood or the local boy with an imac want to go digital, doesn't mean thay can't produce great stuff in the format.

I prefer the magical look of film stock going by at 24fps to digital and video (according to Leslie Halliwell, the pre-1951, pre-safety stock made with silver nitrate, the stock that gave us the term 'the silver screen', was literally luminous, and losing that look to regular safety film stock was a tremendous let down). But, I'm hopeful if digital production and distribution is the trend, that something good will still come out of it. These days, a lot of what we look at on film is CGI-enhanced stuff to begin with, so maybe the stretch to total digital might be OK.

I don't always believe the cutting edge technology is automatically an improvement over what came before. Sometimes the new tech solves certain problems but introduces new problems of its own. We can only wait and see if the new stuff will be good and have the bugs worked out. Though, in the case of LDs and film stock, maybe it would have been better they left things alone.

Some people are always resistant to change no matter what it is and prefer to be nostalgic about the past. For me, the most fascinating aspect of reading Jean Renoir's book about his father was all the quotes Jean included of the elder Renoir talking about how just about everything from the 19th Century wasn't as good as it was in the 18th Century ("They had hand-crafted furniture, now if it's hand-crafted, it isn't anywhere as good...").

Recently, I sent someone I know a letter rather than an email. The letter began, "Wow. I'm sending you a letter rather than emailing, how 20th Century of me..."

quote:

---

I recently saw Spike Lee's "Bamboozled". That film was purposely shot on video, then transferred to film. The plot was about television, so Lee wanted the film to have a "video" look. However, that look would be totally unacceptable for Star Wars 2. Lucas better be damn sure that it does look as good or better than that

---

You're confusing you're digital videos here. Episode 2 is shot and stored onto a high def hard drive, it doesn't go onto DV tape or anything like the average camcorder records with, it is a far more advanced form of digital recording and storage that is designed by top film industry camera craftsmen.

I still think that with the exception of sound and avid editing digital production in cinema is still a lazyboy option, specifcally in the theatre projection arena with the only great thing the latter offering being uncompressed 5.1 PCM surround.

I feel somewhat the same about this as I do CGI vs models/set design. It's a threat to many talented craftsmen, yet obviously has advatages, no doubt...

In truth, the more easier it is to shoot something, and the cheaper it is thanks to digital, the more utter CRAP we're going to see...d'oh!

quote:

---

I don't see ANY reason why digital "film"....

---

Ack, no such thing! It's video, don't make it sound like something its not. Not sayinf one is better then the other here, but still at the end of the day, it is video...

quote:

---

Who complained about DVDs in comparison to video tapes?

---

No one. Why? because DVD was more faithful to the reproduction of a 35mm print in the home, the detail the clarity.

I dont think the argument is over digital not looking as good, it does look as good as film, maybe better in future, who can say?

The debate just lies within the idea of casting aside film in favour of an "easier" medium, and the rapid growth rate and acceptance of digital technology is a worry to many who have admired the medium of film for the 100 years+ it's been used in cinema.

For many in the industry, its not not noticing the difference that matters, something which Lucas/Panavision and Sony don't seem to have grasped.

Dan (UK)

PS: Aaron, regarding the breaking down IMAX projector, anything will break if not taken care of properly. Digital is not perfection.

I saw Toy Story 2 projected digitally, and to my surprise upon a subsequent 35mm print screening (just as stunning looking) I realised the digital version was missing about 20 seconds of the movie during the airport segments, so even digi projection is prone to damage.

Like I said, my biggest worry is the easier and cheaper it becomes to shoot something, the more rubbish we're going to be seeing on our screens, this worries me as cinema should not be a medium left for anyone to have a go at. Cinema being as accessable as home movies scares me...

I will shoot film whenever I can. I've as yet never shot anything on DV, and thats my descision, I'm happy with it, but like I say, I understand why it is a good option for many, and its not so much the DV Camcorder element that annoys me, it's just the advance digital cameras being used by Lucas on ep2 that I feel will put and end to a lot of highly skilled individuals work in the not too distant future.

The digital cinema revolution is going to take over far sooner then people think, and many are finding it hard to grasp it'll replace all 100+ years that have past, the years that have made cinema great and good. They'll co-exist for a while, but for how long? Who knows, but I still like a Spielberg Quote from a back issue of American Cinematographer in which he said they'd have to close the last lab down to stop him shooting on film.

Dan (UK)

Appreciate your comments

I've cut 16mm on a flatbed Steenbeck, and prior to that I had some serious study into Editing principles and done some Non-Linear Digital Editing on an archaic Mac with Adobe Premiere. I like Premiere, but I'd love to get my hands on an Avid for longer than ten minutes, which has been all the exposure I have had to an Avid Film Composer. I've worked with an Avid Airplay Automated Broadcast system, and found Broadcast Operating not too much to my liking. I like steady pressure as opposed to nervous contant pressure where CYA has to happen all the time. But that's been my experience. I guess I just don't like having to answer to somebody all the time- I better curve that or I'll never get work that way.

I hope people never stop using film. Just like I hope the Synthesizer never disappears into the annals of musical instrument history. 100+ years of film usage cannot be outdone and I agree that the changes are coming faster.

As to film loading , Basically, it's been my experience that loading the BL-16 is cumbersome. I'm sure with proper handling, a Panaflex is much the same, but easier to practice on.

What's your short film going to be about, or has the studio (you), got that under tight wraps?

Ya know, I'm a bit worried about "digital theaters."

The thing that worries me the most is the fact that the little LCD (or whatever) screens in the new digital projectors will develop problems over the years. Film gets scratched, and when that movie is replaced with a new movie, we wave "bye bye" to that old scratched movie. With this digital solution, the LCD screen in the projector could develop "dead" pixels, and those would obviously be visible throughout the whole film. I'm quite sure a digital projector would also be much more costly to repair than an analog one! I think the cost of going to the movies is high enough already, without this new equipment. I am so disappointed with recent movies that I just wait to rent them.

I can't wait to see my first "Blue Screen of Death" while in the theater.

One of my hobbies is collecting 8mm films. I've even shot a few "home movies" on 8mm, but I've stopped doing that since it is very difficult to find anybody to develop it.

REALLY???

I'm truly amazed to know this, because my twenty-year 8MM Romance ended with a bitter and costly divorce.
I produced dozens of elaborate and intricately edited 8MM student films in the 1960's (a few of them were award-winners), and when I became a husband and father in the 1970's, all of my treasured home vids were 8MM with sound.
By 1983, my 8MM camera and sound projector were spending most of the time in the closet, as life's little detours found me with no time to make movies.
During those years, VHS home video cameras were dominating the marketplace.
In 1988, a very special event caused me to remove my camera from the closet, and bring it back into action once again!
My wife and one of her friends were going on a hot air balloon ride, and I decided to document the trip on 8MM film.
I was really looking forward to producing a film once more. I especially enjoyed the editing process, and I began seeing the finished production in my mind's eye.
For the first time in five years, I was about to purchase some 8MM movie film...

Uh-oh.

Nobody had it in stock anymore.

I had to make call after call, and when I finally found a camera store that stocked it, I was absolutely floored at the price!

CHEESH!

This little production of mine was already over-budget, and I hadn't even bought the first roll of movie film!
OK, OK..."This is a once-in-a-lifetime event", I told myself, and I quickly spent a truckload of money on movie film.

The day of the balloon flight was miraculously perfect in every way. I shot every inch of that film, and the visions that I saw through the camera lens were absolutely heavenly! I couldn't WAIT to watch this on the big screen, and then edit it into a magnificent work of art!
I rushed the exposed reels to the camera shop for processing.
I was like a little child at Christmastime...knowing that I was about to receive a truckload of wonderful presents!
Two weeks later, I called the camera shop. The reels weren't ready.
Three weeks later, the reels weren't ready.
Four, five, six weeks later...I was still waiting to get my film back from the processing plant.
At this point I began a righteously indignant investigation to learn what was going on. Many telephone calls finally took me to the source of the problem: the film processing plant. There I learned that so very few 8MM movies were being taken anymore that the processing plant must wait until they have received enough exposed reels of film to develop all at one time.
I had to wait three more weeks, and finally my reels were processed.
Once again, the developing cost blew my budget out of the water.
I rushed home with them, and eagerly fired up my projector, my wife and daughter sitting on the edges of their seats.

Here's where the SH*T hit the fan:

Every single reel, every inch of film, every beautiful, memorable shot was marred, and utterly destroyed by the presence of wide purple streaks running up and down the right side of the frame.

The 8MM processing equipment had been neglected due to a lack of regular usage. The machines were not cleaned properly, and every reel of film that was processed along with mine was also destroyed.

To this day, my trusty old camera still gathers dust.

8mm had its downside--reversal film meant that you had no negative, one print was it and if it got emulsion scratches you were screwed.

It's a short film about a fella who discovers a new found love for comic books. A silent film, though scorred with music.

Shooting 16mm, telecine to Beta SP, editing on Premiere. I'm making it to add to a showreel, unfortunately if I want to take it to festivals it'd have to be screened via video projection (hah, how's that for ironic!) but the idea is to make it, show people what I am capable of doing with film, that I can use it and tell stories with it.

Dan (UK)

PS: I've used 8mm in the past, it's used a lot by underground short filmmakers and I'm rather fond of it. Soundstock can still be found, it's just not made anymore.

PPS: Aaron, gotcha on the digital thinG. Ok!