Jon Kukla Posted September 25, 2007 Share Posted September 25, 2007 Which film school is this, by the way? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tenolian Bell Posted September 26, 2007 Share Posted September 26, 2007 There was no DV when I was in film school either. We were shooting on film and betacam sp. From what I've seen when young film school directors had to learn to shoot film, they took the basics of photography much more seriously. A big detriment with these small DV cameras is that is no longer true. Many young directors don't even have a basic understanding of lens focal length, F-stop, or shutter speed. I would encourage all directors to learn to take pictures with a manual camera. I hope film does die away, those film manufacturers (both Kodak and Fuji) pump ridiculous amounts of toxins into the environment Circuit boards and their manufacture use and produce toxic elements. There are circuit boards in every electronic gadget we use, and their number is increasing every year. Discarded electronic gadgets are pouring tons of dangerous chemicals into our waste disposal systems, most namely lead, mercury, and cadmium. Which has prompted states such as California and New York passing laws making it illegal to toss electronics into the general garbage. By law in these states you are requires to recycle electronics. One billion mobile phones were sold last year. How many of those mobile phones are likely to end up in land fills vs how much film is likely to end up in land fills. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Toby L Edwards Posted September 26, 2007 Share Posted September 26, 2007 Not to mention how many Tape Cassettes end up in land fills because there is nothing worth keeping on them. Toby Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Premium Member Kieran Scannell Posted September 26, 2007 Premium Member Share Posted September 26, 2007 This is the bit where John would calmly respond with news of the latest progress is Kodaks efforts to improve their environmental effort. We miss you John! 2nd that Andy! I can't believe this discussion is still going on! Just shoot whatever your asked to shoot! If you can! Now i can understand people who have never shot film finding the thought a bit daunting, and prefer to push there opinion towards the digital camp but film will always be the option most cinematographers will go for, It just looks better! You guy's should listen to David Mullen, a feature film cinematographer with one foot firmly in both camps as do many other experienced cinematographers on this forum. It's not one or the other! Both have a significant future in professional cinematography i think. Kieran. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jon Kukla Posted September 28, 2007 Share Posted September 28, 2007 Here's an "advance" copy of Oliver Stapleton's column next month on the matter: http://us.imdb.com/indie/ask-archive?date=20071003 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted September 28, 2007 Share Posted September 28, 2007 "One technology completely replaces another when the deciding factors are mainly economic. For instance, diesel replaced steam locomotives. Fuel injection replaced carburetors. " Yeah just like the way video replaced Super 8. Oh wait that never happened Super 8 is alive and well. Carburated engines are still being widely made. The engines may have changed in trains, from steam to diesel, but the train itself is still alive and well. Trucks and planes, the real new technology, have not replaced the train. Film will still be going strong 20 and 30 years from now. Then all of the "film is dead" people will look quite stupid. Actually people did say film was dead 20 years ago when Beta SP came along. Those who have stated how DV in film schools no longer allows new filmmakers to develop the basics are 100% correct. Any film school that turns out grads with no film training isn't worth attending. R, Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lars Zemskih Posted September 29, 2007 Author Share Posted September 29, 2007 Here's an "advance" copy of Oliver Stapleton's column next month on the matter:http://us.imdb.com/indie/ask-archive?date=20071003 Even though I agree with what most people say pro-film here, somehow his answers seemed very backward to me, like arguments somebody would make afraid of trying new things and developing new ways of doing things. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lars Zemskih Posted September 29, 2007 Author Share Posted September 29, 2007 Yeah just like the way video replaced Super 8. Oh wait that never happened Super 8 is alive and well. In most of Eastern Europe and some European countries you can't buy 8mm film, and if you get it somehow, there are no facilities to process it here. Usually. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Premium Member Alessandro Machi Posted September 29, 2007 Premium Member Share Posted September 29, 2007 That's another one of my pet peeves, that there's such a thing as "digital lighting"... There's just LIGHTING, period.... I agree however I've seen film shoots where the key light is so much hotter than the background and that probably wouldn't fly on digital. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts