Cinematography 15 years from now

[Desy Angelina]

Hi, i'm new here..

I come from Indonesia. i'm doing research about the the development of technology in cinematography and in one subtopic i wanna put some prediction about the technology in cinematography 15years from now..

 

it can be about the format, the camera, the cinema, the quality of sound, or anything else..

u can give me a crazy imagination..

and i think some of our prediction will come true :lol:^.^

 

And sure!, i will put your (whom ideas r taken by me) name in my paper, i wont do any copyright.

 

thx 4 helping me..

[Adrian Sierkowski]

Desy;

I don't think anyone really has the foresight to see where cinema is going in the next 15 years. What I can imagine happening will be smaller and smaller cameras, to a point, which are lighter and hopefully have longer run times and battery life in terms of digital. With film cameras, they're about as refined as one can get, but there will perhaps be a hybridization of cameras offering the ability to shoot film or digitally. I think film will remain an acquisition format for a long period to come, but over the next few years we will see more content originating digitally. Also, depending on how well 3d permeates the market place at home, we may see more 3d production though I personally find this rather unlikely in the foreseeable future.

[Brian Rose]

In the future, all lights and cameramen will be obsolete, replaced by a single Magic Bullet plug-in filter, that makes everything look beautiful.

 

In all seriousness, I don't see things changing a whole lot. I for one, don't see "Avatar" being a game changer. Sure more films will use his process, but people will always want REAL stars in REAL environments.

 

From my own experience with high def cameras that function increasingly well under low light situations, I see lighting becoming more nuanced, with less need for high power wattage, and all the added gear that comes with it. Christian Berger is doing some remarkable things with a single high power light and many reflectors, and I think we could see more of this kind of strategy.

 

Certainly digital will become ever more prevalent, and I'm really excited about the prospect of 6k and 8K cameras, which, when projection catches up, could yield pictures of a quality near that of the legendary, much lamented 65mm format.

 

Now, in my own fantasy world, all the big budget films would shoot on 5 perf 65 or Imax, and then handle it accordingly for its need: 8K DI for 35mm out, Imax blowups, etc.

 

Also, Kodak would again make black-and-white matrix film without the annihilation base, allowing technicolor cameras to be used again, in tandem with Warner's glorious ultra resolution process...

 

But that's just a dream...

 

BR

[Tom Sykes]

In the future, all lights and cameramen will be obsolete, replaced by a single Magic Bullet plug-in filter, that makes everything look beautiful.

 

Personally i disagree, obviously for discussion purposes, I believe that as long as there a film makers, then yes maybe there will be some type of plug-in developed that can deem gaffer's, lighting and cameraman obsolete, but that isn't to say that people will adhere to this. I'm saying this because, I'm studying a Film degree because I like making films, i think in general in years to come, like it has been for many many years, film making in general will follow the same conventions throughout. Apologies if it comes across aggressively? It isn't meant so.

 

In response to the question, In 15 years, I can't really call it myself, i believe that a LOT more will be shot digitally, but film will still be still be around for sure. Whether or not digital will eventually take over is questionable? dSLR's? What do people think about these?

[Adrian Sierkowski]

Dslrs are cool and immediate and work really really well for documentary type shooting (just like, let's say, digital film cameras!) but for fine art photography, I'd say film is still around and the SLR will remain. Even Nikon has a new one out, though the thing is a SLR is really as refined as it'll get for awhile, says me. Same goes for Medium and Large format cameras, so they may not evolve anymore. And while digital may be larger in volume of sales (like digital cameras are now) I think you'll see that the majority of highly respected works will sill originate on film, be that stills or motion-- with caveats, of course, for those works who really synthesize style with story (such as, for a quick top of the head idea, Cloverfield, District 9, Slumdog Millionare for D-Cinema, and for stills photography... well the only really impacting photographs I can think of recently seem to come from photojournalism at least in my mind at the moment)

[Satsuki Murashige]

One trend that I am seeing right now is that as quality motion picture cameras become cheaper and more accessible, more professional still photographers are crossing over into the business of cinematography. They are bringing a different base of knowledge to the field in terms of lighting and grip equipment. In some ways this is good, and we will probably see lighter, smaller, cheaper gear packages that will be able to move quickly with fewer crew and still get the job done.

 

But in other ways, we will also see gear manufacturers catering to this market who will try to reinvent the wheel instead, and we will lose some equipment that works perfectly fine but will lose popularity with the next generation of cinematographers and thus eventually disappear when it could continue to serve us well for many years to come.

 

Another trend I am seeing is that there are fewer young cinematographers who are format agnostic. They have limited experience with different formats and cameras (which is natural), but they have no interest in expanding that experience base (unnatural, IMHO). They see one format or camera as 'superior' and all others as inferior and thus not worthy of use, instead of recognizing the objective strengths and weakness of each format/camera and using that criteria as their basis for selection. Part of this is because more young cinematographers own their cameras instead of renting, so they have a financial investment in remaining loyal to a particular brand.

 

I find this ideology troubling, as I think it the shifts the cinematographer's role from being less of an artist to more of a technician. They should be both, but which is more important to the creation of good cinematography? I would argue that the craft is a means of creating the art, not the other way around.

 

So, it's really impossible to say what things will be like in 15 years (let alone 5 years), but I hope that the first trend will continue, balancing the old with the new, advancing by keeping what is good and throwing out the bad. I hope the second trend goes away quickly.

[George Ebersole]

I don't think it'll change all that much. And like the other guy said, for all of Avatar's impressive 3D technique it doesn't seem to be as relevant as when sound or color were added to film.

[Paul Bruening]

I passed on a chance to buy a printer's camera for $125.00. It was about three times a big as my 26" TV. If I had bought it, it would be just a matter of time until I could shoot a movie with it, if those guys would just come out with that 20" x 24", 10,560 MP sensor they promised.

[Desy Angelina]

wooo...

thx 4 all of your ideas guys...

 

i ever think about :

how if we can see a film lively...not just 3d od 4d. but we can see the whole body of the actress and actor..

we can see it from behind, up, down..haahahah...

so the program will follow our minds... hahaha.. its really crazy..

 

i think 15 years later, the camera will become smaller and smaller, in a very good quality, portable with a very long live battery, good sound, and has a very big space to save the film there.

[Thomas James]

I think that in 15 years 65mm cinematography will make a comeback and will become the standard for all epic productions. The biggest format war for big screen supremacy will the 15 perf IMAX format versus the 5 perf Showscan format. Showscan will give IMAX a run for the money because only Showscan gives you at least 30 frames per second which is a significant improvement over IMAX 24 frames per second.

[Adrian Sierkowski]

I'd like to see that Tom! Especially a return to the big epic film sans CGI!

[Chris D Walker]

What I would like to happen:

 

-Film and digital to have an equal share of production shoots.

-Better stocks (whatever you view that as being; 800 EI, tighter grain, a new black and white stock?).

-Better projection in theatres (large, bright and clear). 5/70 or 15/70?

-35mm cameras with greater flexibility (lightweight, 2/3/4-perf easy switch, stop-motion to high-speed).

-New and better lens design (exotic materials, distortion-free optics).

-One-camera projects.

-Facilities for both photochemical and digital intermediates available.

 

What will most likely happen:

 

-95% of all films to be shot digitally.

-All digital projection. No Prints.

-Knockoff cameras and sensors; cheap, poor quality and modular (read: deceptively costly).

-No film with a budget more than $40 Million, thanks to post-production tools and cost-saving producers.

-Non-union shoots become the rule.

-Everybody is a film-maker, meaning more crap is more readily available (I think film-making should be a tough nut to crack, having to prove your commitment to a body of work - elitist, perhaps).

 

The following don't apply to cinematography but I think are important:

 

-More people streaming high definition films from online to their TV's and computers, meaning lower cinema attendence.

-Films are sold as internet virals.

-3D TV as the standard.

 

This is guesswork. 2025 may hold something different entirely.

Edited March 1, 2010 by Chris D Walker

[Matt Leaf]

It could be something weird like the shape changing on the shutter. Or maybe we stop looking at rectangles and watch circle movies. Why is cinema rectagular? Vision is certainly not an oblong. Circlular shutters. Triangluar shutters. Or big blobby ones that cover an entire cinema/lounge room wall so your whole periphery is covered. Maybe it'll be goggles and headphones too. So frame has to be more blobby istead of square. We'll call it the blob-rate. Haha.

Edited March 9, 2010 by Matt Tierney

[Cody Cuellar]

wooo...

thx 4 all of your ideas guys...

 

i ever think about :

how if we can see a film lively...not just 3d od 4d. but we can see the whole body of the actress and actor..

we can see it from behind, up, down..haahahah...

so the program will follow our minds... hahaha.. its really crazy..

 

i think 15 years later, the camera will become smaller and smaller, in a very good quality, portable with a very long live battery, good sound, and has a very big space to save the film there.

 

 

This is possible... It's called a video game hehe. This wouldn't really be film, because in film you remove all control from the viewer in order to deceive them into seeing and believing what you want them to...

 

In terms of theaters falling apart and the entertainment industry falling into a big mush of amateurs and wannabees and viral content only and no more blockbuster films, etc etc.... I don't personally forsee this. Just because anybody has the resources to make whatever they want... does that mean anybody can?? No. I mean look at still photography for example. EVERYBODY owns a camera, but I wouldn't pay money for the majority of the images produced by just anybody... It takes a skilled photographer to consistently capture beautiful images. Just as it take skilled and knowledgeable people and crews to make good films.

[Dominic Case]

I think most of these predictions are a bit limited in their vision.

 

Of course it's hard to predict massive changes or totally new ideas, but if we could all do that then there wouldn't be any new inventions, we'd have them already!

 

But think back 15 years to get a sense of what has changed. Make it 20 years, as technology seems to change faster and faster. So let's think about 1990.

• Windows 3.0 was just out. Your PC probably ran on a 286 chip, with a 40Mb hard drive. No sound unless you added a sound card.
  
• World Wide Web was still in its infancy. No email. Dial-up connections at 28Kbps.
  
• Mobile phones were the size of a housebrick. You used them as phones! - they didn't do anything else, and only worked in the city.
  
• The first DI shot (one effect shot, not a complete film) had just been made (in the film Willow).
  
• THe first Avid non-linear editing system had just been launched, but it would be a few years before NLE completely replaces cutting on film.
  
• No HDTV; no 16x9 TV. No DVDs till 1995. No thought of digital cameras for cinema.
  

Who would have imagined the iPhone, Facebook, Avatar, Google, or the RED camera?

 

Who would predict in 1990 that a computer manufacturer and the Beatles' old record label would be infringing each others' trade mark space (Apple & Apple Corps). Or that one of them would be making postproduction systems?

 

In fifteen years time (2025) we might still be shooting the same tired old stories. Possibly for TV, probably for various streaming and on-demand outlets. At the high end, "stars" will have priced themselves out of the market, and we'll have mostly CGI action flicks, assisted by various forms of motion capture, virtual background capture, and so on.

And we could be shooting true 3D (not just stereoscopic) with some kind of multiple lensing device to give many more points of view: like holography, but probably not holography. The data (lots of it) will be captured instantly in the editing room, via fibre, satellite or even normal wireless transmission. So screen language (close-ups, depth of field, tracking shots, tilts, etc) will all evolve to new devices for storytelling.

 

At the lower end, productions might still be more conventional.