Ruairi Robinson

You know when you see the "making of" of a big movie, and see behind the scenes footage of an action scene, and it looks really fake and shitty from the video cameras, but then when you see it from the film camera perspective, and the same thing looks freakin' awesome? For example: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GSRqH9S2dwM http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6ueCSKlA420...feature=related Public enemies looks like they used the fake and shitty behind the scenes video footage for the actual movie... R.

Hi. Clairmont stocks red cameras. Have a look at their rental catalogue. And the Genesis too had lots of bugs and issues when it was first used in production. It just wasn't being discussed so publicly. R.

http://www.engadgethd.com/2009/07/09/wal-m...er-price-to-98/

I am amused by the absolute certainty of predictions that people making regarding technological evolution, and the wild leaps, and assumptions made. The arguments are usually driven more by emotion than objective analysis of facts, etc. R.

It doesn't bother me, because you can shoot on film, to your hearts content. Most filmmakers still do. R.

Tom, don't you know that digital will NEVER be as good as film. Even if all development on film ceases tomorrow, and a billion dollars a day is put into development of digital sensors, in a hundred million years of technological development it will never, ever, ever match film. This is not just my opinion (though admittedly my opinion is awesome) but it was actually told to me, in a dream, last night, by Jesus, while Mary, Joseph, and all the angels and saints gathered around watching, while the lord God himself sat above, overseeing. Weirdly, he was sitting on an umpire's chair, and the dream turned into a tennis match between jesus and the archangel michael (Jesus kicked his ass btw) and then Jesus told me he was bored with being the messiah and wanted to pass the torch of leadership to me. Then he produced an actual torch, which burned my hand when I tried to take it. I'm not sure what that means. But for the purposes of this discussion, that's not important. The important thing is that digital will never be as good as film. True story! R.

This is only an issue in your head.

Uh huh. You are misreading what was said. There is zero hostility between Stephen and I. Best, Ruairi Robinson International field specialist in jokes that seem like insults if you are not paying close enough attention.

Your attempt at making me feel guilty has failed. For I lack what you humons commonly refer to as a "conscience". Best Ruairi Intergalactic space ninja from planet X

That's LOSE not LOOSE. Sheesh. (While we are nitpicking)

Saw this tonight. Really liked it - great work. "Roses are red. Violets are blue. **(obscenity removed)** you, whore." R.

Huh? You think the content of a film by Andrew Dominik was dictated by BANKERS? You are off yer rocker mate. R.

Looks really nice...! R.

Hmm. Friends is shot on 35mm. Saving Private Ryan is shot on 35mm. But friends doesn't look anywhere near as good as saving Private Ryan! How can this possibly be!!!?????!!!!!!??????!!!!!!?????!!!!! I am trying to comprehend how these statements can come from the same person: "I really want Benjamin Button to win. The cinematography is out standing." "I was rooting for Benjamin Button all the way." "Why do studios feel the need to sacrifice film for digital? This is ridiculous. Digital is good for independent films, documentaries, commercials, music. Digital has no place in cinema." "When it comes to cinema I am pro film for life."

Maybe you should watch the movie first before making your mind up about it. R.

Don't interrupt - there's a backlash in progress!

What did you feel was unresolved?

I don't think you are leaping nearly far enough in your conclusions. I think it spells the end of civilization as we know it. There will be mass suicides, swarms of locusts, the worlds surface will be rendered as smooth as glass by a series of cataclysmic earthquakes and volcanic eruptions, 250,000 people will ascend directly to heaven without dying, and those that are left behind will be without film, and will only have digital SLRs. In fact, instead of selling my red one, I'm going to dump it in the ocean, as an anchor, to drag me down with it. I mean whats the point? There's a stills camera that shoots sort-of-good-ish quality video now. It's game over, man. R.

Evil Dead 2. And Army of Darkness.

The cinematographer might.

1000fps. 3D. In zero gravity.

shame there aren't a hundred good movies on hd-dvd.

Your tv may be doing some bullshit processing to "improve" the image. As I understand it, some of these tvs have a feature that makes motion smoother by interpolating frames, which makes it look like video, and introduces artifacts on some frames. You are better off turning off all you tv's advanced "features" one by one and getting the cleanest possible signal. R.

www.artfulwriter.com www.wordplayer.com www.johnaugust.com

How do I know they didn't try? Well take a look at the images below, and you tell me who tried harder. Me, or Carrivaggio. I know, I know, it's a tough call...