Jump to content

Dream 'job', massive budget - would you shoot digital or film?


Stephen Perera

Recommended Posts

  • Premium Member
9 hours ago, Phil Rhodes said:

Do the Panavision Ultra Vista lenses even look like Cs or Es? I can't find any reference.

 

P

Because they’re so new there’s very little publicly available footage, just a short promo vid and occasionally Michael Cioni waxing lyrical at a convention. But I believe C series anamorphics were the visual reference the design team used for inspiration, rather than something more modern.

We’ll have to wait until some of the productions currently shooting with them get released to see how they look in the context of a feature film - Villeneuve’s Dune for example.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Stuart Brereton said:

That’s because shooting film these days is a prestige issue.

Something likely to become increasingly noticeable. Some people tend to wave the whole film thing off as something only hipsters care about. I'm not so sure it's really a hipster thing at all though - it's becoming more mainline and popular than that. Film was always about getting bums on seats, and promoting a prestigious difference is one (not so small) way of doing that. A country that values its film industry ought to look into this. But of course script and direction is the foundation. 

What's starting to stand out, I feel, is that especially younger people are looking in popular culture for authenticity, earthiness, realness, and a return to valuable things that have meaning. It's not a shallow search for mere prestige though. Obviously I can't back my assertion up with hard facts. Talk to people and read a lot and you will notice this trend. As David Lean once said, you can hold film footage in your hand. You can smell it. Light actually shines through the stuff, physically. Hard to beat that, when it comes to creative use of image. It's magic.

It takes risks to be creative with film.

I'm not knocking digital. I'm just saying don't give up on film. Because if you do it might mean you could be a little out of touch ?

Edited by Jon O'Brien
  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Premium Member

I don't really care about the camera or the lenses, I just want the film to mean something to people and the visual approach to compliment that-- so whatever camera works best is what works best.

Though, that said, I would love to have done some 65mm Reversal shooting, or maybe, go a bit crazy with 35mm Infared-Colored film; if one could.

Would be nice, also, I think, to play with 2-strip color film; just to see what it would be like, learn something new, and honestly film in a new (well old, but new to most) way.

Also we would do as many practical effects as possible.

And somehow the coffee would be both plentiful on set, and also as though made by angels always.

And the wrap party would be well catered and all the crew given a bottle of their favorite drink at wrap.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Premium Member
8 hours ago, Jon O'Brien said:

What's starting to stand out, I feel, is that especially younger people are looking in popular culture for authenticity, earthiness, realness, and a return to valuable things that have meaning. It's not a shallow search for mere prestige though. Obviously I can't back my assertion up with hard facts. Talk to people and read a lot and you will notice this trend. As David Lean once said, you can hold film footage in your hand. You can smell it. Light actually shines through the stuff, physically. Hard to beat that, when it comes to creative use of image. It's magic.

It takes risks to be creative with film.

That is called culture. Everything man does with nature. Nature is physical. What doesn’t have a physical base cannot be cultivated. Ones and noughts are immaterial, completely abstract. As you say, you can touch film, smell it. Who wants to get rid of materials, of physical life, I ask myself from time to time. We’re in the greyest of the twelve ages now, uranian sun. It’ll be over in some 2,100 years. Until then—shoit.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, Jon O'Brien said:

Something likely to become increasingly noticeable. Some people tend to wave the whole film thing off as something only hipsters care about. I'm not so sure it's really a hipster thing at all though - it's becoming more mainline and popular than that. 

I was referring more to the fact that there is pervasive snobbery about shooting film, as if you are not a 'proper' DP if you don't shoot film, or not a 'proper' Director. I see people jumping through all kinds of hoops, and sacrificing budgets so that they can shoot film, regardless of whether it's the most appropriate choice. There were comments made here recently, for instance, about how Joker looked great, but would have looked better on film. That's an opinion that is manifestly incorrect. It would have looked like an underexposed mess.They shot digital because it would have been almost impossible to shoot on film. To claim that film would have been a better choice is to ignore the realities of filmmaking.

Given a schedule that allowed proper time to light and shoot, I'd like the opportunity to shoot film again, but only if film was the best option for that movie. If it caused budget problems and became a choice between great locations and production design or shooting film, I'd take the locations and design every day of the week.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Premium Member

I love projects where formats can be mixed and every camera system and shooting format and lens set is chosen because it is the best choice for that particular scene. I personally mix film and video in almost all my own projects and encourage others to do that well. 

Additionally I work on documentary projects where over 15 camera systems per single project is very normal.

 

I actually think that it is a very conservative choice to shoot a whole movie on the same format and single camera system and lenses. It is understandable if one does not want to draw attention to the visuals or benefit from them and just want to make everything slick and boring so that the dialog and music can do all the work and the main goal of the cinematography is just capture what is in front of the camera and nothing more?

Edited by aapo lettinen
Link to comment
Share on other sites

There is this myth that film will always be better.. sorry but I have to say, I've noticed that the people waxing lyrical about film.. the smell ,take it in your hands ,hold it too the light, ones and zero,s are  meaningless , etc are actually not DP,s .. or directors .. the smell.. or handling of film or holding it up to the light  of the window of ones garret .. are not part of the job or anything really to do with movies.. I'll pretty much guarantee I have smelt and handled more film than any of the sniffers ? waxing away.. over 8 years being a loader ..thousands of mag,s .. but I dont think a movie shot on film is intrinsically better.. as any working DP knows.. this is simply not true..   its 1st year film school talk that you grow out of very quickly.. 

Edited by Robin R Probyn
spelling
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Premium Member

it is exactly like having a car, owning or renting a car or talking about cars. 

Some people just want to drive around. The others want it to be reliable. Some just love it being a certain very rare and old model OR the latest one and expensive looking. Some people just love to fix it and smell the tires after a long drive on fresh asphalt and they couldn't care less how much they paid for it or if it would be reliable enough to get them across the continent if needed. 

Some people are like, "I want to use my Ferrari to haul this 20 ton pile of rocks from point A to point B."  

Sometimes it is just great to have right tools for a job. If you are driving for living it might matter more what type of car you use for a task

Link to comment
Share on other sites

45 minutes ago, Robin R Probyn said:

There is this myth that film will always be better.. sorry but I have to say, I've noticed that the people waxing lyrical about film.. the smell ,take it in your hands ,hold it too the light, ones and zero,s are  meaningless , etc are actually not DP,s .. or directors .. the smell.. or handling of film or holding it up to the light  of the window of ones garret .. are not part of the job or anything really to do with movies.. I'll pretty much guarantee I have smelt and handled more film than any of the sniffers ? waxing away.. over 8 years being a loader ..thousands of mag,s .. but I dont think a movie shot on film is intrinsically better.. as any working DP knows.. this is simply not true..   its 1st year film school talk that you grow out of very quickly.. 

Format really doesn't matter beyond what you do with it.

Unfortunately when a filmmaker introduces their film as "My 35mm short...." or "I made this film on <insert format here>". Its almost short hand for "My boring film". We have all encountered filmmakers that start the conversation with the shooting format or the style they are influenced by... It nearly always results in a film that doesn't have much to say. 

I used to be the same, I loved the idea of making films for the sake of making films. I wanted to emulate my hero's and one way to do that was to lust after the technology they used. I made some mediocre films.

More recently I've been on a learning curve. My most recent short is about something thats personal to me and the film is just a means of expressing those feelings. Of course I want it l look good from a craft perspective - but the point of it is I want to make a specific point and that (I hope) will hopefully resonate with a few people. The means don't matter, only the message. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Premium Member
Just now, aapo lettinen said:

Some people are like, "I want to use my Ferrari to haul this 20 ton pile of rocks from point A to point B."  

"I want to use this blimped 3-stripe camera because it is cool and rare format and difficult to shoot with so I will get lots of attention! but the scene needs to be handheld and we have gimbal and drone shots as well"

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Premium Member

I’ve shot film for over three decades. Now I’m committed to the digital process. I like the fact I can see what I’m doing at the same moment of doing it and not have to worry about all of the problems film can have. 
 

G

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Premium Member
8 hours ago, Robin R Probyn said:

I'll pretty much guarantee I have smelt and handled more film than any of the sniffers ? waxing away.. over 8 years being a loader ..thousands of mag,s

If I’m a waxing sniffer, I’ve smelled film for 43 years now and not only camera stocks but also all kinds of lab and print film. Have loaded magazines of processors, printers, cameras, and projectors. It’s not good and bad, it’s about the resistance offered by film and mechanical equipment. Would be a pity, if you didn’t grasp that.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Film is great but I do not think the medium is superior in anyway to digital. That is just down to opinion, if you prefer one to the other thats fine. 

I personally think digital is amazing because it has given people the chance who never had before to tell their stories in a movie. EG this video about teens in Nigeria making films with their phones. 

This example shows how films are stories. Being able to be told stories by voices we have not heard before (you could argue because they have no had access to the equipment to do so before recently) is fantastic and refreshing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Simon Wyss said:

If I’m a waxing sniffer, I’ve smelled film for 43 years now and not only camera stocks but also all kinds of lab and print film. Have loaded magazines of processors, printers, cameras, and projectors. It’s not good and bad, it’s about the resistance offered by film and mechanical equipment. Would be a pity, if you didn’t grasp that.

But that doesnt make a "movie  " intrinsically "better ".. or "better " to work with on a professional  film set .. having a machine instead of a computer is not going to make a better film or better film maker, or better DP .. digital camera,s can also be amazing in what they can do.. all this sniffing ,sprocket hole gazing against a north light..caressing and getting teary eyed over a can of film ,is not really a concern of the working DP/AC /Editor or director.. .. its an aesthetic for amateurs ,students and hobbyists  ..  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Premium Member

the dreams about specific technical processes are irrelevant unless one already has the whole project planned in great detail so that one is absolutely sure the said technical process would work perfectly on it. In the case of this thread one would need to work backwards to try to figure out which kind of project would suit the chosen technical process perfectly. And not the other way around. 

I would love to shoot film (being one of those film sniffers myself heh) but most of my dream projects would be creating post-apocalyptic fantasy worlds where single-format low-sensitivity mediums would be unpractical for real world production. 

I think the thread has actually drifted from project-centered to technical-centered very quickly. It is understandable on this kind of forum but it is not very constructive when talking about CINEMATOGRAPHY and not PHOTOGRAPHY. 

pretty much the same problem like this https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4LddR4UF9q8   (great looking visuals and interesting technical process VS. choosing the process which works best as a storytelling device on the particular project)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sprockets in the Gloaming ... my new script I'm writing. Feature length, set in southern England, circa 1940. To be shot on 35mm film. Robin, would you like to work on it? I will give you a job. Just have to raise the money.

Stephen, turned out to be quite an okay thread after all, didn't it.

 

Edited by Jon O'Brien
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Jon O'Brien said:

Sprockets in the Gloaming ... my new script I'm writing. Feature length, set in southern England, circa 1940. To be shot on 35mm film. Robin, would you like to work on it? I will give you a job. Just have to raise the money.

Stephen, turned out to be quite an okay thread after all, didn't it.

 

Jon I appreciate the work offer .. shooting on film you say.. excellent .. on digital I would of course just need a moderate sized Winnebago with smarties.. but for film.. an old teak framed canvas marquee ..   rattan  chaise lounges ..a copy of "On the Road"..and incense of celluloid by my camp bed.. which must be a direct copy of that used by Fritz Lang during the making of Metropolis .. and a small jade opium pipe .. this will ensure my best work, and a masterpiece will be produced to lay before the world .. and indeed change the history of man kind .. I will give you some credit too of course .. oh and Tyler as my "tent boy"..  

  • Like 1
  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

46 minutes ago, Simon Wyss said:

Who said better? I never said better.

But you were thinking that ..come on .. you know its true .. you were seduced by the glint of the moon off the Kodak tin.. the scent of the halides .. that cheeky half smile of the sprocket .. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

59 minutes ago, Jon O'Brien said:

You've got it. I will write it into your contract if that's what you want. Seems reasonable. Except the bit about tent boy and the opium pipe.

Jon I never deal directly with the tawdry aspects of my contract .. have your people contact mine.. we can do a breakfast at my place in Bell Air later.. I'll show some of my favorite films in the theatre ..if things move forward.. but I can tell you know .. tent boy and pipe are not negotiable..  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Premium Member
8 hours ago, Mark Kenfield said:

Can we let each other dream without the "constructive" criticism?

well this is the whole point......hahahaha.......this thread is about....the dream.......and Jon, yes......hahaha

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Premium Member
15 hours ago, Gregory Irwin said:

I’ve shot film for over three decades. Now I’m committed to the digital process. I like the fact I can see what I’m doing at the same moment of doing it and not have to worry about all of the problems film can have. 
 

G

Would be really nice to have a thread from you on experiences on the Joker film, that would make fantastic reading....anecdotes and everything and anything.....chapeau.....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...