Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Movies' started by Patrick Sun, Jan 8, 2012.
And, Kodak is filing for Chapter 11 bankruptcy:
This is just awful. Awful, awful, awful.
I'm just shocked that it took this long. I figured it has been all digital for the last few years.
It will still be a mix for a while now. There's a lot of Panavision equipment still out there owned by rental companies, and even if Kodak goes under Fujifilm will continue to make motion picture film for the foreseeable future.
Panavision cameras are all owned by Panavision, but your point is well taken. There are not only Panavision camera, but there are still MANY old Mitchell's that are in perfect working order, and are at least as good as the modern cameras. Doug
Film cameras will last. The real question is how much longer will a variety of quality motion picture film stock be available? Kodak, Fujifilm, AGFA, etc. will only continue to manufacture product if it remains a profitable venture. Kodak may already be out of the picture. As more filmmakers choose to shoot digital because of conveinence, cost, functionality, aesthetics, etc., that outlook becomes less and less promising.
Quite true. Doug
I agree with this guy:
Interesting point about the "illusion" of movies. Great clip, thanks for sharing.
I hate to tell him this, but digital is also just a set of still pictures taken 24 per second. They just aren't recorded on film. I saw Red Tails a few nights ago, digitally photographed, digitally projected on a 50 foot screen. It looked beautiful. In fact it was MUCH sharper and more detailed than most film prints that I see these days, and this was only 2k projection. I doubt most people who saw it would be able to tell the difference between film and digital. In fact there seems to be the common belief that movies stopped being shot on film about 10 years ago. Doug
Yeah, I don't really get his point about the illusion of film. Film or digital, it's still just individual still frames projected sequentially.