How do U feel about the modernizing of cameras used for films?

Cinematography is dying.

quote:

---

Cinematography is dying.

---

i think Emmanuel Lubezki fans would disagree with you. It's adapting to a climate where producers are tighter than ever with budgets, so affordable modern technology is the norm. You will see some films still shot in 16mm or 35, but with the DI process what it is you can achieve certain looks in post.

quote:

---

Cinematography is dying.

---

Hell of job showing your ignorance here.

quote:

---

My opinion is they should have also kept the old school cameras and old school filming techniques used for films back in the day.

---

You mean like Twelve Years A Slave, Les Mis, Beasts of the Southern Wild, Lincoln, Mud..

Try not to make sweeping generalizations that expose your naivety.

Side by Side

I'm a fan of film. It looks better. Has texture.

quote:

---

those old school martial arts flicks? Well, today's modern cameras can't capture the feel and look i

---

I'm not sure what you're talking about, but I'm pretty sure you aren't either.. there really isn't anything from old school analog camera work that can't be mimicked with digital effects. Modern cinescope cinematic have all but mastered the duplication of "old school" filmography.

You seem to fail at having a clue at whats actually possible.

quote:

---

Old school cameras.

---

you don't even need a camera to make video that looks like "old school" black and white...

LINK


you can add flicker, jitter, graininess, blur, atmospheric lighting, and a thousand other things that add up to the "old school" black and white look, it is all easily duplicated now digitally in dozens of programs like photoshop, and of course there are still old school techniques being used like Abrams "screen flare" and mirror basics.

My families first TV's were black and white and yes I've watched plenty of movies Terd Turner hasn't got his hands on yet. So yea you can make modern black and white much "cleaner" if you want it to be that way, or you can make it dirty with all the original film flaws of analog film, dust mots and projector trash included.

With ever increasing film speeds and resolutions well beyond 1000's of lines, it's getting to the point the limit is only what your imagination can come up with.

Your problem is that nobody want's the old fashioned cine imagery of yesterday, it's not that it can't be done. The art may be lost, but the ability and technique is still all possible.

I can somewhat appreciate this, I have a penchant and admiration for old school audio, analog quadraphonic systems, I think they're better in their own right than modern 7.1 superdolby digital-ESP or whatever they're selling these days. The problem is only 1 person in a thousand agrees with me, or you.

quote:

---

I think he is more saying that he prefers the look of actual film over digital when he is talking about old school techniques.

---

right but he's also saying that it can only be done with old, low speed, super 16's that Howard Hughes would use 30 of to make a movie. That's the part where he is wrong.

You could make this look a lot grainier, jitterier and over all archaic by adding more effects. The reason they didn't is because modern movie goers don't want it, not because it can't be done.