For May's LAMBlog-a-thon the discussion will focus on digital film making and the effects it will have on film making in general. Will this new digital age be a huge detriment to the movie industry? Will it usher in an era of new and better film making? Will it even make a difference at all and does anyone even really care?I tend to understand and appreciate both sides of the issue when it comes to digital vs film. Each side of the debate has a lot of good things to say and when it comes down to it neither side is really wrong. I tend to throw my support over to the side of digital cinema though. Don't get me wrong, I don't necessarily want to see the death of film but if I decided to shoot a movie I would most definitely shoot it digitally.
Now I may be a bit biased when it comes to this because I am a huge fan of Robert Rodriguez and he exclusively works digitally these days. The truth is I am more of a fan of the way Robert Rodriguez makes movies than I am of his actual movies. Don't get me wrong I enjoy his films but shooting digitally has allowed him to do a lot of things that other directors would never get the chance to do and I have a lot of respect for him because of that.
For starters, shooting digitally has enabled Rodriguez to gain a level of freedom with his film making that not many directors enjoy. He may not make the greatest movies in the world but because his movies are almost always profitable he has freedom to do whatever he wants. Not many directors get that freedom unless they have been working in the business for a lot longer the Rodriguez and made a lot more movies than he has. Shooting digitally helps him keep his costs low, which makes the profits higher which lets him enjoy this freedom.
There is a lot of debate over whether or not the quality of shooting digitally is up to par with the quality of shooting on film and the truth is that I don't have the technical expertise to really have a definite answer on that. I think it is pretty widely excepted that shooting with 35mm film with result in a higher resolution than shooting in HD digital. However that is how it stands now and digital technology is always getting better and better so who knows what the future may hold.
My other main reason for falling on the side of digital film making is because I am a huge proponent of independent film making and because digital film making is cheaper it allows for people with good ideas but not budge to get out there and shoot a movie. Granted a lot of the low budget, independent stuff out there is pretty bad but every once in awhile something sneaks through that is really damn good and that probably would not have been made if shooting on film was the only way to make movies.
If I can, I will return for a moment to Robert Rodriguez. He made his first feature length film with a budget of $7,000. If you read his book, which happens to be one of my favorite books on film making, you will learn that most of that $7,000 went to buying and processing the film. If there had been digital solutions when El Mariachi had been made just imagine the ridiculously small budget Rodriguez could have gotten away with. Of course that just makes me remember that I still haven't made any movies.
As I said before I don't want to see the death of film. I am all for film makers continuing to use film to make movies if that is what they want to do. There is a certain nostalgia that comes with making movies on film and industries don't always like to go about changing what has worked for years and shooting on film has really been around for quite sometime. Convincing long standing film makers to switch to an entirely new medium isn't something that would go over well and I certainly don't fault anyone for that. I personally think there is room for both mediums in the industry and I think both of them will be around for quite some time.
Interesting points especially regarding Rodriguez.
ReplyDeleteDigital will never be able to capture images the way film does, but the medium is improving. It's also more cost effective. I made a short on film and the budget was 11k. I have made shorts on HD and they cost 4k and less. Digital definitely has its place as it allows more people to make films without sacrificing too much quality.
I agree that many filmmakers love the medium and will never fully switch over. If I can afford it, I would shoot film over digital any day of the week. It's been around for over a 100 years for a reason.
"Digital will never be able to capture images the way film does"
ReplyDeleteI wouldn't count on that Mikey! 10 years ago people were still watching home movies on VHS. Now I can take HD footage with a consumer camera.
Give it another 10-15 years. Sony is making some incredible cameras, none that any of us regular folk can afford, but they are giving film a run for it's money.
Wait until 70mm sized sensors enter the digital realm. They'll be no arguing with those.....
"Of course that just makes me remember that I still haven't made any movies."
ReplyDeleteYou and me both, brother. But it is comforting to know that, if and when we get off our butts, the finances won't be the thing that stopping us.
@Mikey & Joseph
ReplyDeleteWell I think that even if Digital reaches the same quality resolution as film it still isn't going to offer a picture that looks the same as film. I think there is a quality to film that can't be duplicated digitally in a way that looks good. There is just something about that slight grainy look of film that is part of the movie watching experience.
That being said, I don't think every movie out there needs to have that look. 95% of the stuff Hollywood churns out could be shot digitally to save money and the audience for that movie wouldn't know the difference. Most of Hollywood's target audience isn't going to notice whether a movie is shot digitally or on film.
I mean seriously, is the target audience of Twilight going to give a shit if the movie was shot digitally? Are they really going to be able to tell the difference. There is still a place for film but there is no reason your average Hollywood movie can't be shot digitally.
Of course, the downfall of that is, with digital being cheaper and faster to produce they would just churn out crap at a higher rate. So maybe this isn't such a good idea.
----
@Fletch
I've been talking about shooting a "no-budget" slasher flick for years but finding the time is not easy. The place I work has nice digital video camera that is never used that they would let me borrow so I can't use the "I can't afford equipment" excuse anymore. One of these days I will do it. It might be a shitty movie but at least I'll be able to say I did it.