[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Electronic Cinema



 
> My personal opinion is that the reason that it is not already happening is
> distribution security, not the projector.


I disagree :) sorry!

I believe it is a commercial situation regarding the re-equiping of
theatres.....who pays for it? The distributors may save money but they are
not responsible for the equipment in theatres.
Also...
 I think Electronic projection can look great, especially on smaller screens
that are so much more common nowadays. The state of prints being projected
in the UK is often appalling. I viewed some rushes in a full size cinema of
a project I was involved in, "Tomorrow never dies" generated from 625
betacam and using the digital projection projector and was staggered at how
good the experience was. For the normal person in the street it was very
acceptable.

>The demise of the release print business has
> practically nothing to do with origination on film.

I disagree.
I believe if the print market suffers it does indeed impact the quality of
negative processing and film stock development. Bulk prints are very
lucrative  for labs and stock manufacturers rely on volume sales of print
stock. This is a real problem.

> With all due respect to
> Lucas, top directors will shoot on film because it has the qualities we
> debate regularly: it is an involving, story-telling medium, capable of
> conveying atmosphere with a great deal of subtlety, something which
> electronic image capture - for now at least - simply cannot do

Fine words but a film is successful on video or DVD release as well as on a
projected release if it is a good story/script and well crafted.
The key words you said were "for now".
I am a huge fan of film but entertainment covers many mediums and they
should be embraced and not shunned. There is appropriate technology for
different types of film projects. "Antz" is a 3D render and "Bugs life" also
which went direct from digital to DVD. This is an extreme example.
Film is a wonderful acquisition medium for lush cinematic looks that may not
actually be required for certain stylised projects. For some projects film
acquisition has no match....."for now".  Lucas feels for his project and the
look he is after, digital is the way to go. Why should I trash his decision?
I grew up in an age of film and photographic images....today, youth is
growing up in an age of Playstations and internet video.
Filmmaking is indeed story telling with images. Why should those images
always be on a piece of film?
One thing that is very attractive is the instant nature of electronic
cameras. Waiting around to view the rushes to see if a shot worked is not
conducive to workflow. We have seen the appearance of consumer digital
stills cameras in the high street and they offer a similar lure.


> And producers will insist on film origination because it guarantees archive
> compatibility. We can still view the very first movies shot over a hundred
> years ago.

There is also a lot of film lost through the delicate and perishable nature
of the medium :(


I am films biggest fan but I won't let that blinker me from new technology
and opportunities offered by different tools. Technology is advancing at a
tremendous rate and you can either hide from it or embrace it. I choose to
keep an open mind and heart.

Paul Grace



---
Thanks to DAV and Dave Walker for support in 1999
No advertising/marketing allowed on the main TIG.  Contact rob at alegria.com
anonymous messaging now at http://www.alegria.com/HyperNews/get/ubique.html
1018 subscribers in 41 countries on Thu May  6 04:16:11 CDT 1999 
subscribe/unsubscribe with that Subject: to telecine-request at alegria.com
complete information on the TIG website http://www.alegria.com/tig3/