Another nail in the coffin for film - Page 6

Yes, because as we all know, movies are supposed to be like real life, where men in capes fly through the air, spaceships zip through the vacuum of outer space like fighter planes, and elderly bearded wizards cast magic spells to battle dragons... just 100% exactly like real life.

The precise example I gave was the BBC series Planet Earth, one of the most beautiful nature documentaries yet filmed. Then there are live sports broadcasts, another area where hyper-realistic images are highly desirable. Lastly, when I view my photographs and videos on my TV I also want them to look as realistic as possible.

You are perfectly welcome to compromise all other uses of your display to have what has always been a poor imitation of the way real film looks in a theater. But movies made or distributed on film are already ending. In a few decades, nobody will even remember what film looked like.

They may marvel at the flickering images in museums. More likely, they will "virtually travel" from their residence surrounded by high resolution, hyper-realistic video displays, and marvel at the flickering film image on their display. Once the world runs out of cheap fossil energy, actual physical travel may become rare. Think of the world as in the movie Surrogates, but instead of surrogate robots that look like you used to in your prime, you will connect to a small flying video camera at a remote location, and use it as a mechanical avatar in place of actual travel.

I suppose you could filter your display so that the world around you looked like film, or even make it a B&W Film Noir if you wished.

I've been saying for a long time that DYNAMIC range is pretty much the biggest factor between video and film. Camera manufacturers seemed to be intentionally avoiding improving dynamic range much, and instead opting for more megapixels....because us consumers love our super duper megapixels and high rez video. lol.

To me, it's been about achieving more range between light and dark. Super 35mm Kodak film Vision 3 is upto 15 claimed stops of dynamic range. The Arri Alexa is about 14 stops natively. This is why it looks so great. A typical camcorder from a couple years ago probably achieved 6 or 7 stops and probably not much more even now. A good DSLR like the Canon T2i, 7D and 5D Mark II can achieve about 10 stops with Technicolor Cinestyle color profile; Big step up from most consumer camcorders, but not quite at film level, so more care with lighting is needed in certain scenes.

The extra dynamic range gives much more grading room. BlackMagic Design is releasing the first ever true prosumer priced Cinema Camera ($2,995 + Free Copies of DaVinci Resolve 9.0 Color Grading software that's $1,000 by itself generally and UltraScope which is $600 usually) with 13 stops of dynamic range (though it's been said that's a conservative estimate and can reach as high as 15) that shoots 2.5k RAW with 12-Bit Color to standard SSDs.

This is a huge deal and one of the most revolutionary steps ever in indie digital filmmaking. It's pretty close to the original Red Scarlet that was supposed to be $3k and ended up being $16k when operational, minus the expensive proprietary media and accessories and plus the expensive free software included. Thank you BlackMagic Design! They're calling this the Mini Alexa! lol.

That asume that nobody will be watching classic movies. Can you find a single person today that havnt seen at least 5 black and white movies in their life? Just because we now have colors doesnt make B&W obsolete.

Of course you wouldnt do a B&W movie today, if you aming for an academy award.

The creators of The Artist would like to have a word with you. They may even let you hold their Oscar.

I thought it would have been funnier if he discovered it for himself.

The biggest problem with DSLRs is that they capture video in compressed formats that basically discard a lot of the raw data from the sensor. Manufacturers are holding the more capable capture formats close to their vest so as to milk as much money as possible from their professional lines. But upstarts like the Blackmagic Cinema Camera may force a turning of the tide in that regard.

Yes, I am very close to pre-ordering the Blackmagic. It would solve a number of problems I've encountered over the last 18 months.

The problem with DSLR start before compression. There is not enough horsepower to process all data. So they only use 6% (or something like that)of the pixels for videomode.

Exactly. Ya gotta love a company that jumps right in out of nowhere with something daring, unique and revolutionary for an unheard of price. The fact that they are throwing in $1,600 in high end software for free is icing on the cake. There is no camera under $15,000 ready to shoot that has the features that the Black Magic Cinema Camera provides for $2,995. You're essentially paying $1,395 for a 2.5K ,12-Bit RAW large sensor video camera capable of dynamic range similar to that of an Arri Alexa if you factor in the normal price of the software. That's pretty amazing, because it should only getting better from this point onward. Innovation leads to change. BlackMagic Design is a true innovator.

This camera should force some sort of change in the industry. It will probably be on back order a lot due to very high demand and who knows what they will release in a year or two. Maybe a Super 35mm version with 4K. Maybe global shutter sensor. We shall see.

I've seen some movies in the theater recently that were projected film (and nicely projected). Boy did it look nice: rich, detailed, clear, really nice contrast and even good black levels, dimensional...just somehow an almost perfect marriage of "looks real/believable" and "yet still a fantasy" that sucks me right in.

As good as my calibrated JVC RS55 projector looks (and it can look more vivid and sharper), there is a "something" in projected film I'd love to have reproduced at home.

FOR-A to Unveil 4K Slow Mo Camera


http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/new...-camera-327794

I haven't read the whole thread but is it possible to use variable frame rate in the film (Hobbit)?

24fps for regular scenes and
48/60fps for the action scenes?

That would probably look weird though...

Anything is possible.

If you display your movie in 48P, You just double each frame of 24P content to get a 24P/48P variable.

But you are right it will look wierd to switch framerate inside a movie. It was very common during older BBC productions that used 50i cameras for indoor scenes and 25fps film on outdoor scenes. Not to mention the difference between video and film.

But I have mixed 25P and 50i video on the same clip and the difference is not subtle even if the content was shoot on the same camera.

So I dont think we will see this in the movie, but if anyone gets access to both 24P and 48P versions of the film, we could see a fancut that does this.

That was Douglas Trumbull's idea when he was to make BRAINSTORM. The regular footage would be shot using 35mm (1.85 AR) @ 24 FPS and when the actors went into "brainstorm mode" it would switch to Showscan 70mm (2.20 AR) @ 60 FPS.

How Technology is Changing the Movie Theater Business

http://www.dcinematoday.com/dc/PR.aspx?newsID=2837

More Kodachrome goodness: http://vimeo.com/5645171

(It has a copyright notice, so I elected to link to it rather than embed.)

This is an amatuer photographer with a handheld 16mm filming VJ day (August 14, 1945) in Honolulu on Kodachrome movie stock.

There is a bit of "shakycam" factor, but the images are remarkable.

You guys should really give this a watch. A truly wonderful insight into the art of cinematography, as well as a fantastic intro\tease for what is sure to be an excellent camera comparison.

http://www.zacuto.com/shootout-revenge-2012/revenge-great-camera-shootout-part-one