Originally posted by era
Even films on HBO didn't measure up...and HBO tries for quality. There must be something of a technical problem converting celluloid to HDTV? It's never as good as digital videotape sources.
You are talking about two different mediums. Film is a "softer" look where video is more "harsh" but that doesn't mean it is bad. You get the details in film, but it doesn't look like "real life" like video does. I too was a little disappointed when I first started watching HD film thinking I was missing something, but the one movie that brought it home to me how much detail could be seen was Charlie's Angels.
I had a friend over and was showing him my new Sony 34XBR800 and I flipped it over to HBO-HD and Charlie's Angels was on. Now I have seen Lucy Lu on Ally McBeal hundreds of times and thought I knew her face pretty well, but when we were watching the movie, I shouted out, "My God, she has freckles!" I had never noticed it, but on HBO-HD it was VERY plain to see. That turned me around that I was biased that I really was NOT seeing the detail because it didn't look like video even though it WAS there! I have since looked at other HD transmitted films and depending on how the director shot it, the detail are always there, sometimes it is more noticeable than others. For a certain "mood" of a film, directors will fuzz or soften the PQ, or color it or something to make it stand out and you can get lost in that and miss the detail. My how the mind plays tricks on you!
In the business there are two distinct camps that are very vocal on which medium they prefer. It is kinda like the Miller Light spots, (great taste, less filling) Film will never look like video and video will never look like film, but they BOTH can have HD DETAIL.
When we were WGHPiedmont 8 (prior to FOX) we had a promotions director with a cinema background and if you remember the pretty pictures of the Piedmont that we always showed for station IDs, they were shot on 35mm film, then transfered to video tape. They never looked like the video stuff that was shot for everything else, and it wasn't suppose to. But that is what he liked. (he is in LA now now working for the FOX station there) Our current promotions director prefers video and we shoot most everything on video, but he will occasionally shoot film for a certain effect. (video is MUCH cheaper than film to produce, almost 10:1 cheaper)