Hey guys and gals. I thought it might be fun to begin a thread that features cinematography from both the technical and creative aspects. It's always been a fascinating subject, but with the amazing advances in the digital age, I thought you might enjoy having a place where we can post things of interest, and comment. I thought of this after having a number of fun conversations in this forum about Oblivion and the new Star Wars feature to be shot on film. As I researched around, I found there was so much to talk about, but I didn't want to steer off the topic. So, the best thing to do is create a thread for the topic. We will focus (no pun) on capture/shoot and post...because they are now more interwoven than ever.
My two decades + career as a feature film and TV camera operator and director of photography was mostly in the "photochemical era," but has been transitioning into the digital world for about a decade now. Needless to say, I have had a strong bias. I used to think that the original film image was always going to be the benchmark which digital images might approach someday. Even 35mm going to a DI and digital cinema looks great. A couple of years ago, and especially in the last year, I've seen digital cameras do things that I could never have believed; they can actually do a number of things better than film. Heresy!
Yes, I have a favorite digital camera, but I see digital cameras as being just different enough to make them useful. By that I mean that the idiocyncracies of digital cameras have become somewhat like film stocks. You might choose one or the other because of how you and the director may see it fits your film's subject and vision best. So, let me discourage camera flame wars. Bring examples and let us all see.
Those of you who work in the biz are also welcomed to contribute and correct me when I'm not accurate or incomplete.
Let me start a new reply post now, so that we can light this candle!
My two decades + career as a feature film and TV camera operator and director of photography was mostly in the "photochemical era," but has been transitioning into the digital world for about a decade now. Needless to say, I have had a strong bias. I used to think that the original film image was always going to be the benchmark which digital images might approach someday. Even 35mm going to a DI and digital cinema looks great. A couple of years ago, and especially in the last year, I've seen digital cameras do things that I could never have believed; they can actually do a number of things better than film. Heresy!
Yes, I have a favorite digital camera, but I see digital cameras as being just different enough to make them useful. By that I mean that the idiocyncracies of digital cameras have become somewhat like film stocks. You might choose one or the other because of how you and the director may see it fits your film's subject and vision best. So, let me discourage camera flame wars. Bring examples and let us all see.
Those of you who work in the biz are also welcomed to contribute and correct me when I'm not accurate or incomplete.
Let me start a new reply post now, so that we can light this candle!