Scary or the future ?

Discusss your Cinematography hardware, Cameras, Lenses, Grip, Rigs etc here
Post Reply

Are film(raw stock) cameras goin to be obsolete from cinema ?

YES
2
67%
NO
1
33%
CAN'T SAY
0
No votes
 
Total votes: 3

User avatar
Saihmee Dara Singh
Jr. Member
Jr. Member
Posts: 97
Joined: Thu Nov 30, 2006 7:11 pm

Scary or the future ?

Post by Saihmee Dara Singh »

Is this gonna be the future of cinema arts...scary scenario...Thats a i-phone with a lens adapter..
Attachments
iphone4-dslr-07-07-2010.jpg
iphone4-dslr-07-07-2010.jpg (24.79 KiB) Viewed 7752 times
User avatar
Paramvir Singh
Hero Member
Hero Member
Posts: 677
Joined: Thu Nov 23, 2006 12:54 pm
Location: Mumbai
Contact:

Re: Scary or the future ?

Post by Paramvir Singh »

unfortunately the answer is yes.

the things that go in favour of digital are that its producer and inexperienced director friendly.

I had mentioned to some people on the forums and outside that one of the key qualities requird to be a successfull film maker is to be a hustler. there are many people out there with inadequate talent or scripts or ideas, but on the basis on their ability to hustle, they are able to bag projects. their lack of experience or knowledge, and of course the lack of ability to trust their fellow collaborators (read: Cinematographer, Audiographer, Editor etc) makes them lean heavily towards digital, thinking that they are getting what they can see. Something they cant have with film, because only the Cinematographer (and often other experienced key crew) know what mage is being recorded.

Also these are the guys who call the shots, they shape where the technology is heading, and they follow misunderstood trends. Like the trend on shooting on the Canon 5D. I have seen tonnes of material shot on the 5D, where they havent used the ONLY ONE reason why it should be used. Even in terms of cost, the SonyEX3 or Z7 or similar camera systems are cheaper, providing the same quality results.
User avatar
Saihmee Dara Singh
Jr. Member
Jr. Member
Posts: 97
Joined: Thu Nov 30, 2006 7:11 pm

Re: Scary or the future ?

Post by Saihmee Dara Singh »

Yeah Param ,I agree with you ..But for the same reason a forum like this becomes more important so that people who have confusion or misconceptions regarding a particular technology or so called trend can get their doubts cleared ..But alas...

Cinematographers or any-one reading this please share your views too...
bakulmatiyani
Newbie
Newbie
Posts: 44
Joined: Tue Nov 25, 2008 11:39 am

Re: Scary or the future ?

Post by bakulmatiyani »

I have a few questions that i would like to put to everyone who reads this post and i would greatly appreciate it if you could take just a min and even reply with a yes or a no.

1. Are we needlessly fearing/ shying away/ running down, a new technology that is still in a very nascent stage of development (compared to the existing film cameras)?

2. although the prospect shown in the picture above of the i 535 camera shall we call ;P it is scary and funny at the same time, will it really be such a bad thing?

3. if digital cameras can make the film-making process more affordable and accessible to a wider range of people what is exactly wrong with that?

4. this one is more an observation than a question; every year India churns out about 150-170 mainstream Hindi films out of which maybe 10-15 are hits and if we are lucky maybe 3-5 are even good films. This sad little number is less than 2% of the films that are made. So in light of this fact even if the digital medium coughs up more bad filmmakers what are we really loosing, I see it from a slightly more optimistic perspective that we just might stumble upon some great gems in terms of both films and filmmakers which considering the otherwise prohibitive cost would have never seen the light of day or rather the light of a projector :D

Any way these are merely the ramblings of an editor with nothing better to do with his time while reel no 3 exports for DI in the background rendering me jobless (pun intended) for 20 mins. If any one happens to find themselves in a similar situation please do take the efforts to reply to this one.
User avatar
Pooja Sharma
Newbie
Newbie
Posts: 22
Joined: Thu Nov 23, 2006 8:19 pm
Location: Mumbai
Contact:

Re: Scary or the future ?

Post by Pooja Sharma »

Can't say I agree entirely with Param. An EX3 or Z7 may be cheaper than Canon 5D, and give the same quality, but not the same look. Which is why I suppose so many people are getting hooked to it, even though it comes with its own set of headaches... I should know, I picked it over the EX3 and the Panasonic P2, both great cameras. Although admittedly, in that case, there were other factors at play as well.

Curious also to know though what is the ONLY REASON why it should be used??

And Bakul, to answer your questions,
1. nobody in their right minds can afford to shy away from new technology. I think this is more an expression of dismay (correct me the two sardars of my batch, if I'm wrong!) at misconceptions surrounding new technologies, especially around how they compare with film.
2. Nope, probably not, because of 3. and 4.
IMHO

Ofcourse, nothing compares with film. Still.
User avatar
Saihmee Dara Singh
Jr. Member
Jr. Member
Posts: 97
Joined: Thu Nov 30, 2006 7:11 pm

Re: Scary or the future ?

Post by Saihmee Dara Singh »

Bakul i agree with you to a extent too...

Pooja its not about dismay , i love analog sound or rather the world loves it, we are going back to vinyl records (recent hindi film albums are available on LP too,and i mean 2010 and 2011 films) so u see ,its about adapting to a certain technology for the better OR just adapting to newer technology cos the world is doing it and at what cost(not monetary ;) )

Above examples in relation to sound cos u guys are better judge of moving images , we can talk about sound as much :)


Ofcourse, nothing compares with film. Still.[pooja's quote]

I think the above sums up everything O0 aint it pooja ?

Am happy atleast and thankfull that atleast we are engaging in some discussion ..tnks pooja,bakul..i hope more will join....cheers
User avatar
Paramvir Singh
Hero Member
Hero Member
Posts: 677
Joined: Thu Nov 23, 2006 12:54 pm
Location: Mumbai
Contact:

Re: Scary or the future ?

Post by Paramvir Singh »

Hi Bakul

Film still remains the technically most superior image acquisition and storage format. Having said that, everyone in the world has the right to shoot their stories on whatever is good for them, even if its pin hole cameras with oiled butterpaper. The important thing is, we must get over this 'lets make a film (or rather, video)' , and move on to 'lets push the craft'.

No one seems to be excited at the prospect of pushing the craft. All that I see around me (locally), whether shot on 5D/7D/Red/Alexa/Baby's Diapers/whatever, is soooooo boring.

we will come to your rendering a little later. But to answer your questions:

1) 1. Are we needlessly fearing/ shying away/ running down, a new technology that is still in a very nascent stage of development (compared to the existing film cameras)? :

No we are NOT. BECAUSE we indulge in new technology, we run away from a camera. Why? Because as heads of departments, our job is to suggest the best possible means of achieving the best possible results. Costs are the production department's job. And anyway, after a film has released, we cant print pamphlets of justification to media and audience "paise nahin the to VHS pe shoot kiya, lekin story to dekhiye aap... "

Also we have spent substantial amount of time shooting on various formats like VHS, UMatic, MiniDV, iPhone, various other phones etc. For top jobs, at our age and experience, we want top gear.


2) 2. although the prospect shown in the picture above of the i 535 camera shall we call ;P it is scary and funny at the same time, will it really be such a bad thing?

No Comments.

3. if digital cameras can make the film-making process more affordable and accessible to a wider range of people what is exactly wrong with that?

I also wear the turban of a producer. and camera cost doesn't affect the overall cost of a film significantly anyway, if you consider professional workflows. we ALWAYS had cameras like 8mm, VHS, MiniDV etc available to make films. But the interesting thing is, i am yet to hear of any pathbreaking film shot on MiniDV ('Lets Talk' can hardly be called path breaking). Just because someone can make a film cheap, doesn't mean she is going to make it well.


4) this one is more an observation than a question; every year India churns out about 150-170 mainstream Hindi films out of which maybe 10-15 are hits and if we are lucky maybe 3-5 are even good films. This sad little number is less than 2% of the films that are made. So in light of this fact even if the digital medium coughs up more bad filmmakers what are we really loosing, I see it from a slightly more optimistic perspective that we just might stumble upon some great gems in terms of both films and filmmakers which considering the otherwise prohibitive cost would have never seen the light of day or rather the light of a projector:

Ahem, maybe we can concentrate on making these 170 mainstream films better to begin with? But its a personal choice.

That apart, people can choose to shoot on whichever format they wish too. But I just wished they would spend more time disucssing the quality of their script rather than some gizmotic new medium to shoot on. Seriously, I would rather we have 50 fantastic films made each year THAN 500 horrid ones.

@Pooja: The only advantage of the Canon 5D for video is lensing. In that too, shallow depth of field. Something which I haven't seen explored in any 5D video locally shot by excited folk.


The other aspect of lensing, perspective, is geometrically and optical possible with pretty much any other camera format.

The 5D is essentially a stills camera. Making it work for motion picture work is like performing a surgery with a kitchen knife instead of a professional surgical knife. Give me an EX3 anyday.

Here's someone's interesting witing
"I think it depends on what type of shooting you do, and what you want to do in the future. Personally, I own both the EX1 and GH1 (and pre-ordered a 7D this morning). Each project I shoot runs into the hundreds of gigabytes of footage, and sometimes into the terabytes. The idea of shooting and syncing audio for that much footage shot on any DSLR is a non-starter. It wouldn't matter if the image of the 7D was dipped in angel's blood and cured cancer, it just won't work as the main acquisition camera for my work.

Price is also a bit misleading. Sure, you can get the 7D (as I have ordered) with the kit lens for $1899. But chances are you'll find yourself adding other lenses, support equipment and other gear with the ultimate goal of making the 7D work more like a full-sized camera. And if you're anything like me (or many others on this board), you'll end up with a camera that delivers great images, but comes with a somewhat convoluted (double-system) workflow and lots of moving parts. This works for some, but not so well for others.

My work involves quickly being able to pull the camera out and start shooting. If I had to wrangle a Zoom H4N, a stabilizer/mount system and more, I'd likely miss the action in front of my, and I would have some unhappy clients. DSLRs make working this way a bit more challenging, though still possible, with some sacrifices."
Post Reply