|
|||||||||
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
November 2nd, 2004, 10:48 AM | #16 |
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 1,244
|
I'm sorry, Jack, I never got it. My spam filter may have caught it, but I go through that before I dump it. Guess I missed it!
Jay |
November 2nd, 2004, 11:32 AM | #17 |
New Boot
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Fort Worth, Texas
Posts: 15
|
<<<-- Originally posted by Bill Pryor : Well, I came from a film background many years ago and shot thousands and thousands of feet of 16mm, and shooting video at 24fps doesn't make it look like film. Lots of excellent low budget movies have been made with video, all interlaced, and they looked great. Not like film, but great. I have yet to see any DV movie shot 24fps, though I have seen some high end HD stuff shot 24fps.
I realize there's a big blitz to say you have to shoot 24fps to make anything worthwhile for theatrical projection. Sorry, but I don't buy it. -->>> Didn't mean to say, that it would completely fool anyone and look just like film. However, the 24fps motion rendering is a major component of the film look. IMHO, all the films shot interlaced (many of which get de-interlaced) would all have benefited from 24p capture.
__________________
J. Lamar King DP - Fort Worth, Texas |
November 3rd, 2004, 01:08 PM | #18 | |
Inner Circle
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Toronto, Canada
Posts: 4,750
|
Quote:
Film advantages: More exposure latitude. This gives more possibilities for lighting scenes and for color correction in post. No video artifacts. When highlights in video are about to blow out, there may be color shifts. Advantage or disadvantage: Film has shallower DOF. Film has grain. (Video can mimic this now, so video might have an advantage since it's more flexible.) Video: You can monitor video at a shoot and know what it looks like (instead of waiting for your film to be processed). You can spot mistakes on the shoot. You can shoot a lot more takes since it's cheaper. Lower cost and faster to shoot. Better for run and gun/documentary shooting (can shoot over 12 minutes without having to reload film, smaller cameras). For some people video can be better than film since you can shoot a lot more footage and let your actors improvise more. Low cost (cheaper equipment, no processing costs, less production costs) also makes the art of moving images much more accessible. |
|
| ||||||
|
|