Jay 37,042 Posted January 21, 2014 Share Posted January 21, 2014 Anchorman 2 is the final movie Paramount will release on actual filmParamount becomes the first major studio to stop releasing movies on filmObviously things can still be shot on film, and there will always be specialty screenings of films on film stock, but going forward the major mass market releases of films are going to be all digital, perhaps as early as next year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Koray Savas 2,251 Posted January 21, 2014 Share Posted January 21, 2014 Good. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matt C 452 Posted January 21, 2014 Share Posted January 21, 2014 I think The Weinstein Company is the second one to follow suit. Much to the dismay of Quentin Tarantino... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Luke Skywalker 1,790 Posted January 21, 2014 Share Posted January 21, 2014 well at least it seems 'films' will be easier to store and more difficult to destroy by time...is film music stored digitally also, right? No more 'master tapes' disaster in the future... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jay 37,042 Posted January 21, 2014 Author Share Posted January 21, 2014 Oh yea, ALL music is recorded digitally these days, unless some hipster artist requires an album to be recorded onto tape for some reason. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
A24 4,306 Posted January 21, 2014 Share Posted January 21, 2014 ... for some reason.Tape = distortion = warmthCheers!Alex Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jay 37,042 Posted January 21, 2014 Author Share Posted January 21, 2014 Right, and the percentage of music recorded on tape in 2014 will probably be less than 1%. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
A24 4,306 Posted January 21, 2014 Share Posted January 21, 2014 But many of the digital recordings in 2014 will use this:Cheers!Alex Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dixon Hill 4,232 Posted January 21, 2014 Share Posted January 21, 2014 Lol Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BLUMENKOHL 1,068 Posted January 21, 2014 Share Posted January 21, 2014 I only watch movies on my reel projector. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Muad'Dib 1,800 Posted January 21, 2014 Share Posted January 21, 2014 Good.No. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Koray Savas 2,251 Posted January 21, 2014 Share Posted January 21, 2014 There's really no benefit to using film. It costs more to shoot on, it costs more to distribute, it costs more in terms of prep work for a projectionist and theater chain, and it's easily damaged. Plus there's no 'aesthetic look' about film that can't be replicated digitally. No one lamented the death of 35mm handhelds. Why is this a big issue? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jay 37,042 Posted January 21, 2014 Author Share Posted January 21, 2014 Good.No.You think studios should continue to snail-mail physical reels of film to movie theaters, who have to assemble them, attach trailers and light cues, and run them through a projector that worsens the quality of the film with every viewing, rather than having the movie studios beam a perfect digital copy of the film to the theaters? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marian Schedenig 8,083 Posted January 21, 2014 Share Posted January 21, 2014 There's really no benefit to using film. It costs more to shoot on, it costs more to distribute, it costs more in terms of prep work for a projectionist and theater chain, and it's easily damaged. Plus there's no 'aesthetic look' about film that can't be replicated digitally. No one lamented the death of 35mm handhelds. Why is this a big issue? There's an indirect benefit: Slower production and post production mean the film makers have to plan their films more carefully (instead of doing everything completely at the last minute, ala Peter Jackson) and there's more time for other post production disciplines like film music. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sharkissimo 1,973 Posted January 21, 2014 Share Posted January 21, 2014 Plus there's no 'aesthetic look' about film that can't be replicated digitally.Bullshit. Muad'Dib 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wojo 2,453 Posted January 21, 2014 Share Posted January 21, 2014 I don't care at all. Just make good movies that I want to see.If they can shoot movies on toilet paper at x number fps, then I would watch their tp movies. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Koray Savas 2,251 Posted January 21, 2014 Share Posted January 21, 2014 Plus there's no 'aesthetic look' about film that can't be replicated digitally.Bullshit.It's all in the cinematographer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,265 Posted January 21, 2014 Share Posted January 21, 2014 Skyfall proved that digital film can look as gorgeous as film.Digital film is also a lot more versatile. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jay 37,042 Posted January 21, 2014 Author Share Posted January 21, 2014 Well, the thrust of the article and therefore thread is that film is dying as a DISTRIBUTION method, the article was not discussing the filming techniques used to make the finished product. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,265 Posted January 21, 2014 Share Posted January 21, 2014 Spielberg still shoots on film and will continue to do so until its really impossible. Many other directors will do the same.Star Wars is being shot on film again! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BloodBoal 7,538 Posted January 21, 2014 Share Posted January 21, 2014 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jay 37,042 Posted January 21, 2014 Author Share Posted January 21, 2014 Spielberg still shoots on film and will continue to do so until its really impossible. Many other directors will do the same.Star Wars is being shot on film again! I know all that, and that is all still off topic.The article is saying that films are no longer going to be screened on film, not that films are no longer going to be shot on film (I mean, most aren't anyway, but that's not what the article is about) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sharkissimo 1,973 Posted January 21, 2014 Share Posted January 21, 2014 Skyfall proved that digital film can look as gorgeous as film.Gorgeous perhaps, but in a different way. There are a number of scenes that looked very digital. I don't mean ugly like PUBLIC ENEMIES, just mushy shadows.Plus there's no 'aesthetic look' about film that can't be replicated digitally.Bullshit.It's all in the cinematographer.I've yet to see a digitally shot film with the same light qualities as JFK, CATCH-22, DAYS OF HEAVEN, TESS, or EMPIRE OF THE SUN, to choose a few disparate examples. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bilbo 3,709 Posted January 21, 2014 Share Posted January 21, 2014 Oh yea, ALL music is recorded digitally these days, unless some hipster artist requires an album to be recorded onto tape for some reason.Foo Fighter's are the only ones of the top of my head. I'm sure there are others but they recorded Wasting Light on tape and the upcoming one is on tape also. I don't really see the point when 99% of your audience will be listening to CDs or MP3s anyway. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
A24 4,306 Posted January 21, 2014 Share Posted January 21, 2014 Oh yea, ALL music is recorded digitally these days, unless some hipster artist requires an album to be recorded onto tape for some reason.Foo Fighter's are the only ones of the top of my head. I'm sure there are others but they recorded Wasting Light on tape and the upcoming one is on tape also. I don't really see the point when 99% of your audience will be listening to CDs or MP3s anyway. CD or MP3 is perfectly capable of capturing all the virtues (like analog compression and saturation) that come with analog recordings. We watch 'film' on DVD or Blu-ray too, don't we?Cheers!Alex Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sharkissimo 1,973 Posted January 21, 2014 Share Posted January 21, 2014 Oh yea, ALL music is recorded digitally these days, unless some hipster artist requires an album to be recorded onto tape for some reason.Nothing hipster about wanting to record on tape. There is a genuine difference.http://www.soundonsound.com/sos/feb10/articles/analoguewarmth.htm Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,265 Posted January 21, 2014 Share Posted January 21, 2014 I've yet to see a digitally shot film with the same light qualities as JFK, CATCH-22, DAYS OF HEAVEN, TESS, or EMPIRE OF THE SUN, to choose a few disparate examples.I'm sure oneday you will. Digital film is still a very new innovation. Very much in development.Also, was the beauty of those movies a direct result of being shot on film? There are plenty of movies shot on film that simply look like shit.The artist (the director or DP) is far more important then the medium. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sharkissimo 1,973 Posted January 21, 2014 Share Posted January 21, 2014 There are plenty of movies shot on film that simply look like shit.Note that all of the examples I chose were produced before Digital Intermediate took over (roughly in the late 90s/early 2000s). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,265 Posted January 21, 2014 Share Posted January 21, 2014 yes. And there are plenty of films shot before the digital era that don't look very good at all. Was that because they were shot on film....or shot on film...badly? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sharkissimo 1,973 Posted January 21, 2014 Share Posted January 21, 2014 Throw me some examples man! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JoeinAR 1,949 Posted January 21, 2014 Share Posted January 21, 2014 I don't really care as long as movies are still made. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,265 Posted January 21, 2014 Share Posted January 21, 2014 Of what? There are countless films that havent been shot well.Shooting on film doesnt automatically mean quality!the examples of brilliantly shot films you mention are highlights of cinema, the zenith of a craft that has been around for a while. It is NOT the default.Give digital a chance to evolve. Eventually there will be brilliant looking film shot in that medium. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Unlucky Bastard 7,782 Posted January 21, 2014 Share Posted January 21, 2014 There is no "digital film", just video cameras. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Richard Penna 3,617 Posted January 21, 2014 Share Posted January 21, 2014 Throw me some examples man!Shawshank Redemption looks fairly poor. It has massive amounts of grain, which one of the BD releases tried to eliminate by softening the image (which made it even worse IMO).Given that this is about distribution, and not about the filming, I'm all for it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sharkissimo 1,973 Posted January 21, 2014 Share Posted January 21, 2014 Throw me some examples man!Shawshank Redemption looks fairly poor. It has massive amounts of grain,Looks fine to me. Not amazing, but nothing to complain about. I love grain - one of the things I hate about modern film stocks is the lack of grain and contrast. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
filmmusic 1,799 Posted January 21, 2014 Share Posted January 21, 2014 one of the reasons that I don't watch recent films is that they aren't shot on film and i don't like the digital look...I just don't see the magic in digital films that i see in films shot in 35mm (even in bad films). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,265 Posted January 21, 2014 Share Posted January 21, 2014 So Skyfall looks worse then Sleepless in Seatle? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Unlucky Bastard 7,782 Posted January 21, 2014 Share Posted January 21, 2014 When film is done right, it looks spectacular. When film is done badly, it looks meh. When digital is done right (ala Prometheus and Skyfall) it looks very good. When digital is done badly, it looks awful. Sharkissimo 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jim Ware 524 Posted January 21, 2014 Share Posted January 21, 2014 well at least it seems 'films' will be easier to store and more difficult to destroy by time...is film music stored digitally also, right? No more 'master tapes' disaster in the future...Digital archival is at least equally (perhaps considerably more) fragile than any analogue medium as has already been proven by a number of expansions of 'recent' digitally-recorded scores. mrbellamy 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wojo 2,453 Posted January 21, 2014 Share Posted January 21, 2014 Digital is still very easy to destroy. Erase the files. Wipe the drives with 1s and 0s, or just run over the platters with a steam roller. Shatter the flash drive. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dixon Hill 4,232 Posted January 21, 2014 Share Posted January 21, 2014 Magnets, bitch. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jay 37,042 Posted January 21, 2014 Author Share Posted January 21, 2014 I was actually reading an article last night about how many companies are now preferring tape backups over hard driveshttp://www.businessinsider.com/magnetic-tape-solves-data-storage-problems-2013-12 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matt C 452 Posted January 21, 2014 Share Posted January 21, 2014 Digital projection, in terms of presentation, is far superior to the 35mm projectors. Digital ensures a clean, crisp image for multiple showings (and no having to prepare the reel for the next show) -- however digital projectors have their own sets of problems. Replacing the projector bulb in a DLP projector is tricky, since it's more liable to shatter for one. And then come the trickier computer aspects -- sometimes the dowser goes down when the cues are slightly off. Sometimes the movie file stops playing in the middle of the show for no reason at all (which requires rebooting the projector and touchscreen monitor).On the other hand, if the movies doesn't play on time (or running late) -- it only takes like a minute or less to play the movie without previews. In that respect, I'm not sad to see 35mm projectors being phased out. I do feel sad for the 8% who are trying to upgrade in order to stay in business -- because it is a matter of time before Paramount's other rivals phase out 35mm prints too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ricard 2,235 Posted January 21, 2014 Share Posted January 21, 2014 Spielberg still shoots on film and will continue to do so until its really impossible. Many other directors will do the same.Star Wars is being shot on film again! I know all that, and that is all still off topic.The article is saying that films are no longer going to be screened on film, not that films are no longer going to be shot on film (I mean, most aren't anyway, but that's not what the article is about)Sure, but while the title of the article is very clear, the topic title is misleading; it says "death of film", period. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jay 37,042 Posted January 21, 2014 Author Share Posted January 21, 2014 But surely reading the first post of the thread and it's attached article clears things up immediately, no? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sharkissimo 1,973 Posted January 21, 2014 Share Posted January 21, 2014 When film is done right, it looks spectacular. When film is done badly, it looks meh. When digital is done right (ala Prometheus and Skyfall) it looks very good. When digital is done badly, it looks awful.This, though honestly I wasn't all that impressed by the cinematography of PROMETHEUS. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ricard 2,235 Posted January 21, 2014 Share Posted January 21, 2014 But surely reading the first post of the thread and it's attached article clears things up immediately, no?Yes, but that only happens once. When people come back to the thread what they see is the title, not the article, which they may have forgotten, and keep discussing whatever they read. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jay 37,042 Posted January 21, 2014 Author Share Posted January 21, 2014 Well, the end of film as a distribution method is one step closer to film being completely phased out anyway. It will never completely go away, but like vinyl records it will be a specialty item when it was once the norm. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ricard 2,235 Posted January 22, 2014 Share Posted January 22, 2014 Well, the end of film as a distribution method is one step closer to film being completely phased out anyway.Then we're all "on topic" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,265 Posted January 22, 2014 Share Posted January 22, 2014 We need a seperate forum for this Brónach 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now