|
|
This topic comprises 4 pages: 1 2 3 4
|
|
Author
|
Topic: Last can of Taken 2
|
|
|
|
|
Jonathan Wood
Expert Film Handler
Posts: 206
From: Oxfordshire, United kingdom
Registered: Jan 2008
|
posted 02-09-2013 04:55 AM
quote: Manny Knowles was the last to post
People who like the dust and scratches are stupid.
Hardly stupid Manny, just I think in this context misunderstood!
How many times have you seen something on tv given the 'old film look' a post effect that overlays false grain, print weave and scratches? Its this I meant; the nostalgia and cultural association we all have for film. Obviously no one wants to pay good money to see a beat up print, but for me there is something about seeing A LITTLE dust and the ODD scratch especially on an older movie, it reminds us that we are watching something that has been physically created by human beings rather than a series of 1's and 0's, streamed from a black box. It was probably the the imperfections of film as a child that initially made me curious about what the stuff was in the first place. I know this is Film TECH and I dont expect that many people to agree but as a working DOP who has spent his working life shooting both film and Digital; I have lost track of the number of times that Directors have asked me for a 'film look'and there have been many occasions when a film grain has been overlaid in post along with a light dust speckle ! This might seem crazy to some, but if you consider it in the cultural sense it helps people to subconciously connect to what they are watching. It's almost as if the Director believes that its the 'filminess' of the image , warts and all, that gives the image its gravitas and vitality? Anyway its all in my opinion, but its rude to say people are stupid for having an opinion.
BTW I'm very tired of hearing that 'as the director intented' nonsense. This is a phrase coined up my marketing types designed to sell us wide screen DVD's of 4:3 VHS' we already owned ! Sure some directors have a vision and some dont know what it is until they see it, in my experience ! And that vision changes with each generation as new technologies allow us to see old films with new clarity, compare the VHS and Blu Ray of The Red Shoes, I hardly think Powel and Pressburger could have envisioned that ! Anyway, talk about off topic! ![[Smile]](smile.gif)
| IP: Logged
|
|
Ramon Lamarca Marques
Expert Film Handler
Posts: 186
From: Edgware, England, UK
Registered: Feb 2006
|
posted 02-09-2013 07:19 AM
quote: Jonathan Wood
the nostalgia and cultural association we all have for film
Absolutely spot on Jonathan, I have made similar comments in the past. There is an emotional connection many of us have to film. I have complained in the past about many bad 35mm repertoire prints that have been screened and so I do not enjoy a bad 35mm print. A while ago I went to see Yolanda and the thief just to enjoy the Technicolor colours and the 35mm print the British Film Institute has is atrocious, the hues are all wrong, a DVD screening would have been better. Nevertheless seeing a good 35mm repertoire print manages to take me back to that era, a bit like seeing original objects in a museum. It does it in a way that a very pristine DCP with very clean digital sound doesn’t. It is all subjective but I like it!
However, as it has been said on Film-Tech, digital has managed to remove people who know about image presentation from theatres. The other day I went to see Life of Pi. The adverts were all shown in fast forward mode. I thought to myself, digital is great! Then the film started and there was more flickering than seeing an 8mm print on an IMAX screen (and it was digital 3-D). It was dreadful. The sound was almost non-existent. I went out to complain and there were only popcorn engineers available, who looked at me like if I was talking nonsense. I came back to the auditorium frustrated. More people complained and they started the film again, it did not work, more complaints. Someone came to check the screening. He checked the 3-D screening, without glasses, and said it was fine. More complaints, finally the 3rd time and with 30 minutes of delay the image was OK but the sound was not. More complaints. The sound was finally fixed. I no longer go to a big cinema chain in the UK because they show flat films through 3-D polarisers because they can’t be bothered to remove them. This is my main fear with digital, quality control. And I want better blacks and 4K as a standard.
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Jay Glaus
Expert Film Handler
Posts: 123
From: Pittsburgh, PA USA
Registered: Dec 2010
|
posted 02-09-2013 12:41 PM
Brain wraps lol, I'll never forget a brain wrap one night that induced panic in a guy in the field who claimed the booth was on fire when he saw the film burn through. Afterwards we explained to him what actually happened but he was still insistent the booth was burning down, we ran in there and put it out, and just didn't want to say so.
Anyhow, putting my two cents worth in on the film. I was suprised this past year the amount of problems we had with prints. I had a reel of Dark Shadows that looked like someone took it in the shower with them which was a new print, water marks galore. They sent us a new reel for that one. Then, MIB3, half of the film on a new print was so warped and bent, I thought I could play it however, which I did. But the first 4 reels you could see how it wouldn't sit right going through the gate, so I had to assist with focus between characters at times. Tried everything I could think of, tension, everything. They ended up sending me a whole new print and it was fine. I think there was a third one this past year too but I can't think of which one it was.
We've always had a new print come with an issue once every blue moon, but never quite as often as this past year. Don't know if that has to do with the digital conversion and making less prints or what. Just thought I'd throw it out there.
Jay
Oh and P.S., I do like the look of film, think film is great, and will miss it much, just as long as it is printed well.
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
Manny Knowles
"What are these things and WHY are they BLUE???"
Posts: 4247
From: Bloomington, IN, USA
Registered: Feb 2002
|
posted 02-09-2013 03:17 PM
quote: Jonathan Wood
for me there is something about seeing A LITTLE dust and the ODD scratch especially on an older movie, it reminds us that we are watching something that has been physically created by human beings rather than a series of 1's and 0's, streamed from a black box.
Do you honestly think that a movie that is projected digitally was not made by humans?
quote:
but as a working DOP who has spent his working life shooting both film and Digital;
I have said MANY times on here that I'm 100% in favor of shooting on film and archiving to film. I trust cinematographers and archivists with film. Sad to say but, generally speaking, I don't trust today's "projectionists" with actual film. I've projected quite a few restored movies via D-Cinema and the "film look" comes across very well.
quote: Jonathan Wood
BTW I'm very tired of hearing that 'as the director intented' nonsense. This is a phrase coined up my marketing types
That may be where the phrase came from but I believe the sentiment had already existed -- they just gave it a name. But let's play pretend -- if the filmmakers don't care and it's a free-for-all, then it doesn't matter if we play a pristine print, or a battered print, or a DCP -- or if people just watch it on their iPods.
It may be true that many directors don't have a vision, but should the great directors suffer because we're playing to the lowest common denominator?
quote: Ramon Lamarca Marques
digital has managed to remove people who know about image presentation from theatres.
It also removed A TON OF PEOPLE who knew nothing about image presentation from theatres.
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
Jonathan Wood
Expert Film Handler
Posts: 206
From: Oxfordshire, United kingdom
Registered: Jan 2008
|
posted 02-10-2013 06:14 AM
[It may be true that many directors don't have a vision, but should the great directors suffer because we're playing to the lowest common denominator?]
No one is suggesting we pander to the lowest common denominator; its an industry after all and all industries are dictated to by economics. Only a few top directors will be able to call ALL the shots. I would argue that it's a producers' industry and this is always where the power is, it's just more palatable to talk about the 'director's vision' rather than the producers. Not to say of course that directors are without input or vision, look at people like Terrence Mallick and Wes Anderson, as close as you can get to true auteres.
Years ago before I started shooting, I went for an interview for a TK grader at the BBC in London. I went happily through the initial technical selection process and then I came face to face with a panel of BBC dinosaurs who asked me what I thought about pan and scan. This was the 80's - the age of 4:3 TV's and before the vogue of showing letterboxed films, and I genuinely hated seeing anamorphic films pan and scanned , so I said I thought that films shot anamorphically should be transferred in a letter box format. They looked at me as if I were from Mars and quietly asked me if that meant I wouldn't be intending to use the millions of pounds worth of new pan and scan TK equipment they had just installed? How times have changed. (I didnt get the job. )
And of course I dont believe that digitally projected movies are not made by humans. ( Everyone knows they are fashioned in the depths of Venusian mines by slave labour ? )
Also, I know there are/were some uncaring projectionists out there but there were/are also of lot of dedicated people who were passionate about film, shame they are all facing an uncertain future.
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
All times are Central (GMT -6:00)
|
This topic comprises 4 pages: 1 2 3 4
|
Powered by Infopop Corporation
UBB.classicTM
6.3.1.2
The Film-Tech Forums are designed for various members related to the cinema industry to express their opinions, viewpoints and testimonials on various products, services and events based upon speculation, personal knowledge and factual information through use, therefore all views represented here allow no liability upon the publishers of this web site and the owners of said views assume no liability for any ill will resulting from these postings. The posts made here are for educational as well as entertainment purposes and as such anyone viewing this portion of the website must accept these views as statements of the author of that opinion
and agrees to release the authors from any and all liability.
|
Home
![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
Printer-friendly view of this topic