Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Register Log in
  • Hey all, just changed over the backend after 15 years I figured time to give it a bit of an update, its probably gonna be a bit weird for most of you and i am sure there is a few bugs to work out but it should kinda work the same as before... hopefully :)

RED vs. 16 mm

lrgebhardt said:
Go for the RED. I think it is the future, whether RED or (gad!..sorry about this...) someone else...just like the digital still world...people still shoot film for it's "Better" image, but they are a very few.
Click to expand...

Hi,

I generally get paid more money when shooting Film, so most of the work I take is shooting film. It's easier as well!

Stephen
 
gwertheim said:
It's not that i haven't worked on film before. Looking to the future, I think working with RED would look better on a resume, but some of my teachers think film would look better.

It's a constant battle between the two formats for me.
Click to expand...

Your first post seemed to imply that the school pays for 16mm but not Red? That's not correct, is it?

Okay, so you've shot on film. Several people seemed to have missed that point. Have you shot on Red? It's your project. You know the details and what you want to do with it. You are the one that knows the people you are going to work with, right? So, obviously as far as the project itself, no one can give you any advice that is better than your own judgment.

As I don't think anyone can tell you what's best for the project, what do you really want people to offer their opinion on? What looks best on a résumé? That seems like a reasonable question, but again, it depends on details not given. What kind of jobs do you expect you'd be applying for? Who would see this résumé?

I, personally, can't imagine choosing 16mm over Red, but you're the one asking.
 
lightman said:
I, personally, can't imagine choosing 16mm over Red, but you're the one asking.
Click to expand...

Hi,

That sounds as if you have never shot film professionally, if there was a lot of hand holding I know which I would choose!

Stephen
 
lightman said:
:) ... well, we are talking about a student film, aren't we?
Click to expand...

Hi,

Yes but your giving advice to someone who will become a pro, having experiance in shooting film is very valuable, I stopped shooting film for 10 years because video was trendy. Having a choice in life is nice!

Stephen
 
Stephen Williams said:
Hi,

Yes but your giving advice to someone who will become a pro, having experiance in shooting film is very valuable, I stopped shooting film for 10 years because video was trendy. Having a choice in life is nice!

Stephen
Click to expand...

Which he said he has. He didn't say he had Red experience, if I am not mistaken? And I didn't offer that as advice, that was just my enthusiasm. My advice was that he elaborate on what he really wants to know, as I don't think he's given quite enough information to really get good advice. But, that's just my opinion. ;) :innocent:

(And I agree, by the way. I definitely value my 16mm experience!)
 
I am going to chime in here again........shoot film now while you have the chance.

I always thought while i came up thru the ranks how much more difficult it must have been when the fastest film stock around was 125 ASA and the exposure latitude was 3 over and 2 under(or something like that). I even recall reading somewhere that most of Kubrick's 2001 was shot on 50ASA.

nowadays, film stock is so forgiving that it is possible to keep your meter safely tucked away until you need your shooting stop. That is how I work when I shoot film. You just have to learn to evaluate light in this way. It takes time and experience and there is no short cut for this.

For years there has been this prediction of the death of film. I find the use of the word "death" inappropriate. What we are really seeing is an additional type of capture method. We might see film as a capture method become less accessible (financially or otherwise), but at the moment film still lives and used on a professional basis.

I am off to South Africa for a commercial shoot in a few days and we have 100 rolls (40,000ft) of 35mm budgeted...in my eyes, it doesn't get much better than this, but my next job after this will be shot entirely on RED. I can't wait. I love the film experience and I love the RED/digital experience, but they are two totally different animals. Learn them both. Make them your friend.

Eric
 
I would consider your professor's opinions and academic politics too. You might get downgraded for going against the flow, if that matters too you.
 
I just noticed this thread, revived, at the top of the list. The last posting by the owner of the thread was in August. But the community still has something to say.

I own a RED but if I had someone picking up the tab on film production costs, I would shoot film.
 
David Rasberry said:
I would consider your professor's opinions and academic politics too. You might get downgraded for going against the flow, if that matters too you.
Click to expand...

Hi,

Going against the flow is quite important in this business, producing the best results possible for the given budget is more important. Has the professor personally done any work of distinction, or does he teach because that's all he can do?

Stephen
 
Shoot film, if you have the chance. It may be the last time you ever get to do so and the experience will be useful for the rest of your career.
 
Stephen Williams said:
Hi,

Going against the flow is quite important in this business, producing the best results possible for the given budget is more important. Has the professor personally done any work of distinction, or does he teach because that's all he can do?

Stephen
Click to expand...

I agree, Stephen. My next stills project is an editorial piece. After some testing it's been decided it will be shot entirely with two ancient Agfa Record 6x9 film cameras and Kodak Tri-X film, one with uncoated optics purchased off eBay for $12.

In this business, I find it's often the people who take their own path that get the best jobs. If it were me, I'd let everyone else shoot HD, I'd go with 16mm.

-Fran
 
If your school is paying for film and processing, DEFINITELY shoot on film. You might NEVER get this experience again, specially for free. And the knowledge you will acquire from the experience will help you be a more well rounded cinematographer, whether shooting video or film in the future.

One of the things that cinematographers love the most about RED cameras is that the shooting workflow is very similar to that of shooting film. If you don't ever learn this workflow, you will never have a true understanding of what current and past cinematographers went through and how they made decisions to achieve the "look" they were after. Just a thought.

Xoce
 
Jose Alvarez said:
You might NEVER get this experience again
Click to expand...

Heard this argument several times now. But why??? Why learn a medium you will never use again? Same logic as; if you are graphic student don't use DTP, use old metal types. If you are planning to be an architect, don't use CAD, use a pencil. Product designers don't use 3D render programs... I don't get it!
 
Jonas Nyström said:
Heard this argument several times now. But why??? Why learn a medium you will never use again? Same logic as; if you are graphic student don't use DTP, use old metal types. If you are planning to be an architect, don't use CAD, use a pencil. Product designers don't use 3D render programs... I don't get it!
Click to expand...

Hi,

Film will be around for a very long time, if you choose to ignore the highest paid part of the industry thats fine by me. I am happy to say you're not the only one who doesn't get it. :innocent:

I do know an architect who does multi million euro projects that prefers sketching with a pencil.

Stephen
 
The-Wrestler-Fox-Searchlight.jpg

The Wrestler starring Mickey Rourke and directed by Darren Aronofsky just won the Golden Lion at the 2008 Venice Film Festival.

Shot on Super16 with Arriflex 416, Zeiss Ultra Prime Lenses.

Trailer HD1080p>>>

Tech specs>>>
 
Jonas Nyström said:
Heard this argument several times now. But why??? Why learn a medium you will never use again? Same logic as; if you are graphic student don't use DTP, use old metal types. If you are planning to be an architect, don't use CAD, use a pencil. Product designers don't use 3D render programs... I don't get it!
Click to expand...

Hi Jonas,

When CAD drawings are hung in galleries, I'll agree with that logic.

BTW it's funny you mention CAD. The agency creative for a shoot I did in September said his biggest complaint about digital imaging is it makes everything look like a CAD drawing.:)

Nice work on your site, BTW.

-Fran

http://www.frankuhn.com
 
Jonas Nyström said:
Heard this argument several times now. But why??? Why learn a medium you will never use again? Same logic as; if you are graphic student don't use DTP, use old metal types. If you are planning to be an architect, don't use CAD, use a pencil. Product designers don't use 3D render programs... I don't get it!
Click to expand...

Shooting film will teach you more about cinematography than shooting on HD. It's not so important as to what format you shoot, but to increase your knowledge as a cinematographer. Look at what you can gain with film... the red cameras will be around forever and you'll have so many chances to shoot that, as you will with film. But you would be better off learning more about this now as a student, then a few years down the road when you're hired on. can't make mistakes then!
 
Jonas Nyström said:
Heard this argument several times now. But why??? Why learn a medium you will never use again? Same logic as; if you are graphic student don't use DTP, use old metal types. If you are planning to be an architect, don't use CAD, use a pencil. Product designers don't use 3D render programs... I don't get it!
Click to expand...

Jonas, with all due respect, I find your logic that sounds like....don't waste your time shooting film, a bit surprising. I mean, come on, this is all about the learning process for a film student. Plus I assure you that film on a high end professsional level will be a viable capture medium longer than you think. I might have taken your quote a bit harder than you meant it, but it really sounds uninformed. I guarantee, anyone who has never shot film and has no film projects on their reel during the next 3-5 years will not get that film job they really want.

RED is stupid cool, but film is stupid cool too.

I only wish I had shot more Ektachrome and Kodachrome (that is some great stock...check out "Three Kings") before telecine and other post processes such DI, rendered it obsolete(read financially not viable)..but if I have a chance and could justify it creatively I would still shoot it.
I wish I had shot more 22 or 31 for the same reason...

OH.....one last thing.....the guy who started this thread is AWOL or MIA or whatever you want to call it...I PM's him several times to find out what he ended up doing, but I have yet to get a response...so GWERTHEIM, if you are out there.....what did you end up doing?

Eric
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top