Terry VerHaar
Well-known member
Film is dead, long live film.
Film is dead, long live film.
Whenever I see commentary on this subject, usually great pains are taken to point out that the camera/technology/etc. is just a "tool" and that good films are made by talented people with good ideas and a great story. This is, of course, true and will remain so forever. But, after taking this as a given, it has to be acknowledged that the quality of the tools that the craftsman uses does have an effect on the quality of the product.
I listed to the discussion by the ASC members about digital and came away thinking that the real advantages of high quality digital platforms right now are accessibility, immediacy and future growth. Even if you lean one way or the other on which is currently the "best" way to make films today, I think that someone just getting into making "movies" today would find it easier and more immediately gratifying to pick up a Sony EX-1 or an HVX-200 or whatever and get started. Most of them have far easier acccess to these cameras than films cameras and, with the immediate feedback of digital and the ability to shoot and post all in the same day, young "filmmakers" can make their mistakes and learn more quickly.
In addition to immediacy (instant gratification in an ADD society), digital platforms like RED also represent tremendous future growth. I am sure there are those that would argue that there is still plenty of room for film to advance technologically but I think it is a pretty mature medium and the potential growth in capability doesn't begin to match that of digital (IMHO). So, whatever medium is "best" today, I personally think that the future lies with digital (RED) and that newer and younger filmmakers will naturally jump on that learning curve to ride it forward.
Terry
Film is dead, long live film.
Whenever I see commentary on this subject, usually great pains are taken to point out that the camera/technology/etc. is just a "tool" and that good films are made by talented people with good ideas and a great story. This is, of course, true and will remain so forever. But, after taking this as a given, it has to be acknowledged that the quality of the tools that the craftsman uses does have an effect on the quality of the product.
I listed to the discussion by the ASC members about digital and came away thinking that the real advantages of high quality digital platforms right now are accessibility, immediacy and future growth. Even if you lean one way or the other on which is currently the "best" way to make films today, I think that someone just getting into making "movies" today would find it easier and more immediately gratifying to pick up a Sony EX-1 or an HVX-200 or whatever and get started. Most of them have far easier acccess to these cameras than films cameras and, with the immediate feedback of digital and the ability to shoot and post all in the same day, young "filmmakers" can make their mistakes and learn more quickly.
In addition to immediacy (instant gratification in an ADD society), digital platforms like RED also represent tremendous future growth. I am sure there are those that would argue that there is still plenty of room for film to advance technologically but I think it is a pretty mature medium and the potential growth in capability doesn't begin to match that of digital (IMHO). So, whatever medium is "best" today, I personally think that the future lies with digital (RED) and that newer and younger filmmakers will naturally jump on that learning curve to ride it forward.
Terry