How many movies are still shot on film ?

[Stefan Antonescu]

Hey,

Title says it all. Is it 50% ? More ? Less ?
I know that digital projection has taken over, but I was wondering about the actual shooting.

 

[Phil Holland]

Not very many at all.

 

[Terry VerHaar]

Kodak's numbers tell the tale. Film usage, in linear feet, has dropped 96% since 2006. That doesn't leave much.

 

[Martin Stevens]

Kodak's numbers tell the tale. Film usage, in linear feet, has dropped 96% since 2006. That doesn't leave much.

Wow, so if you have a few feet in your freezer you have .05% of all the film in the world.

Oh, I kid!

 

[David W. Jones]

The same number as it takes licks to get to the Tootsie Roll center of a Tootsie Pop.

 

[David Battistella]

http://nycppnews.com/kodak-keeps-making-movie-film-after-top-directors-push/

 

[David Battistella]

And

http://www.ropeofsilicon.com/quentin-tarantino-makes-lot-sense-discussing-dislike-digital-cinema/

 

[Saumene Mehrdady]

You're gonna get a different answer than what the norm really is because its reduser.

most high budget shows are still film

 

[Wil Wong]

Few shoot on Film and even fewer (if any) distribute on film. Maybe IMAX but otherwise...

 

[Nick Morrison]

You're gonna get a different answer than what the norm really is because its reduser.

most high budget shows are still film

I've been reading American Cinematographer religiously for 7 years, and I can say this would have been true maybe 2 years ago.

But I have to admit, especially over past 18 months, almost every movie they have covered has been shot DIGITALLY. Very few on film. The Alexa 4:3 sensor has become very popular on big budget features for Anamorphic.

That said, JJ Abrahms is shooting the new Star Wars on film I believe.

 

[Craig W. Bickerstaff]

Apparently the next Bond film is being shot on film as well, I would have thought Mendes would have stuck with Alexa after Skyfall but I guess it was Deakins who pushed for the Alexa, Even Wolf of Wall street turned out to be mostly shot on film, I think only the night stuff was done on Alexa.

 

[Paul E. McCarthy]

Didn't 20th Century Fox order 2 billion or million ft of film in 2014 it was all over the news from what I recall. I have spoken to a NY rep from Kodak. If you want to shoot film Kodak will make it happen for you. Unfortunately processing and telecine still cost a F' load. not to mention a 4k scan for the finish...

It's kinda like when the Radio Star that got killed by the Video coming back to life and killing the Video's dad.

Mind blow...

 

[Marc Wielage]

Kodak's numbers tell the tale. Film usage, in linear feet, has dropped 96% since 2006. That doesn't leave much.

Note that most of that film footage was for theatrical prints, not negative. A high-ranking Kodak official told me back in 2004 that camera negative was essentially a break even business, that they didn't make a lot of money on it. They did make a huge profit on prints. Once all the theaters began converting to digital (mainly for 3D), that was the beginning of the end. When TV shows started shooting mostly on digital in 2008, that's essentially what killed the film lab business in NY and LA.

The real scoop on film used for production can be obtained by talking to film camera rental houses and the last few labs still processing 35mm negative. The two or three I know told me before the summer that things were extremely bleak; one even told me you could get a full (name-brand) 35mm camera package for about $250 a day, and they'd give you a backup body for free.

Unfortunately processing and telecine still cost a F' load. not to mention a 4k scan for the finish...

Not really that expensive if you look at the hard numbers. Last time I checked, 1000 feet of negative + processing was about $1000, and telecine could be done at about $350/hour. Realistically, you could have an indie film shooting 10,000 feet of film a day (2 hours) and not spend more than about $15K. If you had 20-25 shooting days, you'd be looking at about $500,000 for the film aspect of it. This isn't that much of a problem for a feature in the budget range of $5M-$7M; it would be a problem if you were trying to make a movie for $1M.

I think it was the time element that hurt film more, since you can turn around digital dailies much faster than you can with film -- plus, you can set up the entire operation in an editorial office, as long as you have smart people, enough storage, and good monitoring.

 

[Saumene Mehrdady]

the two mediums will coexist, like digital and vinyl music

 

[Terry VerHaar]

the two mediums will coexist, like digital and vinyl music

Haha - yes... in about the same proportion, too. :smiley:

 

[Marc Wielage]

Haha - yes... in about the same proportion, too. :smiley:

Best laugh I've had all day.

 

[Joe Taylor]

For years I have been crowing that if motion picture film survives in anyway, it will be Super 8 as it's lone survivor. There is really no way to replicate that very unique look. 35mm, 'meh.'

To me the fact that you can now buy a Arri 435 ES from Visual Products for $4900 with 3 400' mags, an electronic shutter and a video tap, is somewhat alarming. The mags themselves would have set you back more than $6000 just 10 years ago the. The 435 body over $100,000. That alone should hint you in on the state of film in 2014. The market for film cameras is basically dead.
However, Quentin Tarantino is shooting his next western in 70mm. That excites me.

 

[NOSA OBAYIUWANA]

I remember being in film school and looking at digital stuff and saying "this stuff sucks." Now I look at film sometimes and I say "that just does not look sharp." I still love film... more 70m than 35m though. But I can't say i miss loading and checking the gate... that stuff sucked.

Digital has revolutionised African filmmaking, both in the diaspora and on the continent. That's a billion people now with a voice and a market of their own. Now who can say anything negative about that?

 

[Saumene Mehrdady]

Haha - yes... in about the same proportion, too. :smiley:

actually vinyl is having somewhat of a resurgence and its become very profitable. it certainly has its own scene/community

film and digital will be the same way

 

[Karim D. Ghantous]

For years I have been crowing that if motion picture film survives in anyway, it will be Super 8 as it's lone survivor. There is really no way to replicate that very unique look. 35mm, 'meh.'

To me the fact that you can now buy a Arri 435 ES from Visual Products for $4900 with 3 400' mags, an electronic shutter and a video tap, is somewhat alarming.

I have a Super 8 camera or two and I intend to use them. Not a priority but still, if you want to shoot a beautiful medium, film's the thing.

And I suppose that cheap 35mm cameras - Arris, no less! - might be a good thing for production companies, not taking into account the other costs. It's not alarming, it's great! What did Lisa Simpson say? "Did you know that the Chinese use the same word for 'crisis' as they do for 'opportunity'? "