- Thread starter
- #21
FREUDENBERG_FILMS
Member
- Joined
- Feb 5, 2008
- Messages
- 9
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 0
freudenberg_films - you might want to take a closer look at star wars attack of the clones that you where refering to. the amount of cg in that pic is missleading - i always thought. observing the bit of actors and props that where actually shot - not computer generated - where interestingly unsofisticated looking.
in fact, lucas stated (can't recall the source anymore though) after shooting the new star wars movies, that he wouldn't necesarily shoot everything on digital cameras anymore but choose the right format for each occasion.
tanner
Very true. His future movie based on the first African American fighter pilots will be shot on 35mm I believe Mr Lucas stated. But a lot of his elements and models where not all computer generated either. ILM have a saying when it comes to effects and that is if it can be done in camera then we will do it in camera. Why build a city in 3D when it can be done practically in half the time and still have the same effect.
Don't get me wrong I love my HVX202en camera. The reason I bough it was for it's image quality and its 4.2.2 pull down. The 4.2.2 allows me to pull a far better key out of my footage then say a DVX100a. In fact I'm shooting a shot film on the HVX but I want to make a 90 min TV movie once I finished. The HVX could pull it off but I want a camera that I can make a real nice DOF. Sure you can stick an adapter on the front to do this on the HVX but you lose image quality. I only want to lose image quality if I want to add filters and add noise in post. A kind of byproduct of the new HD technology I thinks.