Those with the spider senses to discern such things have a habit of claiming film "just looks better," much in the same way audiophiles can tell that vinyl "just sounds better," but these both circle back to the inherently vague "know it when I see it" phenomenon.įilmstrips are a living thing - they degrade and expand and contract and mutate and warp over time based on the conditions they’re left in. Though digital photography may be more practical, film has aesthetic merits that aren’t as easily pinpointed. So digital is the solution, right? Not so fast. Digital is theoretically pristine forever (assuming file formats remain uniform, which isn't always a given). Film degrades over time, which means that individual copies can often get quite dingy. Recent technological advances have streamlined this process beyond what the filmmakers of bygone eras could have even imagined. As such, transportation, preservation, and even tinkering with the look of the finished product are now simpler than ever before. Digital video doesn’t really exist in the same way that MP3s don’t exist. Instead of these potentially error-ridden physical procedures, many cameras now save these images as data to a digital bank, which can then be accessed like any other file.
The advent of videotape and the handheld video camera made physical media somewhat easier to work with, but all it takes is one afternoon spent carefully respooling the magnetic tape on a VHS cassette (or one VCR chewing up a bunch of that tape) to realize how easily ruined it all is. If that sounds like a long, laborious process with tons of room for mechanical and human error, that’s because it is.
(Some cameras can also take more than 24 frames per second - see motion smoothing, above - but this generally produces an image that looks too real to our used-to-24-fps eyes.) It would then be treated with chemicals and displayed for showings by running the reels containing these strips of pictures through a projector. Once upon a time, all movies were shot using machines that would take 24 photographs or "frames" every second and instantaneously leave a negative of those images on a filmstrip. Just what is Tarantino talking about here? When someone pushes his glasses high up on his nose, raises a finger, and creaks, "Actually, film is…" chances are he’s about to explain the difference between analog and digital filmmaking. To me, that's just television in public." The fight is lost if all we have is digital, DCP presentations. He added, "If we're acquiescing to digital projection, we've already ceded too much ground to the barbarians. "If I can't shoot on film I'll stop making movies," Tarantino said on Los Angeles radio station KCRW's show The Treatment. What is film? What is digital? Director Quentin Tarantino has been at the center of many conversations about film versus digital.
IMAGE OF SEE SPOT RUN DVD CASE MOVIE
The general public might not be able to define what 35mm film or the Academy ratio is, but they instantly recognize both from years of movie watching. You know this stuff - you just don't know you know it. We have the innate ability to recognize differences in image, but few of us ever learn what causes those variations. And Canadian director Xavier Dolan has gone after Netflix UK for displaying his movie in the wrong /U7MvgUtlcf Quentin Tarantino's The Hateful Eight is filmed in a mostly extinct format, and much of the film's press has been centered on that fact. The disconnect between the unfamiliarity most people have with the process that produces this image and the instant familiarity these same folks have with its effects - that weird-looking image - is both paradoxical and entirely typical of matters concerning motion picture format.Īnd this is a discussion that's only heating up. That feature is easily turned off - and we're here to explain what all of the above means. To many of you, that will sound like gibberish, but don’t worry. It's a result of what’s called "motion smoothing," also often called the "soap opera effect," a process that artificially increases the frame rate of a program by interpolating images between the 24 frames that televisions usually run every second. You know that’s not how TV’s supposed to look.īut there's an easy explanation for this. You may not be able to place a name on what’s happening, but you still instantly recognize the distracting, crisp falseness of the image. We, or someone we know, have said something similar to the above when faced with just this situation.
IMAGE OF SEE SPOT RUN DVD CASE TV
Picture a TV that appears to be displaying a cheap, unnatural-looking image, even though it's just come out of the box. It’s the picture on the TV it just looks … too real."
0 kommentar(er)
