The Future of Film

[Tommy]

very revealing interview with executive of Kodak motion pix division
https://cheddar.com/videos/film-is-stil ... igital-age

[Mmechanic]

Thanks for putting this up. Interesting

[Silverdream]

I was enjoying seeing the counter displaying 22222 topics on this site. Such an achievement.
Now 22223.
Still, thanks for posting something new.
I do wonder why there is little action on this site of late? Maybe every topic has been covered or maybe there are no longer as many small film users?

[Will2]

Interesting take on film use skipping a generation...seems reasonable. Unfortunately a lot of knowledge in the industry may have been lost because of the "digital or bust" attitude.

He doesn't mention how much of the move to digital was pushed by long time industry veterans that were looking for digital projects to be on their resumé since it seemed like that's where everything was going. No-one wanted to be caught as the last guy using film.

[MovieStuff]

He doesn't mention how much of the move to digital was pushed by long time industry veterans that were looking for digital projects to be on their resumé since it seemed like that's where everything was going. No-one wanted to be caught as the last guy using film.

What most people don't realize is that the slow move to digital over the last 15+ years had little to do with technology. Certainly, 24p high resolution digital acquisition was "good enough" for both theatrical and television production long ago. And, before everyone dog piles on me about the superiority of film over digital, let me re-emphasize the term "good enough". Motion picture and television production are businesses, first and foremost. They will do the very least they have to on any given product they produce. Just take a look at the abysmal scripts that have come out of Hollywood for the last few decades. Now compare that to the perceived inadequacies of digital imagery. The worst of professional digital is still way better than most scripts. I'd say that if audiences aren't commanding better scripts, then they aren't likely to care much whether something was shot on film or 24p digital. So why didn't the industry rush to digital? Because, being a business that produces a product, the entire industry is governed by contracts and unions. There was over 100 years worth of pipeline already in place for film acquisition and post production. Digital came to usable maturity faster than the unions and lab contracts and editors could keep up but, again, long term contracts were already in place and unions did not have a large number of members qualified to work in the new digital arena. As the years have gone by, contracts have ended or been renegotiated and unions now have a stable of qualified members that are digital savvy. Film will be around for motion picture production as long as it is financially viable. This isn't a judgement about the quality of digital versus film. Just an observation based on industry trends.

[David M. Leugers]

Losing the knowledge of film production due to the passing of experienced users is now being offset by the incredible availability of information on the internet. Those who want to shoot film can learn a great deal and short cut the learning curve like never before. Best advice is to jump in with both feet. Shoot film and make mistakes, learn and get better each time out. It can be a very fun and rewarding experience.

I have been an avid film goer since 1959 and before I started school. I never thought there would come a time when I basically quit going to see films. Excuse me, but IMHO they are that bad overall. Combined with the reduced experience and horrible patrons of today, why waste the money? The films I have gone to over the past few years have all been actual film prints being shown. "Dunkirk" on 70mm IMAX film projection at the Indianapolis Museum was a special treat and worth the 4 hrs of driving to see it. I think most people will grow up today and never experience what we now have mostly lost. I don't know what it is, but 24fps film projection of a pristine 35mm film print is a lasting experience in my memory banks, but any digital projection I see has all the staying power and entrained attention of watching a TV game show. I can get that at home. I know Hollywood is a business, but I think they may have killed the goose. At least for me.

[Mmechanic]

Exactly the same here. Cinema with film was murdered. The initial experience, flammable perforated black-and-white film projected with carbon arc light at 16 fps or so is even more appealing once known. That is how cinema grew up. The light palaces, the ubiquitous urban distraction and stimulation. The elegant visual luxury