Hi, Marc!marc wrote:Tough pill to swallow? most of us swallowed that pill a long time ago when we saw countless footage of ours and/ or other people's home movie footage. That was our education in the difference between quality and simple trigger pulling.
Well, obviously, you and other caring people like you are not the super 8 film makers I was referring to. There are a lot of super 8 film makers out there that care about quality and the end result shows. However, they are the exception and not the rule, from what I've seen over the years. My point is simply that many super 8 film makers don't really use their "full-auto-everything" super 8 cameras any differently than many using their "full-auto-everything" miniDV cameras. The only difference is that one gets an automatic, genuine "film look" by using super 8 and THAT difference seems to be the cheat that too many amateur film makers rest their laurels on; as if it merely "being film" somehow elevated their efforts to a level above the same shot on miniDV. Those people are the ones, I think, that are the most threatened by the coming digital revolution because their film look "trick" will become common place.
I've seen the miniDV 24P and it looks damned good. Not Kodachrome but, hey, there's always room for different types of "film look" other than Kodachrome in the world. I still prefer the look of K40 for super 8 but I can see how those super 8 "film makers" (and I use that term loosely) with a vested interest in protecting their egos would bristle at the thought of vidiots armed with 24P miniDVs edging in on their turf. For THOSE super 8 film makers, the coming advent of 24P miniDV IS going to be a though pill to swallow as the limitations of their own material will suddenly be more obvious than before and the fact that it is Kodachrome won't be enough to differentiate it from the other 24P point and shoot hacks.
As you say, any village idiot can pull the trigger and, in most villages, there's already enough idiots around. Don't need more, regardless of whether the medium is "true" film or "digital" film. So, in that sense, I think you and I are in agreement: Content and expertise is what sets the final results apart, not the medium. To that end (and as it relates to this thread) I would rather have good entertaining content, even on 24P, than boring and underachieved content on 24F where, too often, the mere fact that it is 24F is supposed to engender some sort of reverence that supersedes all other deficiencies.