Films on mobile phones?

[T-Scan]

I just heard on the news last night that airlines are going to be accomidating ipods by installing docking stations behind the seats.

But would anyone really be able to tell if something were shot on film or 24p on a tiny screen? If super 8 really made a difference in the picture quality (assuming picture quality is a priority to someone watching a movie that small) then I guess I would agree that it might be a match made in consumer heaven but I suspect even VHS material would look okay at that size.

Yes- I transferred my concert film onto my Ipod... a mix of 24P, 16mm, and S8. The film shots look incredible next to the 24P, the density and saturation look just as good as on anything else, just smaller and without grain. Based on what I've seen so far, the onset of the small screen could be a big plus for small guage film. If people start producing for pod casts, or the like... what is the point of using high resolve expensive stocks?

[steve hyde]

...yeah, I agree that it is a new and unique venue. The venue is well suited for some kinds of audio-visual communication and not others. I wouldn't want to watch Tarkovsky's "Mirror" on it, but I might watch an OutKast video or an interview or something like that.

On a side note. I recently looked at time series data that shows how dramatically movie theater attendance has declined in the past 10 years. IT is really dramatic. My guess is that it will continue to decline since there is no indication that there will be a theatrical revival of any kind. Ipods, home cinema systems and "underground cinemas" are clearly the wave we will be riding for the next few years. I think all of this is good news for independent producers that don't have distribution deals.

Steve

[Actor]

So how do you post credits for a feature to be seen on a mobile phone? One letter at a time scrolling by? :lol:

Roger

I often cannot read the credits on my 25 inch standard def TV. That only applies to DVDs. Stuff produced for TV usually has a big enough font that I can read it. :?

[npcoombs]

Personally i think that cinemas will become promotional avenues and social venues for the appreciation of film in the future.

1) Directors and actors (much like musicians) should spend a lot more time touring their films across the country and internationally. If you consider the time and effort it makes to put a film together, for instance Andrea Arnold's recent 'Red Road', she only did three cinema venues in the UK when really for a small release film she and the actors should have been touring every art house venue in the UK and Europe promoting the film for months.

2) Social venues, the social aspect of cinema going should be emphasized and the airport like utilitarian aspect will not survive the future.

[steve hyde]

Personally i think that cinemas will become promotional avenues and social venues for the appreciation of film in the future.

1) Directors and actors (much like musicians) should spend a lot more time touring their films across the country and internationally. If you consider the time and effort it makes to put a film together, for instance Andrea Arnold's recent 'Red Road', she only did three cinema venues in the UK when really for a small release film she and the actors should have been touring every art house venue in the UK and Europe promoting the film for months.

2) Social venues, the social aspect of cinema going should be emphasized and the airport like utilitarian aspect will not survive the future.

...well, this forum is an example of an electronic social space. In many ways forums like this one promote ongoing dialogue in ways that a couple hours at the cinema never could. I don't think airport-like utilitarian aspects are going away any faster than ipods.

What you are proposing is too cost prohibitive since release prints cost about 500.00 USD per minute to make. Who can afford to spend $45,000 for a print that won't recover that cost "on tour"? The alternative, is of course digital and digital comes with its own set of pros and cons.

Filmmaker Crispin Glover was in town here recently touring his new small gauge film "What is it?". Surrealist in form, the film covers the sexual fantasies and experiences of people with down syndrome. After the show he told us his motivations to make the film come out of a reaction to the transnational corporate entities that fund films. He wanted to make something that they wouldn't fund so that he can go on tour and talk about just that. Since he is Crispin Glover, he can pay for it himself. I doubt he will recover his investment, although with his name on the bill perhaps he will..

This week we have had a Kieslowski retrospective at the North West Film Forum with old 35mm prints. Some of the films are not available on video so it is a very unique opportunity to get a chance to see some of the films. I have been seeing them every night this week. There is usually about 12 people in the audience..

Steve

[npcoombs]

What you are proposing is too cost prohibitive since release prints cost about 500.00 USD per minute to make. Who can afford to spend $45,000 for a print that won't recover that cost "on tour"? The alternative, is of course digital and digital comes with its own set of pros and cons.

I think you misunderstand me. The film is already showing in cinemas across the UK and their are dozens of prints anyway.

The point is the director and actors should tout with the prints giving Q&As, having drinks with the audiences, release partys in different towns etc.. the marketing budget of the film could easily have covered it.

[Evan Kubota]

This week we have had a Kieslowski retrospective at the North West Film Forum with old 35mm prints. Some of the films are not available on video so it is a very unique opportunity to get a chance to see some of the films. I have been seeing them every night this week. There is usually about 12 people in the audience..

Which films? Are they shorts? Kino has been quite good about releases, and referring to my 'Kieslowski on Kieslowski' book (highly recommended) it seems that the only narrative features not on DVD are Personnel (there is an older VHS - New Yorker Films?), The Calm (approx. 45m and shot on 16mm - I have a digital version from a very old print, unsubtitled) and Short Working Day (not available at all, AFAIK).

edit - I think I know what Nathan is getting at. The current form of 'distribution' really doesn't work that well and additional opportunities for filmmakers to interact with the audience would not be unwelcome.

[super8man]

I was simply stating that super 8mm on a small screen STILL LOOKS LIKE FILM and not video and not VHS and not 24p ergo it may help the small guage formats live on quite a bit longer. And of course, as someone else pointed out - all the things and looks you get to do with super 8 remain the same. Simply stated, my PSP with an original Spiderman2 movie (made for the PSP) and my home spun music videos done in super 8 do not look remotely the same. Both are "nice" in their own way, depending upon how you determine your own personal "nice."

Now, movies on cellphones? I think they need to rotate their screens 90 degrees, make them one inch larger than they are currently and they may have something. Currently they are ALL too small to be taken seriously, unless they are used as outlets for youtube-quality vids...then all bets are off.

[sarmoti]

... since release prints cost about 500.00 USD per minute to make. Who can afford to spend $45,000 for a print that won't recover that cost

I'm assuming you mean the initial film out will cost that. Having release prints made is much, much cheaper.

I argue that super 8 is the ONLY choice for real film on the tiny screen. It may actually help super 8 stay alive for a while longer...tick tock...

The only problem wth that ideal is that grain in the source material & unsteady images makes highly compressed codecs much less efficient since the limited bit budget gets allocated to compressing grain and weave & wobble. Even Discovery HD will not accept Super 16mm originated material because it falls apart when they overcompress it in MPEG-2 for HD broadcast.

Unfortunatedly, the best source material for highly compressed media is either clean 35mm or 24p Digital video with heavy noise reduction.

[johnnhud]

At any given point I have several spongebob squarepants episodes on my phone, as well as a few 8mm transfer clips and at least 1 feature legnth movie. The spongebob's are great 11 minute shorts that are good for watching when I'm on the toilet! The 8mm stuff is always being shown to friends who I tell about what I do, and the feature legnth movie is there just because it's cool!

The screen on my phone is a 320x240 QVGA, which is amazingly clear! The phone can play video that is compressed at about 600k per second, so the quality of the video is great, it will also play back MP3 audio with the movie, so the soundtrack always sounds good too.

I like my phone.

[steve hyde]

I think you misunderstand me. The film is already showing in cinemas across the UK and their are dozens of prints anyway.

The point is the director and actors should tout with the prints giving Q&As, having drinks with the audiences, release partys in different towns etc.. the marketing budget of the film could easily have covered it.

I see. Here in Seattle we have filmmakers touring with their films all the time. This month we have already had several thanks to the North West Film Forum. I imagine London is the same story and then I'm sure fewer make it down to Exeter. I suppose it depends where you are. Actors don't tour with movies because most actors do not want to watch themselves or discuss their performances in public. "A-list" actors don't have time to tour.

Which films? Are they shorts?

Shorts:

The Office
Tram
Concert of Wishes
From the City of Lodz
I was a Soldier
Before the Rally
Factory
Bricklayer
Refrain
First Love
X-Ray
The underground Passage
Curiculum Vitae
Hospital
7 women of different ages
Talking heads
From a Night Porters' Point of View

Features

The Scar
Camera Buff
Blind Chance
No End
A Short Film about Killing (feature version)
A Short Film about Love (feature version)

I'm assuming you mean the initial film out will cost that. Having release prints made is much, much cheaper.

....yes, I mean the initial print. Too cost prohibitive to make one print for a festival our tour without a distribution deal ( or marketing plan)....

Steve

[audadvnc]

The only problem wth that ideal is that grain in the source material & unsteady images makes highly compressed codecs much less efficient since the limited bit budget gets allocated to compressing grain and weave & wobble. Even Discovery HD will not accept Super 16mm originated material because it falls apart when they overcompress it in MPEG-2 for HD broadcast.

Thanks for that explanation - I was wondering why Discovery doesn't like film.

[sarmoti]

Yeah, it's a shame. Hopefully with the transition to more efficient MPEG-4 based codecs they'll revisit the rules. That's possible if they maintain the same bitrate with the newer codec but what will probably end up happening is that they'll just cram more channels into the same bandwidth by cutting data rates per channel.

[Evan Kubota]

semi-OT

Steve: that looks like a fantastic retrospective. 'No End' and 'Blind Chance' are perhaps is most underrated films. And many of the short subject docus I've been trying to see for a while (Before the Rally, I Was a Soldier). 'Personnel' (which apparently isn't showing?) is very interesting as a sort of mid-point film during Kieslowski's transition from documentaries to narrative features - both in length (about 45 minutes) and style (shot like a docu in real settings, with non-actors, but with some fictional action and 'planted' dialogue).