Just one comment before we start to ignore Mr. Bill.
The format issue really boils down to the 'effectiveness' of the 'reality
effect.'
The larger image size of 35mm allows for greater magnification without an
undue enlargement of the underlying grain structure of the film--as tends to
be the case with 16mm--resulting in a more convincing re-presentation and
audience reception of 'reality.'
Digital video has an image that appears 'ultra' real, or surreal because of
the underlying structure of the computer chip used to capture the image.
Unlike film, which has a grain structure that is random in both size and
dispersion across the image area, the pixels (on the video camera chip) are
equally sized and arranged in a strict matrix.
As Micheal Chanan pointed out, sound has a profound influence on the
reception of a film, and I would suggest the visuals (which do vary
according to format) act in the same way. There is no magical aura attached
to 35mm film, but it is my preferred way to receive a film.
Bill, why don't you take some of your boundless energy, grab a digital video
camera and make your film. When you transfer it to 35mm for the world
premier, the grain structure inherent in the film stock will break up the
digital 'look'--and on DV, you'll be able to afford it (unless you can come
up with another excuse.) Good luck!
James Wallace
Director
Cinematographer
----- Original Message -----
From: <[log in to unmask]>
To: <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Monday, May 15, 2000 11:45 AM
Subject: Re: cinema specificity...my two penneth.
>
>
> bill flavell writes, in his usual moderate tone:
>
> This is so far out in left field I don't even know how
> to respond. It's patently obvious that YOU don't have any
> cinematic specificity. Why bother to be on this mailing
> list then?
>
> and again:
>
> Well, this is a film philosophy mailing list, and the
> largest film-specific theory/aesthetics/philosophy list
> that I know of. And anybody who denies the specificity of
> the cinema is definitely gonna hear from me.
>
> this all hardly deserves comment except perhaps the suggestion
> that this thread ought to be torn
>
>
>
>
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|