>Those people who make beautiful
>movies on video could be making something even more spectacular ones on
>film. A filmmaker who is forced to shoot on video is like a painter forced
>to paint with a broken pencil.
> <[log in to unmask]>
Sorry, but I disagree. Some people actually prefer DV. I find film
limiting, cumbersome, and extravagantly expensive. DV, particularly in
terms of the possibilities for manipulation, is much more interesting.
-------------------------------------------------------
>Really, the difference is superficial and technical.
>Kirill Galetski.
The difference is certainly not superficial. Film is an industrial age,
mechanical medium. The making of films is still essentially an industrial
process. DV is all 0's and 1's. It is information age, its fluidity and
manipulability (is that the word?) speak of and to the present time and the
present condition. Further, it allows individual artists a voice.
-----------------------------------------------------------
>But the fact
>of the matter is that people shoot on video because they have to, not
>becaue they want to. Anyone who's serious about filmmaking tries, at one
>point or another, to get financing to shoot on film.
> <[log in to unmask]>
I'm serious about what I do (as serious as I can be anyway.....) and I have
absolutely no burning desire to move to film. Further, it's not just me.
There are others (many others fwiw) who feel the same way. Film is indeed
beautiful. I love it. I appreciate it. BUT.... there are more effective and
interesting means now available for the construction of moving image
sequences.
Mark O'Connell
[log in to unmask]
|