SCREEN-L Archives

December 1994, Week 1

SCREEN-L@LISTSERV.UA.EDU

Options: Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
Reply To:
Film and TV Studies Discussion List <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Mon, 5 Dec 1994 11:09:56 -0500
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (34 lines)
On Thu, 1 Dec 1994, Jennifer Warren wrote:
 
> I can think of ONE very EXCELLENT reason :  If the quality is even
> remotely reasonable, then shooting in video for film output would
> drastically reduce production costs, allowing low budget filmmakers
> access to CGI FX which currently are simply cost prohibitive.  I realize
> that studio's and giant FX houses have a vested interest in keeping costs
> of decent equipment out of reach of low budget filmmakers...but I would
> hope that you would at least have something CONSTRUCTIVE to say.
>
> Jennie
Uhm.. sorry if you didn't see it as constructive, but the point I was
trying to make is that if your original source is video, who cares what
neato special effects you can use, the product is still going to be
limited by the extremely low resolution of the video.  I mean, if you want
to play around with effects, why not stay in video.  i.e. sample it
digitally and then run it through premiere or use a toaster or
something, then print it back to video, then if you just have your heart
set on seeing this *video* projected then get a video projector.  The
point is, if you shoot it on video, you have made a video (not a film),
and I don't see the point of wasting the cellulloid (which is
photo-chemical not magnetic or digital).  Also, what is it exactly that
you're saying here?, Do you want to make a feature length film on video
(no one will buy it, ever, don't kid yourself) and then transfer it so
that it can be shown in theatres.  You  might also run into the problem
that the ratio of video is 1:1.66 whereas film (standard widescreen) is
1:1.85, so then you would have to crop your image, destroying
compostitional value.
 
 
 
 
Ian

ATOM RSS1 RSS2