MovieChat Forums > Devil's Playground Discussion > ARgh..stop using digital video cams...

ARgh..stop using digital video cams...

posted 14 years ago by tetrahex
9 replies | jump to latest

Its so obvious when its used, everything looks so cheap.

You saved money, and made it look like you saved money..congrats.

[–] TheBeardedWonder 14 years ago

That's kind of silly advice for low budget films. If the option is a movie shot on digital or no movie at all, what are they supposed to do?

I'd rather watch this movie and have it not look as good as film than have it not exist at all...

"Did you mean for all those words to come out like that or did they just fall out randomly?"-H.H.

[–] tetrahex 14 years ago

How were low budgets films made before dv?

I don't buy it.

[–] TheBeardedWonder 14 years ago

a)They shot on bad looking cheap film stock and people complained then too.
b)Many just weren't made at all.
c) All the budget went to getting a camera and film, and there was nothing left for effects, lighting, audio editing, etc... so everything else was poorer but the video looked good. A polished turd is still a turd...

Now that there's a way around that for low budget film makers, why shouldn't they use it? I agree a huge budget movie with lots of explosions and a high budget doesn't need to shoot on digital, but what's wrong with a low budget movie doing it? It allows them to spend extra on things like effects, CGI, and the free running in this case. And as I said, if the case is digital or nothing, I see no problem with it...

"Did you mean for all those words to come out like that or did they just fall out randomly?"-H.H.

[–] samson_k 14 years ago

I have no problems with DV cams being used

I do wish that a little more time would be spent on post production to make them look a little less rough.

Some, and this film included, seems not to have been colour graded very well or given a filmic look (all of which can be done).

[–] pedromonkey 14 years ago

yes DV does at times look cheap but if they use a 35mm filter it makes the film look more professional...

[–] MrMacauw 13 years ago

Give us an example...?

The film was shot on the Sony F35 which huge budget films have been too (Superman, Miami Vice) and currently George Lucas is shooting Red Tails on it.

Also, it was graded in a Baselight suite, with the same colourist and same equipment as 28 Weeks Later.

[–] seriouslycgi 13 years ago

lord of the rings was shot on digital

so was this low budget film:

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1470827/

[–] tetrahex 13 years ago

no, lord of the rings was shot on film.
go look it up, it is on imdb....

[–] richieblac 12 years ago

LoTR was shot on film, then the negatives were scanned into digital format.

There is much, much, MUCH more going on to how a video production looks at the end than simply "film or digital". It is SO much more complicated than that, and suffice it to say, there's nothing wrong with going digital.

One thing I noticed in this film is that shutter speeds tended to look quite high, eliminating that "classic film"-looking motion blur and making it look edgier and (literally) sharper on a per-frame basis. This has to do with camera mechanics, and nothing to do with what medium the image is printed onto.

Just one example.