Can everyone just calm down with these digital vs. film comments? Yes both are good, yes you may like one to another. But let's not forget that the story of the film is all that matters.
What's more impressive is how Arri, a solid Film company, transitioned tobe the hallmark Digital Film company, while Kodak and Panavision are now history book chapters.
I worked in Europe with an Alexa and I agree the picture is kind of sharp, but we had contrast problems etc...You can make pictures to look good, but film still the best way to shoot a feature. You cannot imagine all the problems we had in post. It's so simple to shoot on film and edit in digital from your negative master. No surprise of lighting, color etc..But today, we do not have any real theatres anymore! In the 50' -60's we had Big theatres with a curved big screen (Scope) real movies!
For producers of digital cinema, is a relief to begin to emerge with high resolution cameras, but I sure spend a lot of time for the electronic technology equal to the celluloid. So while, has to work with what exists in the market for Digital Film makers. Greetings from Ecuador. Ethan Lenin SC Para los productores de Cine Digital, es un alivio que empiecen a surgir cámaras con alta resolución, pero estoy seguro que pasara mucho tiempo para que la tecnología electrónica iguale a al celuloide.
@surferboy36O yep, personally, i think nothing can match the aesthetic qualities of film but the alexa is the first digital camera that looks remotely close to what film can do. Drive was shot on the alexa and that was beautiful.
In the days when color came about, there were still people who lagged behind and shot in B&W. You cannot deny that Digital cameras is gaining grounds and is being adopted by tons of film makers. Seeing that it is a much superior workflow that produces the same quality (I would argue even better) it will surely take over. It is inevitable.
I agree my opinion doesn't change anything, film will be all but obsolete soon but doesn't mean digital is better. Look at the last four films of Peter Fincher and then look at Fight Club or Seven, there is absolutely no comparison in the depth and beauty of his early works.
Love the d20. Alexa. But those 1800HMI. I need to add two . I have 4 1200. Pars. 4 1200 fresnel . 3 575par. 2 575 fresnel. 2 joker bug 400. And 2 Ltm 2.5 pars. Now 2 1800 to replace my 2.5 would be great.
I would not say it like that because there are so many films it completly depends on the stock. I prefer film and I would never replace it with digital cameras but I have to admit that the results of Alexa look very good for digital cameras (NOT for Film Cameras)
if w/e movie is backed by a good script and good actors then the differences between the alexa, red and film are negligible. Digital is by far superior in terms of workflow tho for sure.
I think people see footage from cameras like the Alexa and conclude digital is cleaner and therefore better than film. So with that logic in place, they go out and buy a digital stills camera to shoot their videos on and feel better about the whole thing. I dunno....
You can't really compare digital and film in terms of aesthetics because that is opinion driven, but digital definitely wins from a practical standpoint. I know film still has greater latitude than digital, but that is likely to change pretty soon. That said, organic film grain can't really be reproduced.
NO WAY. Film is infinitely better, and aesthetically pleasing in a way that cold, flat digital is not (at the moment at least). Watch a classic film noir - no way digital can replicate that.
Film will always be better than digital. A clean sharp image does not invoke reality. Digital cameras take away the shadows and blurs of an image. 35mm film was by fare the pinnacle of movie making. However, Arri Alexa resembles film in movies like Zero Dark Thirty and The Wolverine. Them movies were darker and had better resolution, the images weren't 'clean'.
No, I disagree. Technology has failed us. It's failed me. From Red One Digital to the smart phones, this is not technology.....this is a virtual world gone wrong.
I think there are some good digital qualities. Like Zero Dark Thirty....that was digital. It was only good because it was darker in contrast. Watch the trailer to see what I mean. Or X Men days of future past.....that dark seedy splendor color I'm in love with.
We cannot compare digital and film anyway! It's like to compare your HDTV to a film projected on a screen. The TV has too much contrast. Film is always pleasant to watch. How can you get the Technicolor look with and Alexa. It will look fake! Take a look to the ten Cmdts, Gone with the wind, Ben-Hur etc..They are great movies. Today, people like Avatar! What the hell is that 'movie' .To have a good movie you need a good director,DP, history and GREAT actors and no computer 'Actors'.
It's all for intent and purpose. Personally I don't like the look of film. Never did, I like a clean sharp digital image, but if a director wanted a 70's film look with grain, then I'd use it. (pending I don't pay for the film....)
If you cannot see the difference in image quality between David Finchers films and his last four movies then that explains why you think digital is a good thing.
Just because film had more time and digital is still new does not make film better. Truth is, counting newer films you can come to the conclusion that digital will phase film out whether you like it or not. Remember what happened to black and white?
Anyone with any concept of film and digital can tell immediately which is which though - and digital looks far worse. The irony is that the makers of digi cameras are spending billions to make new technology that merely replicates the 'look' of film.
Whoever says or believes film is better than than digital is/are stupid! Film is much harder to deal with and is also so "analog". I dont really like that. Digital is as revolutionary as the internet (need I say more). If something is better in every way, why is pride or nostalga dictating a right mind. If you are a film purist and elitest, I can also asume you enjoy Blackberrys to iPhones. Dugital is so much more faster, lighter, cleaner, better to operate, and more modular in terms of a camera. If you like the blurs and I guess "grain"... add a DAMN filter in post production and try adding cgi to film to shit in the sewer.
Why do you use the word "analog" like it's a bad word? the curves in a record hold WAY more information than a CD, and and the atoms in a film negative hold WAY more information than a few 1's and 0's. Digital IS getting to the point where its finally almost indistinguishable from film's quality, but only on the utmost best of camera's like the alexa, and only just recently.
Lol that was 2 years ago I said that, but I still believe Digital is superior. Film is slow, novelty, and ancient. Digital can do anything now, and the Red cameras are better than Alexa in terms of resolution, fps, flexibility, and half the price. Film is like a bike Alexa is like a 1970 Mustang Red is a new shiny Lamborghini They all have their place but film is definitely. Alexa is over-rated and over-priced Red got it together but still expensive but the pinnacle of technology will never be cheap.
I can understand someone thinking like you do, but me a favor, and I mean this seriously: Go watch Apocalypse Now either on a large screen on theater, come back here and tell me whens' the last time you saw a red look that good. If your answer is anything other than never. repeat until you understand what makes a image good. also sorry Alexa > Red and Film> Alexa.
Film is pointless when the film is scanned in at 2 or 4K, then edited in a computer, then graded with a computer, then shown on a digital projector. Unless you're shooting Imax, there isn't really a reason to use film as it's an expensive cumbersome format.
"If it was not as good as film in quality, the movie studios would have NEVER adopted it". Such a naive statement! The studios adopted digital because it's CHEAPER! If digital was more expensive than film what do you think ALL Hollywood films would still be shot on??!! Wake up and realize that Hollywood doesn't care about 'art', it cares about one thing - MONEY. Digital IS NOT 'better than film in every way'. Have you seen Public Enemies? Appalling, and that was from a MAJOR director and studio.
Compared to which film stock? Rated at what speed? For what color temperature? Lol you really don't know what you're talking about. It's funny. Also what normal person can afford to shoot with a Red Epic? That's why lots of indies shoot video on digital stills cameras and it looks like shit. I can shoot on film for next to nothing.
lol that quality is crap. oh and about shooting digital... Peter Jackson and Ridley Scott would disagree with you. Explain to me why they switched to Digital if it is not as good like you claim?
Imagination? lol RED EPIC shoots 5k and has more exposure latitude (Dynamic Range). Digital wins. Hipster directors can add shitty film grain in post if they desire.
Развлечения
Can everyone just calm down with these digital vs. film comments? Yes both are good, yes you may like one to another. But let's not forget that the story of the film is all that matters.
well it's not ALL that matters . Cenima matters . If you have a great story with but it looks like a scrappy home movie, your movie won't hold up :/
like Blair witch ?
What's more impressive is how Arri, a solid Film company, transitioned tobe the hallmark Digital Film company, while Kodak and Panavision are now history book chapters.
I worked in Europe with an Alexa and I agree the picture is kind of sharp, but we had contrast problems etc...You can make pictures to look good, but film still the best way to shoot a feature. You cannot imagine all the problems we had in post. It's so simple to shoot on film and edit in digital from your negative master. No surprise of lighting, color etc..But today, we do not have any real theatres anymore! In the 50' -60's we had Big theatres with a curved big screen (Scope) real movies!
Watching Hugo in Full 1080p showed me that Alexa is better than Film, it blew me away!
This is INCREDIBLE! Excited to TEST this out!
For producers of digital cinema, is a relief to begin to emerge with high resolution cameras, but I sure spend a lot of time for the electronic technology equal to the celluloid. So while, has to work with what exists in the market for Digital Film makers. Greetings from Ecuador.
Ethan Lenin SC
Para los productores de Cine Digital, es un alivio que empiecen a surgir cámaras con alta resolución, pero estoy seguro que pasara mucho tiempo para que la tecnología electrónica iguale a al celuloide.
ARRI Alexa XT, am loving it. i call it a cameraman's camera.
Thanks dude...
It's on the website for stargate studios.
Can we see the actual short somewhere?
beast
@surferboy36O yep, personally, i think nothing can match the aesthetic qualities of film but the alexa is the first digital camera that looks remotely close to what film can do. Drive was shot on the alexa and that was beautiful.
best cameras der welt!!!
I really wish to see the original takes before any correction. I will catch you there~
@kisslite The difference between digital and film now is a matter of prefrence and artistic choice (If budget allows that choice). It is great!
I wish to be your final final camera assistant.
hey sup you,how you doing..sorry i travel small..send me your contact
is hugo was shot by film or digital?
Drive was shot on Alexa? What about breaking bad? Is is also shot on digital?
Thanks..
In the days when color came about, there were still people who lagged behind and shot in B&W.
You cannot deny that Digital cameras is gaining grounds and is being adopted by tons of film makers. Seeing that it is a much superior workflow that produces the same quality (I would argue even better) it will surely take over. It is inevitable.
And you where 100% correct lol
Nice
and its only 720p? lol
I agree my opinion doesn't change anything, film will be all but obsolete soon but doesn't mean digital is better. Look at the last four films of Peter Fincher and then look at Fight Club or Seven, there is absolutely no comparison in the depth and beauty of his early works.
kiitos
What camera are they using to film the alexa film the action?
Judging by a few shots with shallow DOF, maybe a 5DmarkII or 550D
I think they used 35mm film for most of the seasons but i wouldn't be surprised if they switched over to digital.
neither the Alexa nor any kind of RED killed film, the CMOS sensor did ... (a mono sensor that made Digital Cinema possible)
--talks about how good the camera is... posts video in 720p lol
it was uploaded in 2010, 720 was the max resolution
result?
Image quality in the same class as 35mm film.
Digital, Alexa
the ARRICAM alexa is good for advertising and music videos, but for movies are Arricam 435, Lite, and 535 b is the best camera:)
Love the d20. Alexa. But those 1800HMI. I need to add two . I have 4 1200. Pars. 4 1200 fresnel . 3 575par. 2 575 fresnel. 2 joker bug 400. And 2 Ltm 2.5 pars. Now 2 1800 to replace my 2.5 would be great.
It was ARRI ALEXA classic EV.
i like
I would not say it like that because there are so many films it completly depends on the stock. I prefer film and I would never replace it with digital cameras but I have to admit that the results of Alexa look very good for digital cameras (NOT for Film Cameras)
have you seeen dark knight? dark knight rises? Assassination of Jesses James? road to perdition?. pretty sure Film still kicks ass
have you seen dark knight? dark knight rises? assassination of jesse james?, looper? pretty sure film is AWESOME
and i agree..
if w/e movie is backed by a good script and good actors then the differences between the alexa, red and film are negligible. Digital is by far superior in terms of workflow tho for sure.
If digital was invented first then people would be saying "film will NEVER look as good as digital".
I think people see footage from cameras like the Alexa and conclude digital is cleaner and therefore better than film. So with that logic in place, they go out and buy a digital stills camera to shoot their videos on and feel better about the whole thing. I dunno....
why use green screen in a grass field?
wut? :D no comments! go make an appointment to your doctor
its not 1080P, its a 3K-4K camera, its better than 1080P!
You can't really compare digital and film in terms of aesthetics because that is opinion driven, but digital definitely wins from a practical standpoint. I know film still has greater latitude than digital, but that is likely to change pretty soon. That said, organic film grain can't really be reproduced.
Awsome camera, but I just don't like how digital looks.
and i'm still paying off my last camera....
I am tried of knowing and admitting how fucking good this Alexa is. I just wish I had money to buy this piece of shit. :(
Using green screen when grass is on frame seems like a bad idea to me, blue screen instead...
I want one like that on my iPhone.
You cannot beat film. Digital give you a non life picture. Nosferatu the undead, the twilight zone.
If you cannot see the difference then I don't know what to say :P
I'm just watching videos, I'm a curious person. It's pointless to my interests.
That's quite an arrogant comment to make. How many landmark films were made in digital and how many on film?
NO WAY. Film is infinitely better, and aesthetically pleasing in a way that cold, flat digital is not (at the moment at least). Watch a classic film noir - no way digital can replicate that.
Film will always be better than digital. A clean sharp image does not invoke reality. Digital cameras take away the shadows and blurs of an image. 35mm film was by fare the pinnacle of movie making. However, Arri Alexa resembles film in movies like Zero Dark Thirty and The Wolverine. Them movies were darker and had better resolution, the images weren't 'clean'.
Why do you like clean images? Movies are not documentaries or news broadcasts. They're meant to be 'fake'.
I don't care. Anything worth doing never comes easy. Good images are better when they have photo chemicals, not binary numbers with o's and 1's.
No, I disagree. Technology has failed us. It's failed me. From Red One Digital to the smart phones, this is not technology.....this is a virtual world gone wrong.
I think there are some good digital qualities. Like Zero Dark Thirty....that was digital. It was only good because it was darker in contrast. Watch the trailer to see what I mean. Or X Men days of future past.....that dark seedy splendor color I'm in love with.
your thinking in the past. Yes we get it , film looks good. But be a innovator not someone stuck in the past.
We watch it in 1080p :-| not 4K
We cannot compare digital and film anyway! It's like to compare your HDTV to a film projected on a screen. The TV has too much contrast. Film is always pleasant to watch. How can you get the Technicolor look with and Alexa. It will look fake! Take a look to the ten Cmdts, Gone with the wind, Ben-Hur etc..They are great movies. Today, people like Avatar! What the hell is that 'movie' .To have a good movie you need a good director,DP, history and GREAT actors and no computer 'Actors'.
It's all for intent and purpose. Personally I don't like the look of film. Never did, I like a clean sharp digital image, but if a director wanted a 70's film look with grain, then I'd use it.
(pending I don't pay for the film....)
No shit. I was just saying that it's equally stupid to disregard a medium like film that gave us so many incredible things.
If you cannot see the difference in image quality between David Finchers films and his last four movies then that explains why you think digital is a good thing.
Just because film had more time and digital is still new does not make film better. Truth is, counting newer films you can come to the conclusion that digital will phase film out whether you like it or not.
Remember what happened to black and white?
you're not even replying to the same person...
Kavner
Lilit
Lavner
What a weird comment. Do you think shooting on digital means you bypass the need to learn the art of lighting and cinematography?
Anyone with any concept of film and digital can tell immediately which is which though - and digital looks far worse. The irony is that the makers of digi cameras are spending billions to make new technology that merely replicates the 'look' of film.
Alexa Cassic Ev is still making better images than a C700
actors should always insist on kodak film…
+kinimato graphs Actors? Perhaps I'm missing something in the chain of decision making in movie production.
Kodak film probably won't be available in 15 years.
So much hate, I though people in this domain were nice to each other...
You hate film, and yet most of your favorite movies were probably shot on it.
Looks like shitty VHS to me.
Whoever says or believes film is better than than digital is/are stupid! Film is much harder to deal with and is also so "analog". I dont really like that. Digital is as revolutionary as the internet (need I say more). If something is better in every way, why is pride or nostalga dictating a right mind. If you are a film purist and elitest, I can also asume you enjoy Blackberrys to iPhones. Dugital is so much more faster, lighter, cleaner, better to operate, and more modular in terms of a camera. If you like the blurs and I guess "grain"... add a DAMN filter in post production and try adding cgi to film to shit in the sewer.
Why do you use the word "analog" like it's a bad word? the curves in a record hold WAY more information than a CD, and and the atoms in a film negative hold WAY more information than a few 1's and 0's. Digital IS getting to the point where its finally almost indistinguishable from film's quality, but only on the utmost best of camera's like the alexa, and only just recently.
Lol that was 2 years ago I said that, but I still believe Digital is superior. Film is slow, novelty, and ancient. Digital can do anything now, and the Red cameras are better than Alexa in terms of resolution, fps, flexibility, and half the price.
Film is like a bike
Alexa is like a 1970 Mustang
Red is a new shiny Lamborghini
They all have their place but film is definitely. Alexa is over-rated and over-priced
Red got it together but still expensive but the pinnacle of technology will never be cheap.
I can understand someone thinking like you do, but me a favor, and I mean this seriously: Go watch Apocalypse Now either on a large screen on theater, come back here and tell me whens' the last time you saw a red look that good. If your answer is anything other than never. repeat until you understand what makes a image good. also sorry Alexa > Red and Film> Alexa.
sorry. its only my opinion.
Film is pointless when the film is scanned in at 2 or 4K, then edited in a computer, then graded with a computer, then shown on a digital projector. Unless you're shooting Imax, there isn't really a reason to use film as it's an expensive cumbersome format.
Everyones trolling on film. Gotta say, I disagree. Alexa is great, but IMAX Film is better. LISTEN TO NOLAN! HE KNOWS ALL!!
"If it was not as good as film in quality, the movie studios would have NEVER adopted it". Such a naive statement! The studios adopted digital because it's CHEAPER! If digital was more expensive than film what do you think ALL Hollywood films would still be shot on??!! Wake up and realize that Hollywood doesn't care about 'art', it cares about one thing - MONEY. Digital IS NOT 'better than film in every way'. Have you seen Public Enemies? Appalling, and that was from a MAJOR director and studio.
Compared to which film stock? Rated at what speed? For what color temperature? Lol you really don't know what you're talking about. It's funny.
Also what normal person can afford to shoot with a Red Epic? That's why lots of indies shoot video on digital stills cameras and it looks like shit. I can shoot on film for next to nothing.
lol that quality is crap.
oh and about shooting digital...
Peter Jackson and Ridley Scott would disagree with you.
Explain to me why they switched to Digital if it is not as good like you claim?
Imagination? lol
RED EPIC shoots 5k and has more exposure latitude (Dynamic Range).
Digital wins.
Hipster directors can add shitty film grain in post if they desire.
I agree film will be dead in maybe a decade or less, but digital is still shit.
Because it requires less craftmanship, and the image is "flat" not great.
Digital, Alexa