Lol, yes. It's been used in a lot of recent BIG productions, like Star Wars, The Hateful Eight and Interstellar. Besides, Danny Trejo's face would be much sexier in 70mm than digital. The CU's of Samuel L. Jackson sure proved the magic of 70mm. And then there is the dust in Interstellar, and the beginning of TFA where we can see every single grain of dust. 35mm may get outdated as the digital cameras are getting better, but they still have to go a long way in order to get to the level of 70mm and 70mm IMAX
Ben1238 Is it really? Most of the good movies that come out nowadays are indie. But most indie films are still trash. There few good films by popular and well known directors. It’s all gone to the next god awful Zach Snyder superhero movie, or a mundane Michael Bay-esque shitstorm, or an absolutely terrible “comedy” movie that lacks any humor whatsoever. Because the general public has become stupid enough to accept it. The only recent film I saw that was absolutely phenomenal was Drive (2011).
+Catherine Manne They are still BFFF. Just complete opposite sides in the spectrum of film making. That one scene in Sin City that Tarintino directed was Rodriguez convincing him to use a digital camera.
3 года назад
I think it wasnˋt a fixed lens camera. He talked about the Sony F900 and that camera could change lenses.
Let’s understand something in order to use film you have to buy the film one cost you have to process the film second cost and then you have to transfer the film to a telecine third cost and just so you know a telecine operator cost $600 an hour. I actually had to process the film twice and hired telecine operator twice because I had to apply bleach. Long story film is a pain in the ass it’s too expensive.
I am a supporter of digital filmmaking, because digital is very easy to use. Heck, it's a lot easier to edit and project, with digital footage. I hate film stock! Why, you might ask? Because film is too blurry and has there's black dots and scratches almost everywhere, so much so, that no one can see the image, very well. I mean, shooting on film is fine, but that's pretty much, the only good thing about celluloid as a whole, because editing on film is just boring, because with either scissors or moviolas or whatever, they're just a nightmare to get them to cut the film correctly. Oh, but it gets worse! Projecting a movie on film is nothing but scary, because splicing the reels together in the correct order is hard enough, but then sooner or later the film wears out, and at that moment, they send you replacement reels, but what's worse about that is that you might've forgot the order of the movie itself, and it's such a black hole on all levels, that you would have to quit, and look for another job! That's why digital is a billion times better than film stock, because with digital, you don't have to worry about technical difficulties or losing the movie in the fire, or anything like that. Digital is safer to use, when making and showing a movie, entirely.
Well, i live in El Salvador, i know it is the smallest and poorest country in Central America, I don't even have a visa to go to the states, so how can I make an impressive movie just with a small 300 dollar hd handycam and a bunch of friends? taking into accountant that is very difficult to get financing here and my whole state worths like 2000 bucks
+guasinay50 Read Rodriguez's book 'Rebel Without A Crew' - he had really basic gear! Make sure you use separate audio recording, like an H2N or something similar. Sound is so important! You have one great advantage over there - plenty of natural sunlight, i.e. a free light source! Practice making short films, and do take in some of the advice viewers on youtube might leave for you, some of them might actually know what they're doing/saying :-) All the best of luck!
Frankydoesitalso it depends on the season, but you can fly from L.A. for 500 bucks round trip. Well my dad has some property where you can find some kind of jungle and stuff, but here the problem is convince the people to work on your project, because nobody really believes it can make it.
+guasinay50 Do something small, like a 5 minute film or a 2 minute scene (so no need for a long story) and push so much effort into that as a promo piece to show others. If you have an example, you have proof of how awesome something can be and you will be able to convince others otherwise.
This guy is so smart, imaginative, and is not going to be sitting at home waiting for something to happen...
And seems to be a cool dude. But why are his movies so horrible?
Some people are a joy to watch and listen to...
And yet almost thirteen years after this was recorded film is still alive and strong.
LOl, no.
Lol, yes. It's been used in a lot of recent BIG productions, like Star Wars, The Hateful Eight and Interstellar. Besides, Danny Trejo's face would be much sexier in 70mm than digital. The CU's of Samuel L. Jackson sure proved the magic of 70mm. And then there is the dust in Interstellar, and the beginning of TFA where we can see every single grain of dust. 35mm may get outdated as the digital cameras are getting better, but they still have to go a long way in order to get to the level of 70mm and 70mm IMAX
Ben1238 true but digital is still very commonplace and practically standard on effects heavy pictures.
Ben1238 Is it really? Most of the good movies that come out nowadays are indie. But most indie films are still trash. There few good films by popular and well known directors. It’s all gone to the next god awful Zach Snyder superhero movie, or a mundane Michael Bay-esque shitstorm, or an absolutely terrible “comedy” movie that lacks any humor whatsoever. Because the general public has become stupid enough to accept it. The only recent film I saw that was absolutely phenomenal was Drive (2011).
Film is an option as is digital. As it should be.
What does your friend Tarantino think of all this? 😜
He hates digital
I love how they have completely opposing views when it comes to film and digital. It's really awesome that they remain friends and colleagues.
< lol so true I touch on this video and break it down. Check it out on my channel its new :)
i take it this is why they are not as close as they were in 90's growing apart on film philosophy
20 years ago wow
That's was cool! I wonder if he and Tarantino are still friends, given T's love of film. Was that a fixed zoom lens camera?
+Catherine Manne They are still BFFF. Just complete opposite sides in the spectrum of film making. That one scene in Sin City that Tarintino directed was Rodriguez convincing him to use a digital camera.
I think it wasnˋt a fixed lens camera. He talked about the Sony F900 and that camera could change lenses.
Do you have any castings coming up?? 😊
Let’s understand something in order to use film you have to buy the film one cost you have to process the film second cost and then you have to transfer the film to a telecine third cost and just so you know a telecine operator cost $600 an hour. I actually had to process the film twice and hired telecine operator twice because I had to apply bleach. Long story film is a pain in the ass it’s too expensive.
Except the difficulty of film made better cameramen.
I love you man
Brilliant!
I am a supporter of digital filmmaking, because digital is very easy to use. Heck, it's a lot easier to edit and project, with digital footage. I hate film stock! Why, you might ask? Because film is too blurry and has there's black dots and scratches almost everywhere, so much so, that no one can see the image, very well. I mean, shooting on film is fine, but that's pretty much, the only good thing about celluloid as a whole, because editing on film is just boring, because with either scissors or moviolas or whatever, they're just a nightmare to get them to cut the film correctly. Oh, but it gets worse! Projecting a movie on film is nothing but scary, because splicing the reels together in the correct order is hard enough, but then sooner or later the film wears out, and at that moment, they send you replacement reels, but what's worse about that is that you might've forgot the order of the movie itself, and it's such a black hole on all levels, that you would have to quit, and look for another job! That's why digital is a billion times better than film stock, because with digital, you don't have to worry about technical difficulties or losing the movie in the fire, or anything like that. Digital is safer to use, when making and showing a movie, entirely.
Well, i live in El Salvador, i know it is the smallest and poorest country in Central America, I don't even have a visa to go to the states, so how can I make an impressive movie just with a small 300 dollar hd handycam and a bunch of friends? taking into accountant that is very difficult to get financing here and my whole state worths like 2000 bucks
+guasinay50 Read Rodriguez's book 'Rebel Without A Crew' - he had really basic gear! Make sure you use separate audio recording, like an H2N or something similar. Sound is so important! You have one great advantage over there - plenty of natural sunlight, i.e. a free light source! Practice making short films, and do take in some of the advice viewers on youtube might leave for you, some of them might actually know what they're doing/saying :-) All the best of luck!
+guasinay50 How much is a ticket to el salvador. At least you have great locations and jungle and all that stuff.
Frankydoesitalso it depends on the season, but you can fly from L.A. for 500 bucks round trip. Well my dad has some property where you can find some kind of jungle and stuff, but here the problem is convince the people to work on your project, because nobody really believes it can make it.
+guasinay50 Do something small, like a 5 minute film or a 2 minute scene (so no need for a long story) and push so much effort into that as a promo piece to show others. If you have an example, you have proof of how awesome something can be and you will be able to convince others otherwise.
For diectors who pioreed Digital , they all made terrible films after wards
That's a lie!
Well now that it's been 6 years, YOU ARE WRONG