I've been a long time reader of your website and really love it, this is the first thing I've posted. I first saw the post about the whats the point in saving film when you first put it up, i disagreed with a lot of it and it left a bad taste in my mouth. Every time I've visited your website since I still get upset by this article. I learnt how to shoot on digital using 5D's and then Sony cameras, I'm currently a full time student studying film production and we shoot most of the digital productions on the Alexa, but occasionally we do still use film. Only 16mm I've never shot on 35mm but its an awesome experience every time, its been a huge learning curve and I don't even specialise with cinematography. My main department is production design, but there is something magical about how film works and how it looks. Theres a discipline there which isn't the same with digital. What I find shocking is that anyone could wish away a medium like film. It might not be the best format for everything but its still an amazing format to have available. The look of something is down to taste and opinion. In filmic medium you have some rather slim options which to capture your footage compared to say painting and how many different types of medium there are at the artists disposal (water colour, acrylic, oil, etc). I suppose what I'm getting at is do you sort of see how stupid people look when they say one is better than the other? Or why we don't 'need' one of them any more? Your argument is invalid, just because something is more accessible or nearly completely resembles the other thing, does not mean it replaces the medium. Variety is the spice of life, long live film.
I've been a long time reader of your website and really love it, this is the first thing I've posted. I first saw the post about the whats the point in saving film when you first put it up, i disagreed with a lot of it and it left a bad taste in my mouth. Every time I've visited your website since I still get upset by this article. I learnt how to shoot on digital using 5D's and then Sony cameras, I'm currently a full time student studying film production and we shoot most of the digital productions on the Alexa, but occasionally we do still use film. Only 16mm I've never shot on 35mm but its an awesome experience every time, its been a huge learning curve and I don't even specialise with cinematography. My main department is production design, but there is something magical about how film works and how it looks. Theres a discipline there which isn't the same with digital. What I find shocking is that anyone could wish away a medium like film. It might not be the best format for everything but its still an amazing format to have available. The look of something is down to taste and opinion. In filmic medium you have some rather slim options which to capture your footage compared to say painting and how many different types of medium there are at the artists disposal (water colour, acrylic, oil, etc). I suppose what I'm getting at is do you sort of see how stupid people look when they say one is better than the other? Or why we don't 'need' one of them any more? Your argument is invalid, just because something is more accessible or nearly completely resembles the other thing, does not mean it replaces the medium. Variety is the spice of life, long live film.