|
|
Posted by Martin Heffels on 09/21/07 06:51
On Fri, 21 Sep 2007 03:26:35 GMT, "David McCall" <mccallmail@verizon.net>
wrote:
>That worked for a while, until the motion picture industry started
>loading their film onto computers and essentially making videos
>instead of films. They still insisted that they were films because
>the acquisition was still on film, and the final product was still film.
While the editing might have been done on the computer, usually in the end
an EDL rolls out of the computer, with which the neg (well, a duplicate) is
cut into the movie. Unless you refer to a "digital intermediate", but that
doesn't make it video either :-)
>Now we have many of the Hollywood types shooting high definition
>video, editing and doing all of their effects using electronic tools,
>and in some cases even displaying their products in high
>definition video, yet they still persist in calling it film.
Digital film.
>The video folks just aren't taking it anymore. If the hot shots in
>Hollywood can produce videos and call it film, then why can't
>we all call our productions films, and call ourselves film makers.
It's the end-product. It used to be called "motion picture", which is a
much more neutral name. Let's revert back to that :-))
cheers
-martin-
--
Official website "Jonah's Quid" http://www.jonahsquids.co.uk
Navigation:
[Reply to this message]
|