[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

film look vs video look

All this discussion on the "film look" reminded me of an article(by Kim =
Foley) that came out of the American Cinematographer magazine a couple =
of years back.  A test was made at MIT if viewers can actually =
differentiate material shot on film or video.
A parallel shoot was done using an Ikegami and an Arri BL3(w/5247 film =
stock), with the goal of minimizing the "differences between the look of =
film and video and see how closely they really could approximate each =
other."  Then, it was simply a matter of determining the differences in =
the "look" that remained.
Surprisingly, eighty-six percent of those with a trained eye and the =
average viewers in the sample group distinguished the film from the =
video shoot. However, they couldn't exactly articulate the difference =
between the "film look" from the "video look".  There is a consensus =
that video has a "very present live, here and now feel, while film is =
removed, a fantasy, representative of a dream state." Also, I think the =
type of program predisposes the audience as to the format used;news and =
sports are assumed to be shot on video, while action/adventure/drama =
stories are done on film.
All this of course, leads to the question," will video replace film?".  =
That's another discussion all together....

jude ng
videopost manila