Response to Is a 3 ccd mini dv camara better picture quality than 16mm film?

Well everyone talks about digital being a thing of the new age and that its going to outrun the film scene in the next years to come. But personaly I say that film is the greatest medium for quality. If your planning of for example shooting a film for a festival or something of the sort you should definately stick to film, 16mm. You can see the pure quality in the picture. When I usually shoot something on DV, I notice that it kinda looks homemade and that the quality in picture is a little lacking (that's if your using it to make a movie) when I see movies like Visitor Q or the Item, I notice those things for as when I watch a movie like I stand Alone, I can see the beauty in the photography and the camera used. I like to use DV when I'm working on something very low budget and don't have much time for, and when its generally aimed for a straight to video release. Were as when I'm trying to tackle a film festival or something that I have a bigger budget for, I use 16mm. The only problem with that medium is, that its expensive to buy the film, and its very expensive to have it transfered for digital editing. And a problem I happened to come across that almost made me want to kill myself is if the 16mm camera isn't used properly on a shoot, or if the gate is dirty, my entire roll of film is finished. That's fifty bucks down the drain. So if you have the money and want to shoot something beautifully that resembles something hollywood might produce, work with film, other wise, DV is the next best thing and you might not experience certain problems you would with the 16mm. It depends what your going for, they both have there advantages and disadvantages. Thanks.

[ Previous | Next ]