[tig] RE: Digital Smigital

Dean Lyon dlyon
Wed Aug 11 04:29:54 BST 2004


Well, pertinent in that I found the survey results
ASTONISHING! And the survey was dated 2003-2005...

In re-reading the bottom notes, I did see it was 
in conjunction with Digital Cinema Magazine obviously
a biased and enthusiastic sponsor!!!

I was interviewed today by a technology journalist
who had already heard from a number of other production
and post-production companies that HD acquisition was the
wave of the future...I immediately offered my opinion(s).

1) What you shoot is your most valuable asset
2) Acquire and Preserve your asset at the highest
resolution possible.
3) People have been talking about the "death" of
film for nearly 75 to 100 years, yet those who have
saved their assets on 2" Videotape are screwed, what
about 1125/60 (HDTV for god's sakes!)...screwed,
1" C videotape, D2?, Crikey, I can't imagine trying 
to play a LaserDisc in a couple of years! And yet,
those who saved their asset on 35mm are sitting back
happy and comfortable!
3a) Not only that...but we all know and agree that the
current HDTV formats are only stop-gap measures until
a much better format can be recorded in the field. 
4) It is more expensive to shoot on Digital. A recent
inquiry by Silverscreen into rental costs has proven that
HDTV is a more expensive capturing medium than 35mm film, 
on camera and equipment rental alone. (Twice as many lights?
HDTV Field Monitors, less setups per day?)
5) Besides, there are certain needs that are impossible 
to solve with Digital Acquisition! (Wide contrast range scenes,
under-cranking or over-cranking (Imagine trying to shoot
100+ fps on a Cine-Alta system!), and what about underwater?
5) Whereas there may be some savings in lab costs and prints
and telecine transfers, it does not compensate for a more
pricey production operation.
6) You have higher shooting ratios! Videotape is cheap and
allows you to record continously (even beyond normal 35mm
magazine lengths!). But more shooting means more production costs.
And more shooting means far more Avid time (okay Final Cut Pro
time) to sift through all of the footage! And what about on-set
playback? Tape Confidence or yet another cause of crews standing 
around on the clock doing nothing as we review and critic our last
several takes!
7) What about large venue digital projection or god forbid going 
back to film? I think we are all on the same page there...

I think George Lucas summed it up best..."It is another medium"
And certainly a lesser medium when all of the above is taken into
account!

Let's hope a lot of companies are buying up digital camera systems,
because they will be out of business by the time we come up with
a proper scheme for "universal mastering"!


-----Original Message-----
From: Rob Lingelbach [mailto:rob at colorist.org]
Sent: Wednesday, 11 August 2004 3:07 p.m.
To: Michael Orton
Cc: Dean Lyon
Subject: Re: Digital Smigital


On Tue, Aug 10, 2004 at 07:57:17PM -0700, Michael Orton wrote:
> Rob, looks like old data, and history doesnt seem to have borne this out.

ah, ok thanks mike.  Dean hadthought it was pertinent.






More information about the Tig mailing list