Article: Film Fading to Black

Wow!!! Nice article Debra. It seems an obituary for film can't be far off.

It's as though film has just slipped away, right under our noses, and most of us simply missed it because we weren't paying attention.

BTW, you covered this story from some terrific angles too. Well done.

David Roth Weiss
Director/Editor/Colorist
David Weiss Productions, Inc.
Los Angeles
http://www.drwfilms.com

Don't miss my new Creative Cow Podcast: Bringing "The Whale" to the Big Screen:
http://library.creativecow.net/weiss_roth_david/Podcast-Series-2-MikeParfit...

POST-PRODUCTION WITHOUT THE USUAL INSANITY ™

Creative COW contributing editor and a forum host of the Business & Marketing and Apple Final Cut Pro forums.

Everyone seems so quick to kill off film. When it's gone everyone will be like "where did it go?" I wonder what resurrecting old archived tape based media will be like in 20-30 years? Or all the failed hard drives sitting on people's shelves.

I've been waiting to respond to this article ever since it came in the mail.

The only ones that dream of the death of film are the ones that don't shoot it. Sorry but I shoot both digital and film and I still prefer film in many instances. Action sports, fashion, music videos are a few industries where I see Film has an advantage.

We should note that as far as digital vs film, there is a duality there. And the more that people push and push for more digital looks and process, the more there will be a reactionary move in the opposite direction. How do you differentiate your look in a market that is FLOODED with digital, shoot film. We did just that on a recent surf Film for a client and the reaction to the look and feel of the film has set it apart and given it a lot of buzz.

People will have to make artistic choices now, and I agree that we are in a moment where we have 2 equally good choices to go with, digital or film. However nailing the coffin on film is not contributing anything to the discussion. It just seems to me that many people who have economic interests in the rise of digital acquisition and distribution are the ones who are trying to "kill off" film. I am here to tell you, I WANT FILM TO BE AROUND for a LONG LONG time. It gives me a choice and a way to differentiate my work.

I agree that film print distribution is going by the wayside, but in terms of acquisition, Film is still the gold standard.

----
george manzanilla
rundfunk media
http://www.rundfunk.com
http://www.georgemanzanilla.com

George/Eugene -- Nobody here is calling for the death of film - just reporting on it. In fairness, I don't think anyone in the industry wants the death of film. This is just an example of how a group of disparate forces come together and create a result. Once all the movie theatres go to digital projection, there's no need for release prints anymore. Kodak/Fuji/film labs economy of scale is already severely compromised. At some point, it just won't make financial sense to make or process film. Although I do believe that film won't entirely go away - someone will keep producing it, although it might become more difficult to get it processed. Best, Debra

I agree with David above! Interesting read. But I've read so many like, only the authors and the media keep changing: paper (as in office), paper (as in books), photographic film, DV tape, tape (as in music), Vinyl, and now film film.

To me all of the above is dead. But I am just a producer / user. Another interesting angle might be to look at archivists, to see if they are dying ...or growing. They are the ones who will have to eventually deal with all these legacy formats, and my guess is that might be dwindling in numbers as well. But I have no data on that... and I've only met a handful of archivists in my lifetime - for any media type.

And I've never met a kid in high school or college who told me, "when I grow up I want to be an archivist."

So if there are no archivists left at some point in the future, isn't "fill in the blank__ is dead" a mute point. In this future, everything is dead as soon as a new media is released and adopted by producers. The world's knowledge in words and pictures and sounds becomes a rolling ball collecting bits as it moves forward, and losing bits as it bounces down the steep hill of eternity. Oh well...

Phoenix Studios Nepal: A small A/V Production House in Kathmandu.

Namaste back at ya! Next time you are in town, come see us for some tea...or something without the milk and sugar :)

It's interesting that u point out that studios are the home of archivists, because they are the ones with the interest. Kinda like public libraries are the home of paper archivists I presume. So what happens when budgets are cut, and positions are removed?

Do we need to get the UN involved? (That's what they would do in this country, if anyone gave a rat's butt).

Me thinks cave people had the right idea... carve it on the walls someplace deep in the bowels of the earth. Or the Tibetans perhaps, who just chant it from generation to generation.

Personally, I think most of what we do today will be lost by tomorrow... and maybe we should plan accordingly. Cheers!

Jigs in the Doo

Phoenix Studios Nepal: A small A/V Production House in Kathmandu.

Yes, I've been to both many times (CU Boulder for BA) and the other is making news here:
http://www.rollcall.com/issues/56_110/Library-Congress-Hit-Hardest-Cuts-204...

One word regarding "world knowledge" if entrusted with these institutions: Scroomed.

Cheers,
jigs

Phoenix Studios Nepal: A small A/V Production House in Kathmandu.

Digital era is here and its arrived quickly, so filmmakers/Producers need to catch up ASAP on the new tech device, which by the way when making movie on digital media, makes your workflow easier and you are right on the spot for editing!

Richard WILSON
Graphic Design • Websites • Motion Graphics
RW Design Studio - Freelancer
http://www.rickywilson.ws

Like a lot of people are saying: no one is CALLING for film to die, but the writing is on the wall.

Film has its inherent aesthetic, but its advantages visually are fairly slim at this point. And even more important for producers and indies, the price/budget comparison.

I'm in love with s16 film, personally. But, it's going. No use in folks getting all up in arms about it.

Just because film cameras are no longer being made is less an issue with film fading than digital constantly requiring a new upgrade and makeover, kind of like the ultra high maintenance wife that keeps hubby working overtime just to break even.

http://www.alexlogic.com

Thanks for the story! There's an engaging point of view in it and I didn't know about the end of film camera production really.

It is clear that film is clearing out of the way for digital at an increasing speed and this will not stop until filmmaking on film as a recording medium becomes a realm of those who can afford it and are enthusiastic about exploring its particularities, not so much quality-wise (as digital is getting there quite fast), but primarily for the photochemical processes and mental ones as well. These are a thrill for many people at least as much as the stories they are shooting. Hence the main source of sadness about spotlights turning away from film stock. But, from a commercial point of view it all comes to the costs and risks involved, so....

I guess there's a good side to this story - filmmaking on film might get purified in a way, artistically speaking, after people who keep doing it reduce to those who truly love it for what it is and hopefully are worth the funding. The sad part is that this means it will get much more unaffordable, unreachable to many, many other talents who will have to work their way to it with a lot more difficulties, but hey, this is the unstoppable reality to come.

...And I'm not saying that digital is less creative! Just different as a medium and much more affordable and safer, so it will naturally pull along more of the artistically bad part of filmmaking with it, along with the good.

I belong to those "nostalgic" ones, but I accept digital development to its best, and I can get great results still playing. A few days ago I was calculating my photometrics using my head, a pen and a piece of paper, instead of using a software. So let's keep what we can and keep evolving.

Cheers!

This is truly sad. Digital is garbage if you ask me.It's too clear and too easy. Film is film and the look of a real movie cannot be replaced or replicated by digital. Anyone remember Eraserhead? Blue Velvet? And the man who made them has gone digital and has lost the classic look of his classic films. I'm sorry, but the whole realm of digital is completely sterile to me. It's just like the audio comparison - nothing can touch recording music to 2" tape vs. pro-tools digital. The difference is night and day to my ears as is film vs. digital to my eyes. No thanks... I'm sticking with film to the very end.

I witnessed the denial of digital taking over the still industry in 2001. It went very much the same a in moving pictures, and as of today, about 90 percent of all commercial, advertising, fashion, editorial and consumer photography is shot digitally. It took only 6 of so years for that to happen, but can anyone honestly say, that they can tell the difference? Most of us own music, do any of us still have vinyl? Most everyone owns an iPod, and the enjoying of music has evolved, I for one don't miss the hisses of vinyl.

There will be those that will hang on to film until the bitter end, but eventually they too, will shoot digital. Digital is all grown up, but the question is, what's next?


Von Thomas
RED/Epic Tech- DIT
Arri Alexa
Canon 5DMKII Tech
IATSE Local 600 DIT
http://www.digitaltechnyc.com
http://www.vonthomas.com
http://reddigitalmotionandstill.blogspot.com/

Von Thomas
RED DP / Workflow Guru

Damn right i can tell the difference between a digital photo and a pic shot on camera film stock! The digital snap is nice and clear but completely "flat" in appearance. As for vinyl, the format has made a massive comeback in the past 10 years and there is no comparison to cd's, or worse, mp3's. mp3's have 10% of the fidelity of a vinyl record and .wav files from a cd about 50%. check out SoundStageDirect.com to see just how many titles are available on vinyl these days.This whole digital thing is crap - you know what it really is all about? Money! The industry alwasy tries to find "the next thing" to get consumers to buy. Even if it is not only not an improvement to past technology, but may be a lesser format. Just like when cd's replaced vinyl for about 10 years. Or HDTV... you really think that looks better? Sharper yes, but better? Not to my eyes... i have a 35" Toshiba newer, but "old school" TV that looks better than ANY HDTV i have seen on the market recently. i try and find one every now and then, but nope... not yet. Digital? No way kids. Looks like poo. I'm kickin' it old school until i see something REALLY better.

I'm in complete agreement and have fully participated in the transition. I segued from stills to film (Bolex R-5) around 1966. I remember when I first encounted a camerman lugging what looked like a large suitcase over his shoulder and a Sony camera at an event in NYC around 1973. We were shooting with an Arri 2C with a 25 to 250 zoom and lights mounted on a dolly. The video guy was getting in our way and my AC said, in a scornfull tone, "excuse me Mr. Sony, but do you mind?" I now shoot with a Canon 5d2 and edit in Premiere.

Charles O. Slavens
The apparent is never the real.

As opposed to the incompetent staff at the Library of Congress? ;^) -- whose archiving article is online here at Creative COW.

Thank you for the reminder, Ann. I am sure that there will be more on the subject to come in the days ahead.

Best regards,

Ronald Lindeboom
CEO, Creative COW LLC
Publisher, Creative COW Magazine
A 2011 FOLIO: 40 honoree as one of the 40 most influential publishers in America
http://www.creativecow.net


Creativity is a process wherein the student and the teacher are located in the same individual.

"Incompetence has never prevented me from plunging in with enthusiasm." - Woody Allen

I think that videotape is the only archival medium that matters.

If you don't mind sharing, what can be done in film that cannot be achieved digitally?

Sean Mullen
Rampant Design Tools

@George - I see where you are coming from, it's not that it can't be done digitally, you're saying it's more organic when done on film. I dig where you are coming from.

Hand cranking is a great technique, but I've done that with a Red MX camera as well, not in post but in-camera. I've also done re-timing in AE which can come out with an organic feel if you have an artist who gets your vibe.

I completely understand the need to grunge up footage, that's the #1 request from my clients across the board. I've even gone as far as painting on actual film. But I have found that most of my clients (many on the national level) have a very difficult time telling the difference between elements I've shot on film and ones that I've manipulated or generated. When the shot is finished they are simply happy to have the grunged up look. Yes, there are some really cheesy filters out there, but that's not what I'm talking about. I have literally hundreds of hours of scanned and generated film elements that I mix and match all the time.

The majority of the projects I've been on lately are behind schedule, budget and due yesterday. They want the amazing look of 8 or 16 but want it now. I've shot snowboarding events on Super8 and it looks awesome. But I've also shot the same production the following year with a series of digital cameras and was able to have it match the film quite well.

It's really all a matter of taste, I hate the thought of film disappearing - I can remember watching my first VFX dailies on film. But I also have to say there is something cool with being able to shoot and manipulate 4k footage immediately, and it looks stunning on the big screen.

Sean Mullen
Rampant Design Tools

Hello George: I would be happy if film endured. As Ronald says, nobody wishes its death. I think the point of my article is that factors that have nothing to do with aesthetics are pushing film into obscurity. When film is no longer the medium of distribution, will the tiny amount they make for those still shooting film justify the costs of making it? Kodak once made its money with the huge consumer market, which has entirely disappeared. Our industry is a minor player in comparison....

I agree with this. However there are many niche markets for film in the production world that a lot of people don't consider. You've heard the quote "The technology of yesterday becomes the artform of today", well that is being seen in the popularity of shooting 35mm stills now, and in small gauge films. Super 8 and Super 16 both have distinct looks that are not necessarily commercial or big budget, but have an appeal that is hard to dismiss and no digital format can accurately reproduce. Fashion, music and action sports are 3 niches where the use of film is still very prevalent. The industry is always led by profits, as we all know (continually buying new gear is a goal), however the artists should be the balance on the scale. Film at this moment is an aesthetic choice and i think we'll see it continue to evolve as an art form. As it's been discussed the only issue is that Film manufacture is controlled by ONE key player, Kodak. I don't cry about it, but I guess I cherish the time we are in now because we DO have the option, 2 great options, Film or Digital. I would hate to just have one, whether that was only film or only digital.

----
george manzanilla
rundfunk media
http://www.rundfunk.com
http://www.georgemanzanilla.com

The future of film can be glimpsed by walking through the pages of Ebay. The motion picture cameras for sale is amazing, even more amazing are the prices $500,00 S35 cameras selling below 20K. 16 & S16 there’s tonnes of it. However sad this makes me feel I remind myself professionally I work in a money making business. Film was once the pathway for a operating a profitable business. Those sums are now changed. Digital mightn’t deliver the perfect “film look”…. Yet, but I ask the question does anyone else see it or care . I have sat in theatres watched & cringed at rolling shutter, artifacting, compression whilst the audience surrounding me applauded a blockbuster. Did they care it wasn’t shot on film?... NO.

@ George, I agree! I saw you speak about Super 8mm film last spring, and I am right there with you with a love of Super 8 film. Despite the fact cameras are no longer being made, I hope that film will continue to be made long into the future. I recently heard that Kodak was struggling in the third quarter, and it made me worry for the future of film. But as long as it's around, I will continue to shoot it, and our clients continue to request it. Digital effects are still far from recreating the magical feeling of film and its ability to evoke an emotional response, and film remains the best archival medium.

No doubt Arris and even Bolexes will keep whirring for decades to come, and some incarnation of Kodak will offer color neg, and someone else will put it in the soup and scan it for digital edit... but the harsh reality is that for much of the world, the SAG / AFTRA issue eerily timed with digital's maturity and global economic realities has dealt a paralyzing if not imminently fatal blow to film.

Labs have closed and absorbed, negative cutters are history, even telecine is waning by lack of demand.

The economic realities of trading emulsion for data files cannot possibly be ignored, and anyone who denies this probably works as a romantic hobbyist / artist filmmaker or an A-list studio DP. The in-between work is pretty much all digital now and has been for several years. In my little world, film fall right off the cliff in 2007...

...and that's a shame, because the discipline taught to film shooters is not continuing into the digital age. I hear this from other departments... something was lost with the end of film on sets. The precious magic and expense and mystery of a can of chemical that must be stored in total darkness... and the trust in the DP and lab that the dailies would knock your socks off... that's gone forever. The shortened learning curve to good image- making that comes with digital often costs the disciplines of protocol and technique that must first be learned and mastered before they are skillfully and intentionally broken.

I think there will be a rebound from this decade of everyman as imagemaker, and some will inject a new quality into the medium however they are used.

Fact is, there are entire working, professional crews right now who have never even seen a film camera in person, let alone on set... and could not care less.

Royce Dudley
Cinematographer
Southern California
http://www.vimeo.com/halepark

George,

I've found it much cheaper to shoot high speed digitally. The Phantom series of cameras can be obtained for only a few hundred dollars per day with the right connections AND I'm able to show my clients the footage within seconds of shooting it. If you are talking over 1000fps, then yes, I can see your point.

Sean Mullen
Rampant Design Tools

Having been around before the "death of film-editing" I can attest to the lack of most people to embrace change. In the 70's news was shot and cut on film, then things changed! ENG equipment was invented and BOOM everything changed and frankly I would not want to go back to shooting timely material on film and rushing it to a lab and cutting it with a tape splicer and then getting it transferred to video, etc, etc.

Film production took a few decades longer, though I remember working on a shoot with an "EC-35" an early Ikagami electronic "film" camera. Even in the 80's things were changing for film production.

Now, it is no surprise that Kodak is hurting and there are no more film cameras being produced. The same paradigm shift happened in still photography, I still have a couple of 4x5's and 2-1/4 cameras in the closet. Should have dumped them years ago, but didn't, my loss, I shoot digital now and have been using photoshop and printing digital way before I stopped shooting on film, but now I'm 100% digital. Same will happen with Film production, now it's a way of shooting, not a physical product you put in your camera!

Do I miss shooting film, sort of, but not really. I had a "lab" and always hated working in the dark, I embraced the "lightroom" and never looked back, though I still have my enlarger out in the garage.

I have a friend who is still shooting S-16, he owns a couple of cameras and will shoot with them till there is no more film and processing. Since the equipment is a sunk cost with no recovery value, this makes sense for him, for now. If a 2/3 camera comes on the market (Ikonoskope) that will take his lenses, that may be a great time for him to change to digital, he has been cutting on an Avid for decades? though I remember cutting on a 6 plate Steenbeck, I do not want to go back to that!

Change, It has been amazing in the past few years!

Malcolm
http://www.malcolmproductions.com