Maybe it’s because I’m seeking it out. But lately I’ve been
seeing a revival of film shooting. I mean, shooting on organic physical film
rather than digital. Which is odd considering I’m starting to come around in
terms of finding use for digital, instead of looking at what’s bad. Digital has
its benefits, but to me the cons outweigh the pros. A few of the things that
come to mind are that you can walk away from a production knowing that you have
what you need (which some may argue a vid feed recorded on video tap could do
the same thing when it comes to film). And you don’t have to wait a day to see
your work. In fact, you potentially could even see a cut scene within that same
day. Yes, convenience. But has this made better movies? I’d argue it’s worse.
The projects I’ve been involved in that dealt with digital dailies usually fall
under people who can’t finalize a decision. Now with so many options, there is
no creative solution. There’s “shoot more until we can figure it out in
editing.” This is bad. There is lackluster pre-production to hammer out all
your issues before you begin. I would argue…this to be the SOLE reason
independent projects should shoot on film. Since a) you don’t know how much
time you waste watching take after take. I would even say in comedy, immediacy
almost makes you second guess your intuition. That’s death. I’m not sure I’ve
seen a comedy this year that was digitally shot that was remotely funny. I
think that energy is bled out with that type of shooting. I think the old
school guys would call this “machine gun” shooting. Spray and hope you hit
something.
So now I’m reading about people who are going WAY old
school. That means shooting and then printing to film, and then editing on a
flatbed. There is nothing more pure and to the physical as this workflow. You
accept the environment into your image. Dust, dirt and scratches. Then you have
mag track that syncs up to film. Mag track is 1/4” roll of audio that you use
to transfer Nagra (sound recorder) to. It’s analog audio, reel to reel. And
matches to picture. Personally, I LOVE reel to reel audio. Audiophiles can
defend this better than I, but all I can say is digital recording drops a lot
that reel to reel picked up cleanly. From my experience anyway.
I absolutely LOVE that there are people out there that make
movies again, the traditional way. I mean, it is commitment since a lot of the
gear used for this workflow is in disrepair or gutted/recycled for other
things.
I just remember, about 20 years ago, I was sitting in a
“bullpen” at University Hall in Bowling Green, Ohio crammed into a storage
space with a flatbed editor. A terrible machine that we didn’t even know
worked. The projection screen was pushed in, and I doubt anyone had touched it
since the 80’s. But I made my short film on it (don’t ask me how, because I
honestly don’t remember the details other than surviving on Coca-Cola and
pizza). This was at a time when you had to be deliberate with your edit point,
less you watch your movie in chunks. Painful, yet educational process that made
me appreciate every frame that I shot. I think it’s missed in digital shooting.
I fight and use film. Because I think there’s an honesty to
it. It’s pure craft. My contention is that, if it is a truly art form to the
crafter, film will always have a place. But in reality, we are dealing with the
mindset of the business side of show. Which they’d rather save pennies to be
just “good enough.” Why not shoot film now before your break into the big dog studios
force that away from you?
No comments:
Post a Comment