Anyone watching Side by Side?

ps3ud0

ps3ud0

ps3ud0

Caporegime
Joined
27 Sep 2004
Posts
27,676
Location
Luton ;)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Side_by_Side_(2012_film)

So whats your thoughts on the whole film vs digital argument?

I have to admit I love the romatic nature of film (well the texture it brings) and the fact that right now its far, far more capable of capturing detail than what we have with digital. Its ludicrous to consider that a process thats been around for decades still has the ability to produce superior results than newer technology of the day...

I understand digital is perfect for workflow and the ability to make changes there and then while shooting or the ability to transport/distribute it easier, its just a nagging concern that like (compressed) digital audio that the original recording may suffer in decades to come when you realise what was missed. We talk aout 4K/8K as beneficial standards and it is if you are talking about todays established digital standards, but you wouldnt think these standards will be of suitable quality 50 years down the line when you start thinking about remastering (well I know digital doesnt need it like film does, but you see my point I hope)...

Its easier to understand why some still consider vinyl to be better than digital formats when it comes to audio, to me, its just so much more obvious when it comes to visual media. Its a very exciting time, just hope people realise what we may potentially lose for the sake of ease of use and that film really is something worth remembering...

ps3ud0 :cool:
 
Last edited:
ps3ud0 said:
Im guessing it was only me then!

ps3ud0 :cool:
Click to expand...

I watched it a few months ago, and then bought the DVD, which is well worth getting for hours of extra chat. It is a very interesting, very well put together piece of work, with some truly great talking heads.

My personal view on digital v film, is bring on digital... which is pretty much the case anyway. Film may have some advantages, [and a certain aesthetic] but that will not be the case for long, with constantly improving tech. It certainly means a better end result in the cinema, with no more knackered, ropey old prints, on tired projectors. And the advantages for film makers are so great, that its only going to be a hardcore few who insist on using film.

I also think the same with music, and think vinyl sounding better than digital is a load of salty balls... same during the recording process. Bad sounding music has nothing to do with it being analogue or digital... MP3 is a blight however :mad:

Anyway 'Side by Side' is well worth catching, or buying :)
 
Last edited:
I do think there are some very good advantages to digital, but right now its pretty inferior when it comes presentation if you compare it to a decent film copy. I think digital needs to go a fair way in that respect but for pretty much everything else (workflow/post-processing, distribution and archiving) its heads and shoulders over film.

I just dont think film has had its day yet and what worries me most is stuff thats been filmed in say 1080p/2k just wont have that same ability to be remastered 50 years down the line like film can be today - perhaps CSI might be able to help :p.

Ill try and pick the DVD up - what were the extras about? I wasnt too impressed with Keanu as the interviewer, but obviously the interviewees and their insight was mesmerising and why I made the thread...

EDIT: As an aside, I hate this stupid practise of adding film grain onto digital films, I just dont get why they do it...

ps3ud0 :cool:
 
Last edited:
ps3ud0 said:
I do think there are some very good advantages to digital, but right now its pretty inferior when it comes presentation if you compare it to a decent film copy. I think digital needs to go a fair way in that respect but for pretty much everything else (workflow/post-processing, distribution and archiving) its heads and shoulders over film.

I just dont think film has had its day yet and what worries me most is stuff thats been filmed in say 1080p/2k just wont have that same ability to be remastered 50 years down the line like film can be today - perhaps CSI might be able to help :p.

Ill try and pick the DVD up - what were the extras about? I wasnt too impressed with Keanu as the interviewer, but obviously the interviewees and their insight was mesmerising and why I made the thread...

EDIT: As an aside, I hate this stupid practise of adding film grain onto digital films, I just dont get why they do it...

ps3ud0 :cool:
Click to expand...

I think stuff shot on 'top of the tree' kit now, such as Red's, Sony and Arri will stand the test of time. A lot of the output using these cameras is very-very good, and very close to film in most respects [better in others]... harsh lighting seems to catch it out sometimes, but with dynamic range constantly improving, this will not be an issue for long. The stuff filmed on DSLR's has many issues, but, it allows some talented people to make releasable [great looking] films, with micro budgets, and to me that’s very cool.


The extra content on the DVD is basically the interviews extended, so there is some repetition with the main film... I think there is four hours of extended material.
 
Oh yeah that stuff pumping out 4K is just about adequate. As you said though its not all about resolution and theres features like HDR that theyve only just fixed within the last 5 years.

I think Im just pointing out that digital on the whole is good as generally its obviously superior to what its replacing, this is just one instance where it still needs to improve significantly IMO. Going to happen sooner rather than later.

Hmm 4 hours more of a documentary, hmm!

ps3ud0 :cool:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom