|
![]() |
|
LinkBack | Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
![]() |
#11 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 394
|
![]()
I also am a digital plus film fan and the one of the places where film is superior over all is that there are many more years of development with film cameras than digital cameras. The quality is there. The prices can also be attractive as well.
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#12 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 5,803
|
![]()
AMG, I might have the answer for you (but not with movies.) IF you buy good film (and that is a BIG IF) and you compare it to the average digital camera, the film will be able to record a wider range of light and dark areas. But if you violate those conditions (like buy a $8000 digital camera) you can record as wide a dynamic range with digital as with film.
I assume when lucas went with digital for the latest star wars films (don't get me started) he made sure that the digital video cameras had the same properties as with film. Of course, there is more to a movie than how much light it can capture, how it handles transitions (both in light/dark and in panning) and all that. So its possible you are picking up on something that is actuallythere. But I don't know enough about it to know. Eric |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|
|