A Quote by Thelma Schoonmaker

I can access footage much quicker, yes. But in terms of living with a film and knowing what's right, digital doesn't do that for you. — © Thelma Schoonmaker
I can access footage much quicker, yes. But in terms of living with a film and knowing what's right, digital doesn't do that for you.
We all know of the dangers and inequities of the traditional digital divide: People who have good access tocomputer networks have a distinct advantage - in terms of both life opportunities and quality of life, I wouldargue - over the vast majority of the world's population that does not yet have good access to computernetworks. The "other" digital divide points to an increasingly unstable situation that has developed inlibrarianship as digital libraries have evolved and matured.
I think digital will displace film, yes. We're talking about digital as a thing of the future, but I'm afraid that it's here.
If you need to strap a camera to you or get in a small space, then it makes sense to use digital.I do think it is possible to use a digital camera artistically, but it can only be good if you are using film technique. Film has grain, and digital has pixels, and there is not that much of a difference, but digital does not replace the need to create a scene and light it properly and spend time considering the shot.
The digital medium gives you the license to talk about many things as compared to movies. It is quicker than shooting for a film.
You cannot do everything you want with the 3D camera, it's too big, and the digital quality of those cameras is a little bit limiting. With film, you have a lot more subtly, like with highlights and color. In terms of sharpness they (both formats) are very close; but in terms of nuance, of color and contrast, film is far superior.
While yes we can both agree the sudden recovery of this footage smells not a little, and that we appear to be bits of tinfoil-on-string to some malevolent government kitten, yes yes yes but, Borlu, however they've come by this evidence, this is the correct decision.
In terms of digital photography, I continue to print and use film for the most part. I still shoot with film, 21/4 film specifically, and I love it. I love it because I know what it does, how it really responds to light.
The gap is not between knowing it and living it, it's between knowing it and living it consistently. You know, we've all had moments when we got it right. Most of us have moments when we get it right every day. The trouble is getting it right when a curve-ball comes at us.
Film has far more color shades. It's called 'bit depth' in digital terms. And most bit depth in digital is about twelve, but film bit depth can be twenty to thirty. And so you just have more shades of yellow and red and oranges and everything.
There was no actually stock footage in "Medium Cool." I wrote the script. I wrote the riots. And I integrated the actors in the film in the park during the demonstrations. But nowhere was it like we had stock footage and then later, in editing, integrated it into the film. It was all done at the time.
As an actor, my attitude towards using of film versus digital is, if you have film, filmmakers have to cut eventually so you don't have to learn all that dialogue. With digital, they can just go on forever and it's a nightmare. So, I like film - nice short takes.
[ Digital revolution ] only has allowed me to work faster, editing digitally, which I'm doing right now, a film on volcanoes. I can edit almost as fast as I'm thinking, editing with celluloid means always searching for this little reel of film, and number it, and scribble on it with some sort of pens, and gluing it together, and working on a flatbed. It's much, much slower.
Once the image was in the digital environment, one of the problems was, we had no means to reproduce the color spectrum, grey scale, and contrast that film produces, without converting the digital file to film, evaluating it, then going back and changing the digital image.
I guess my first digital movie was 'Tintin' because 'Tintin' has no film step. There is no intermediate film step. It's 100% digital animation, but as far as a live-action film, I'm still planning to shoot everything on film.
I edited Big Funk, some of the footage was shot by Peter Care. We were film buffs as much as music buffs, and so there are film reference as well as sound references.
I will do a big-budget film. I will do an indie film. I will do a short film. I will do a digital platform show, television, and even theatre. I don't have any restrictions in terms of platform as long as the content is something that I find interesting.
This site uses cookies to ensure you get the best experience. More info...
Got it!