Watch The Touching Short Film - 'Portrait of A Projectionist'

6 Comments

• | Reply

• CareyCarey | October 21, 2012 10:16 PMReply

  Sergio, what is it about film that you love so much? Can the average person tell the difference between a movie shot on "Film stock" and one shot with a digital camera? What's lost and what's gained in both processes (aside from the cost)? On a similar note, I believe you collect old LP's (music). Some would rather listen to the imperfection of those recordings than the "remastered" versions. Is that sort-of where your at?

• CareyCarey | October 22, 2012 1:10 AM

  Sergio, as I've told you many times, I have always admire your knowledge of films. Hell, who here at S&A has seen more movies than you, and thus, can speak on them with conviction, more than you? Aside from that, your approach, your voice and your comments are anything but "average" and I love that in you. So I had to come back and tell you that I really was looking for how someone can distinguish between "film stock" and digital imagery? I didn't know and don't know what to look for, so I thought you'd be able to articulate it, in a way that even I could understand. Now I am wondering if it has anything to do with the overall experience while watching said films. You know, that subconscious journey back to a time when we were younger and stronger, and life was still a mysterious journey? It's like, I'm thinking, when we hear an old favorite song which instantly takes us back to memories, feelings and emotions of that period. Times when our girlfriends were wrinkle free, young and supple. And as I said, we were younger, stronger and could last all night long *wink* *lol*. Now of course I am being somewhat facetious, but again, I'm wondering if watching movies shot on "film stock" is more about the overall "experience" than the "quality" of the movies? On a similar note, in respect to LP's, when I pull mine from their hiding place, they do, instantly, take me back to memories of days in which I was a reckless fool... but I thought (I knew) I was having fun. In the first place, the love songs help me catch a few "nice" women and the jackets alone inspired conversation. In one such case, a child was born :-(. Also, I used the covers to clean my weed. And that experience (drug use) eventually led to dire consequences that I wouldn't wish upon my worst enemy. But as I said, at the time it sure was fun. Anyway, could you tell me a little more about what movie shot on film stock does for you and how I can tell the difference?

• CareyCarey | October 21, 2012 11:12 PM

  *lol*... I know you're not the average guy, that's why I asked you, I really wanted to know the difference. Hey, I am with you, I love the "feel" of the older films. I am reminded of the films shot in Technicolor. While watching a movie (with another person) which used that process, I said "That's shot in technicolor". Well, they looked at me with a strange look and said, "who notices that?". Of course I said, "I DO".

• sergio | October 21, 2012 10:54 PM

  " Can the average person tell the difference..." I'm not "average" There is a texture to film that digital does not have. Take for example The Walking Dead which is shot on 16MM. It gives the show a rough, grainy texture which I love. If it was shot digitally with its plastic-like "sheen" the visceral impact (figuratively and literally) would have been totally lost in my opinion. But then again like I just said it's my opinion. if you like digitally shot films then go ahead and enjoy it

• Solaam | October 21, 2012 8:39 PMReply

  I wholeheartedly agree and love film. However Sergio, irony is not lost in that this video was shot on a DSLR!
  I enjoy Philip Bloom and have learned tons from his site. He's one of the leaders in this digital age and I'm sure his teachings and informative website have helped alot of filmmakers jump into the game when they couldn't because of the cost of the film process.
  I wish there was room for both. Has Shadow and Act discussed the doc, "Side by Side"?

• VC | October 21, 2012 8:33 PMReply

  Wow, thanks for this. As much as I love film and have shot many movies with film, I fell the film industry shot itself in the foot, 11mins of unprocessed 35mm rawstock $550.00, .30 per foot work printing, $ 1.50 per foot answer printing. I'll miss film but they could have slowed the digital revolution by simply cutting their prices.
  
  see the trailer...http://youtu.be/HiLqhp0soMM