In Reply to: Re: Harry Potter and the Gobelet of Fire---- posted by patrickU on April 12, 2006 at 09:52:04:
"Ha-ha!
Well I meant with " shit " a big commercial product, that was more on the lovely side...From me."Check the quotation marks and you will see that "shit" isn't isolated in my post. I was asking what your statement meant not what that word meant.
"I do not know if it was shot on digital, but many film are done that way now and even when shot on real film, many are digitally proceed in the final stage."
Digitizing film is a very differnt thing than shooting straight on digital. When done well you can't tell the difference between diitally scanned film image and the original. OTOH the digital cameras are still far from film quality."I meant the digital effect,"
Digital in film has any number of effects depending on what is being done digitally.
" I did not go in details for this film because I though nobody here would care!"Then why post at all?
"The same was meant fo K-K, not the film but the effect, the trickery if you want."
But much of what you see in King Kong is done without any digital processing. It does not look like it was shot on digital where as the last two Harry Potter movies do. You can tell the difference can't you?"As for digital versus celluloid, it is a very long subject, each of the proceding has his advantage.
For me, it is of course, the old fashion way I pretend to like much more."
The only advantage I have ever seen in digital was only an advantage if one is doing forensic documantation in very low light. Ugly is ugly. Digital motion photography is ugly. I am sure it will get better but for now no thank you.
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Follow Ups
- you made the same wrong assumption as audiophilander - Analog Scott 10:32:58 04/12/06 (4)
- Re: you made the same wrong assumption as audiophilander - patrickU 11:14:28 04/12/06 (3)
- Re: you made the same wrong assumption as audiophilander - Analog Scott 11:22:33 04/12/06 (2)
- Re: you made the same wrong assumption as audiophilander - patrickU 06:39:46 04/13/06 (1)
- Re: you made the same wrong assumption as audiophilander - Analog Scott 08:42:52 04/13/06 (0)