Digital cinema and the death of grain?

[kristoffer]

Just saw Finchers TGWTDT and it looked amazing. This was shot on the new RED Epic and it has better shadow detailing than the RED ONE used on The Social network. One thing I do miss with digital cinema is the grain. Soon movies won't have grain anymore and I find that a little sad.

[Jimmy Smith]

Does the real world have grain? Unless your walking through a sandstorm no. Then why should movies?

I don't support destructive grain removal of old films but I think Red shot movies(particularly 3D ones) look much better especially now that they can go up to 5k and essencially equal the resolution of 35mm film

[Dubstar]

from what I've read online, Sony is releasing 'Girl with the Dragon Tattoo' in 4K for it's 4K projector's (DLP needs to get it's act together)

[WiWavelength]

Originally Posted by Jimmy Smith

Does the real world have grain? Unless your walking through a sandstorm no. Then why should movies?

Movies are an art form; they are not necessarily supposed to look like the "real world."

For many filmmakers, especially cinematographers, the film grain that is created by using different film stocks and processing techniques is part of their artistic palette.

Assuredly, some filmmakers do embrace digital capture and the "death of grain." But you will find a greater number who prefer the film medium and its traditional aesthetic that includes film grain, 24 fps motion capture, etc.

AJ

[Monkey]

The evolution of movie making is fantastic. Having the ability to shoot without grain artifacts is a huge improvement in picture quality I wish they'd up the standard framerate well above 24fps as well (the tech's been there for ages..). To think at one time movies were black and white with no movie sound. We live in great times

Think of some old movie where everything looked like it had freckles or a plague of flies in the sky, when none was actually there.

Director's can still put in grain artifacts, just as they put in colored filters, etc if they choose. Grain artifacts are the result of the dated technology and directors have far superior tools now like the RED.

[octagon]

Originally Posted by Jimmy Smith

Does the real world have grain? Unless your walking through a sandstorm no. Then why should movies?

I don't support destructive grain removal of old films but I think Red shot movies(particularly 3D ones) look much better especially now that they can go up to 5k and essencially equal the resolution of 35mm film

The real world doesn't have brush strokes either but there's plenty of room in the art world for both painting and photography. I'm not adamantly opposed to digital filmmaking but I hope actual film sticks around for a good long while.

[Falconer]

Can't say I care about grain at all. Only time I notice it is when it gets in the way of a beautiful image.

[Petra_Kalbrain]

Preserve what grain exists for film based productions of days gone by...

But accept the future of grain-free entertainment! The time has come for a new generation of perception folks. THE CLEARER THE IMAGE, THE BETTER!

[42041]

Originally Posted by Monkey

I wish they'd up the standard framerate well above 24fps as well (the tech's been there for ages..).

I'd hate that. 24fps is the visual trademark of cinema.

I'm happy that filmmakers have the option, but personally I'm not a big fan of the digital look. It is inherently more bland and sterile to my eyes, though obviously, the artistry of the photography supersedes the capture medium.

[Snicket]

I shoot my films on a cannon 5D and still get grain In there sometimes so even digital gets grain. And the reason most people don't go above 24fps is because it tends to look cheap like a home movie while 24fps has more of a film look.

[42041]

Originally Posted by Petra_Kalbrain

But accept the future of grain-free entertainment! The time has come for a new generation of perception folks. THE CLEARER THE IMAGE, THE BETTER!

We're not talking about scientific imaging, this is an artform. In this context, clearer is clearer, grainy is grainy, and "better" has nothing to do with it.

[Monkey]

Originally Posted by Snicket

I shoot my films on a cannon 5D and still get grain In there sometimes so even digital gets grain. And the reason most people don't go above 24fps is because it tends to look cheap like a home movie while 24fps has more of a film look.

Are you sure it isn't that most theaters are simply equipped to do 24fps, as it has been the standard for ages and would have major increase in costs to up the framerate in regards to celluloid? (the film reels are huge as is, being twice as big would be a pain to transport as well). In the digital ere the cost to increase would be much less.

[42041]

Originally Posted by Monkey

Are you sure it isn't that most theaters are simply equipped to do 24fps, as it has been the standard for ages and would have major increase in costs to up the framerate in regards to celluloid? (the film reels are huge as is, being twice as big would be a pain to transport as well). In the digital ere the cost to increase would be much less.

TV has never had that restriction, yet every scripted TV show I know, even when all of them are shooting digital (so film cost is a non-issue), is in 24fps. It's a distinctive, cinematic look.

[AreaUnderTheCurve]

Originally Posted by Falconer

Can't say I care about grain at all. Only time I notice it is when it gets in the way of a beautiful image.

*cough* Black Swan *cough*

[Monkey]

I just remembered The Hobbit will be in 48fps

Originally Posted by 42041

TV has never had that restriction, yet every scripted TV show I know, even when all of them are shooting digital (so film cost is a non-issue), is in 24fps. It's a distinctive, cinematic look.

I've never read the statistics but I thought some TV shows were filmed at 30fps and some 60fps as well. Would be interesting to see if there was some data base that showed tv shows and their framerates.

[AreaUnderTheCurve]

Originally Posted by Monkey

I just remembered The Hobbit will be in 48fps

I think 48fps will be the next gimmick to drive up ticket prices even more.

[X12Celtics3]

Originally Posted by JLTucker

*cough* Black Swan *cough*

Black Swan looked absolutely perfect.

Anyway, I like digital filming, but I was hoping this would be on film. For a dark, gritty mystery/crime thriller, it will be a bit odd to not see any grain.

[Jimmy Smith]

If I had my way every movie from now on would be shot with the same cameras The Hobbitt is being shot with

[Foggy]

Grain will always be used as film is an art form and grain is a tool to create effect. The only problem is that grain my be artifical used

[Jimmy Smith]

Up until recently grain was rarely an intentional artistic decision and more a side effect of filmmaking limitations. Digital cinema is little over a decade old and only very recently could it shoot at a high enough resolution. Up until very recently film was simply the only way to shoot a movie at high enough resolution to be future proof.