|
|
![]() |
||||||||||||||||||||
|
Best Blu-ray Movie Deals
|
Best Blu-ray Movie Deals, See All the Deals » |
Top deals |
New deals
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() $74.99 | ![]() $101.99 4 hrs ago
| ![]() $124.99 14 hrs ago
| ![]() $35.99 1 day ago
| ![]() $39.95 14 hrs ago
| ![]() $33.49 1 day ago
| ![]() $70.00 | ![]() $33.49 1 day ago
| ![]() $29.95 | ![]() $23.79 11 hrs ago
| ![]() $22.96 | ![]() $30.49 |
![]() |
#1 |
Member
|
![]()
For the most part i think it looks cheap. It just lacks something of what i like about film. I cant really articulate and describe it but its sorta this heightened reality.
Digital video just looks flat. And the lower the budget is on the film. The worse it looks. Usually. Naturally. But many high budget films still look very cheap and flat. Its kinda weird how you today can watch an restored italian genre film made for peanuts look absolutely fantastic. And then you look at a mainstream hollywood film and it just looks flat. Digital has gotten better than it was. And it gets better every year. But many films still suffer. And it seems like digital demands alot more out of the cinematographer. |
![]() |
|
|
![]() |
|
|