Audio saves film(only slightly tongue in cheek)

[pixelthis]

Film is hanging on by its toenails. At the turn of the century
a billion rolls a year were sold, now its more like 30 million.
Whats this got to do with audio? Well, a small cadre of
film buffs have "developed" (sorry) saying they prefer film,
and have all sorts of descriptions, and excuses, like film catches
light better, etc . HAS a better "texture", and so on.
SO LETS SEE...
CD debuts, kicks turntable butt, a few years later turntables rebound,
for all sorts of wacky reasons.
With the success of turntables, sleezy marketing types push
tube amps, primarily SET, which was obsolete in 1934.
AND A VERY SMALL group start singing the praises of CRT.
And the sleezy marketing types working for the dying film industry, they are not too slow, they now use the same marketing to push film
(or get rid of the remaining stock) that sleazy electronics marketers use, like a lot of descriptive words to describe the
"superiority" of film, etc, a lot they stole from your typical "audiophile", who can pull mumbo jumbo outta their hiney
like nobodies business to brag about their 5 watt SET monoblock.
Nice to know that all of the marketing experise that has saved
so much obsolete tech from the graveyard in the audio field is now being used to save obsolete tech in the photography field.
Great contribution on the part of the hot air devisions of audio
marketing..
If marketing types can sell a five dollar power cord for hundreds
by putting it in a new box, selling film ought to be easy:1:

[Smokey]

Film is hanging on by its toenails. At the turn of the century a billion rolls a year were sold, now its more like 30 million.
Whats this got to do with audio? Well, a small cadre of film buffs have "developed" (sorry) saying they prefer film, and have all sorts of descriptions, and excuses, like film catches light better, etc . HAS a better "texture", and so on.

But they do say that film is capable of 4K resolution. I am not sure if digital can reach that high resolution.

[kevlarus]

But they do say that film is capable of 4K resolution. I am not sure if digital can reach that high resolution.

There's already HD and 2K video cameras (professional digital) and I think there are a couple of companies producing or sampling 4K which is the next standard.

HDMI 1.4a supports both 3D and 4K imaging, but I don't expect 4K to be in consumer products for some time.

[Sir Terrence the Terrible]

But they do say that film is capable of 4K resolution. I am not sure if digital can reach that high resolution.

Sony has a professional 4K projector already in use in theaters. There are already 4K workflows for restoration, 4K scanners, and 4K encoding tools. They now even have 8K scanners in use at Warner Studios, and DTS for restoration projects.

[pixelthis]

But for all practical purposes film is exiting stage right.
As an ex am photog I am nostalgic, but I DO LOVE my 12mp
digital camera. And I am not even using the full potential of
the thing. And it fits in a pocket.
THESE , along with fone cams, have changed the world.
Now if something happens, there are thousands of pics.:1:

[basite]

But they do say that film is capable of 4K resolution. I am not sure if digital can reach that high resolution.



of course it can, but there's more to film than resolution alone, which digital doesn't do and physically never will do.

[Smokey]

of course it can, but there's more to film than resolution alone, which digital doesn't do and physically never will do.

Such as?

[basite]

Such as?

Grain, for instance.

a digital recording (so, with a sensor), has a pattern, pixels next to each other, and under each other, in lines. this is a constant pattern.
With film, you have a random grain. The photosensitive parts are layed out randomly, bigger bits at the bottom, smaller bits on top, but in a random structure, and they vary each frame. This way, the grain is always "moving". With old movies, especially with very light sensitive film, you could see this grain sometimes (though it wouldn't disturb your viewing). This is also a true grain, not the electrical noise you get with high iso's on digital sensors.
this makes a more pleasant viewing experience too, as we like the natural grain.

Then, there's colors. Even though technology is very advanced, digital is still bonded to a constant range of colors, depending on the quality. These are discrete values. A good analog film, will capture the light & colors that come in, again, with random pixel structure. you could say these are continuous values.

and indeed, the sharpness due to the resolution. 4k is great, they're experimenting with 8k too now (recording!), but the perceived sharpness is different with film.

Now, I'm not going to say, that there aren't some lunatic scientists, who can prove that digital recordings are better than analog on film, I'm sure they can. On paper.
But the perception with our own eyes, cannot be valued more than no matter which test results on paper. it's like we compare audio gear. You cannot only go with the specs of a speaker, amp, or any other component, it's about hearing what it sounds like.

and, of course, I'm not going to argue, digital has it's advantages also, for a movie like, Tron, or avatar or the like, digital certainly has the edge, simply because the entire environment is digital, there are countless effects, models, ... but, not every movie is like avatar, then...

Keep them spinning.
Bert.

[Smokey]

Grain, for instance.

a digital recording (so, with a sensor), has a pattern, pixels next to each other, and under each other, in lines. this is a constant pattern.
With film, you have a random grain. The photosensitive parts are layed out randomly, bigger bits at the bottom, smaller bits on top, but in a random structure, and they vary each frame. This way, the grain is always "moving". With old movies, especially with very light sensitive film, you could see this grain sometimes (though it wouldn't disturb your viewing). This is also a true grain, not the electrical noise you get with high iso's on digital sensors.
this makes a more pleasant viewing experience too, as we like the natural grain.

Then, there's colors. Even though technology is very advanced, digital is still bonded to a constant range of colors, depending on the quality. These are discrete values. A good analog film, will capture the light & colors that come in, again, with random pixel structure. you could say these are continuous values.


I am guesing those advantages also comes at a cost. Degrading quality over time with limited life span comes to mind :)

[basite]

I am guesing those advantages also comes at a cost. Degrading quality over time with limited life span comes to mind :)

True, although good storing and well handling the film will help, it will degrade.

although they do make new copies when needed, if the master is available...

This is also a reason why in modern movies, the pictures are shot with film camera's, and then carefully scanned in afterwards, digitalizing them, so a part of the film magic is captured too.

[pixelthis]

Learned a lot on this thread. Lots of knowledgeable peeps on
this site.:1:

[Vinylly]

I disagree on your whole premise. 'SLEAZY'?. You need 'audiophile indocturnation', buddy. This is done by just listening.