How digital technology revolutionized the film industry?
Side by Side (2012) Trailer
Side by Side (2012) is a documentary about
how digital technology has revolutionized the filmmaking process. “Movies
thrill us and capture our imagination. Film has helped us share our experiences
and dreams.” But as more and more Hollywood
film are shot digitally, is film dead? Can digital technology replace chemical
film?
The documentary explores the issue from the
viewpoint of directors, cinematographers, editors, color timers, and actors.
Firstly, digital technology has changed the
filmmaking process in production. For cinematographers, filmmaking is a
craftsmanship of both aesthetics and technical knowledge. As a cinematographer,
I have learned that it is about “painting with light”. We use equipment and
tools such as lenses, filters, and lighting to recreate the reality using our
vivid imagination. With the technical revolution, digital cameras are smaller
and lighter. They are handier for difficult angles which are inaccessible by
traditional big film cameras. People have always argued that the quality of
digital images have no match for the quality of film. However, the invention of
Arri Alexa and Red Epic has revolutionized the industry. They have a broader
dynamic range, resolution, sensor and color. Digital images have developed from
standard definition (SD) to high definition (HD), 2K and then 4K. It also lowers
the cost of filmmaking as film is more expensive.
Traditionally, dailies are sent to the lab
to process overnight and can only be viewed the next day. But with digital
video cameras, they can show the images on the monitor and watch immediately.
In post-production, editors in the editing
bay no longer splice the physical films but use non-linear editing software such
as Avid. Digital technology has facilitated the visual effects (VFX) process.
Moreover, color timing process is also done digitally.
Digital technology’s another influence in
filmmaking is 3D. As a matter of fact, more and more films are shot or made
into 3D in post-production. But I don’t think it is necessary unless it helps
to tell the story. Avatar would be a good example of how 3D enhances the movie.
Furthermore, there is a higher tendency for
filmmakers to rely on post-production. In my field visit to a post-production
house, the staff said that many filmmakers are used to say, “Let’s correct it
in the post.” Though it is a small amount compared to the whole feature film or
network television drama budget, it is a relatively large amount to us indeed. I
highly agree with my cinematography lecturer that it is better to do it in
cameras with filters, lighting and lenses than in post.
In addition, digital technology has made
distribution easier and cheaper. And cinemas have to buy digital projector to
incorporate digital films.
Another important point to take is about storage.
We know that film can last for a hundred years, but it is still yet to see how
long films in digital form can endure. As many digital formats stored in the 80’s are not compatible and readable
nowadays, the format of digital storage is an issue that needs to be solved.
Therefore, it is said that a lot of films shot on digital are converted back to
film for storage.
It is interesting that Keanu Reeves said
that 5D and 7D are cheap digital video cameras. I know that they are inexpensive
compared to cameras like Arri or Red. Sadly, it is still unaffordable to me. And
I hope I can have my own 5D or 7D soon. I guess the pro of digital filmmaking
is that consumer video cameras are so easily accessible that we can all be
filmmakers. As long as we have great stories, it doesn’t matter what we use.
To conclude, this is a must-watch for film
students. It summarized what I have learnt for a year in film school. Ironically,
this documentary reminds me of what my editing class lecturer said, “2012 is
not the end of the world; it’s the end of film.”
