A few thoughts that may help you decide to shoot film or HD. At the point of acquisition film is better than the current crop of HD camcorders. No question.

However the difference is somewhat blurred by the lossy process of getting film to screen. The resultant image is still superior when it is delivered to the cinema. However the projection system and viewing conditions are such that the difference is again blurred to the point that the audience cannot see a difference.

This is fact.

Much is made of the compression of HDCAM (the recording system used in the Sony camcorder) It is telling that even some DPs resort to the numbers game to dissuade people from shooting HD.

They will shoot every test chart, under and over expose HD and make multiple generations of HD images to trip it up.

They do everything but take a decent well exposed well lit picture with it!

Forget the numbers, look at the picture. If you don't like the look of HD fine. But remember that by shooting HD you have the opportunity of low cost post manipulation and grading that for some projects offers enormous production value and this is not reflected in a side by side test.

Compression works. Our eyes are appalling at colour memory but very attuned to skin tones. The biggest problem with digital systems is the 8 bit recording of Varicam and HDCAM is limited to being able to produce 16 million colours. We need more than this to reproduce the full range of skin tones.10 bit recordings are solving this, bear in mind that the camera AD can be a slow as 10bit (Varicam

"I've seen the comparison tests and HD looks shitty"

Checkout the frame grabs on this site.

Most of the comparison tests between HD and film are made to demonstrate what HD can't do. Although this has some use as a aide for a DPs who is new to HD, the technical quality of the resultant HD images are usually below par.

For instance a common test is light a scene for film and shoot with a HD camera along side. This is not the best way to take a HD picture as lighting ratio should be less than film.

The DP lights the scene to be within the tolerance of the contrast range of film, he did not light the scene beyond the performance of film emulsion! Yet he does this for HD? Why?

Rather than trying to make HD look good some companies try to make HD to look like film at the DI stage. The fact is it should be treated to make the best of the image and once it is transferred to 35mm it is really really difficult to tell what its pedigree is...

After all once on screen the projected print has fixed contrast ratio, fixed brightness regardless of what is actually on the film.

The common flaws with these tests are:

• Lighting ratio not changed to fit the format. Basically very poor technique!
• Setting out to prove what can't be achieved with HD rather than what can.
• Inexperienced crew
• Transfer to film by lab keen to get HD experience ie they are inexperienced
• Transfer to film by a lab keen to appease film clients.
• Grading by company that has $1m telecine suite and little investment in HD! 

Tests that demonstrate exposure latitude betray a film approach to exposure. Video systems don't have any exposure latitude! They do have incredibly accurate means of monitoring the exposure/processing to 1/4 stop. So a experienced DP can control highlights, which takes longer on HD than film, but take full advantage of superior digital shadow detail.

You wouldn't expect to get impartial advice about a Volvo from a Audi dealer, would you?

With upgrades to cameras, new lenses and evolving transfer processes the tests are often out of date.

The features Star Wars Attack of the Clones, Spy Kids Two and Simone are popular movies, commercially very successful that are reasonable examples of what can be expected from HD to film, although the dynamic range of the cameras has since improved.

Don't be distracted by film companies and those with a vested interest in maintain sales of telecine machines. Even the rental facility that has lots of film cameras and only a few HD cameras may want to steer you in one direction.

My range of HD to 35mm film examples consists of features with budgets of $2m to no budget indie shorts, TV title sequence and pop promos. The films are a accurate representation of what can be achieved with HD in sympathetic and competent hands.

Make up our own mind.

There is more to the story than the medium that it is shot on...

copyright Michael Brennan 2006