I firmly believe that camera choice should always reflect the creative direction of any particular piece. Whenever I start shooting a new film, I ask myself which format and aesthetic will best suit the story, and then choose my camera system accordingly. I never choose a camera for a project because I own one, or because I have easy access to a camera – it’s always a conscious choice, dictated by the needs of the film.
As a result, I shoot in almost every digital format currently available, whether it’s my personal projects or commercial projects that I direct/shoot. An interesting part of choosing a digital motion picture camera is that it is somewhat similar to choosing film stock. For example, the RED look, at least to me, is very clean, accurate, and sharp, while the Alexa look is softer and more cinematic.
That said, I think it’s safe to say that a digital camera will never perfectly achieve the “film look,” although cameras like the Alexa come pretty close. The bottom line is that film is film and digital is digital. There are things you can do to make your digital footage look like film – either in camera or in post – but you’re still working with digital source material… which isn’t better or worse, just different.
Digital technology has really come a long way in such a short time, and there are undoubtedly many projects that should be shot digitally for aesthetic or logistical reasons. But with that in mind, there’s still something about the movie that keeps many directors and DPs coming back for more. The latitude, character, depth and color of motion picture film are truly unique, and film still offers visual effects that cannot be perfectly imitated by any digital format.
Why film “Super 16”?
I’m currently working on a feature film that will go into production this summer. The feature will be shot (at least in part) on Super 16mm film, and as part of the development process I decided to shoot some trailers for the film in advance. Regular readers of this blog may know that I love shooting mood films or trailers when developing a larger idea, and this case is no different.
The only difference this time is that the trailer will not only serve as a showcase piece for our team as we connect the cast and other key creatives, but it will also serve as a technical experiment. Having never shot in Super 16mm before, I really wanted to shoot something small and manageable in S16 format. The goal is to test different film stocks, lighting settings, and scanning options to ensure the best possible end product when the feature is rolled out.
I actually shot this project with film for two reasons: Visuals and process.
Let’s start with the visuals –
The world this story is set in is very glossy, which is very different from the more desolate and primitive settings I’m often drawn to in my film work. The protagonist is a seemingly innocent man, but underneath his skin is a much darker soul. Super 16mm was the obvious choice for this film, as the format’s gritty, textured, and surreal look can serve to offset the otherwise perfectly clean look of the environments and protagonists. Arguably, the choice of S16 film would have added a great deal of metaphorical contrast, which I believe would have served the story better than the digital alternative.
Movies like this year’s Oscar-nominated “Carol” and one of my personal favorite films, “Black Swan,” have used the Super 16 format for similar reasons, and the results speak for themselves.
But all that aside, from a creative process perspective, the idea of shooting on the S16 also appeals to me…
One of the reasons I don’t like shooting digitally is that there is no time limit. This might sound funny, considering that you could also make an argument that the downside of cinema is that it’s finite and has no chance of a do-over… but I’ve always believed that the best creative work comes from finitude – either Budget constraints, time constraints, or other constraints. While restrictions can feel like a burden at first, they can actually force you to think more creatively and sometimes more instinctively.
On this feature, we will probably use a 4:1 shooting ratio, which means on average we will shoot 4 times per scene, which is exactly what we need. When working with digital technology, it’s not uncommon to shoot 7 or 8 shots (or more) of any given scene, and then end up with a lot of not-so-good footage that ends up spending a lot of time in the editing room.
Movies, on the other hand, force you to make a decision. You need to do it right the first time. You need a camera to capture the look you want. It forces you to rehearse ahead of time (when you’re supposed to be rehearsing) instead of doing it in front of the camera during “rehearsal.” It also gave the actors a sense of urgency, because they knew there were only so many shots before they needed to move on.
The idea of shooting negatives can be intimidating at first, especially if you only work with digital cameras. But depending on how you like to work, the added stress and challenge of shooting on film can really change the way you work and force you to make some more instinctive decisions.
The trailer I’m working on right now is a perfect example of how format affects the process.
Originally we were supposed to shoot the project this weekend, but decided to push it back a week or two to find a better location, rejig the script a bit, and have more time to work with our cast. If I were shooting digitally I would most likely continue shooting, but knowing I would be shooting on film does force me to take a step back and analyze in more detail what I’m shooting. In the end, whatever creative decisions we make with the extra time we now have will inevitably improve our final product.
Overall dimensions
Everything I’ve said so far really applies to any film format from 8mm to 70mm. But the reason I chose Super 16mm for this project (besides what I’ve already said) has a lot to do with the form factor of the camera. The film I was shooting required a lot of handheld work and was going to be shot in some cinema verite style, so the S16mm was naturally the best choice. The Super 16 camera is relatively light and has a small footprint, which means I can shoot just like I would with a smaller digital camera.
Not to mention, I love the physical size of the Super 16mm frame. While it may be very “cropped” by full-frame DSLR standards, I actually like the smaller frame size as it makes focusing easier and creates a very unique look. I’ve also never had a problem getting a shallow depth of field on small format – in fact, even when shooting with my old DVX 100B at the time, I was able to get a nice shallow depth of field in the right conditions… so achieved Wide or Narrow Depth of Field With the right lens and blocking, super 16mm depth of field is definitely possible.
film shooting costs
There is no doubt that shooting on film is much more expensive than shooting digitally. At the same time, shooting on film has never been cheaper and has some undeniable cost advantages over shooting digitally.
Film cameras are currently in low demand and you can rent them at most rental properties for less than the price of a digital SLR. For that matter, if you want, you can buy a used camera on eBay for thousands of dollars or less, depending on the camera of course.
Therefore, the real cost of shooting film is not the camera, but the film inventory and development. While you might expect that the machining process will cost you a fortune, it’s not as bad as you think – especially when you consider the cost savings in other areas of production.
Kodak prices its film stock very reasonably and seems to be offering discounts to just about anyone willing to shoot film right now. A 400-foot roll of new 16mm film (not recanned) sells for about $100 to $125 and provides 11 minutes of footage. The processing/scanning results are about the same, so for every 11 minutes of shooting, you’re looking at about $250 in total.
It’s certainly not cheap by any standards, but for many productions, and even some ultra-low-budget projects, it’s manageable.
Let’s say you’re shooting a short film that’s 10 pages long, or about 10 minutes long. If using a 3:1 shooting ratio, you would need 3 x 400′ rolls, which would cost you approximately $750. Add in the price of additional film or camera rental, and you’re looking at about $1,000.
That’s certainly more than what you get with a DSLR for “free,” but it’s less than what it would cost you to rent an Alexa package for the day and a bunch of hard drives to support your footage.
Storage space is an important consideration when shooting digitally, as you always need multiple backups of your original files. On the other hand movies yes Archival media. You’ll always have film negatives as a backup (which is much more reliable than a hard drive, by the way), and you can choose to back up your digital scans (or not) to as many drives as you see fit.
There are many other ways to help reduce production/post costs by shooting on film. For example, on set, your days may go by faster because you can’t do 20 takes of each scene. That means less overtime, fewer meal bills, and more money in the bank.
Not to mention there’s a lot less footage to deal with in the editing room, which inevitably saves you time and/or money, depending on who’s editing your film… and you’ll probably have to do less color Grading as the color will look beautiful. That’s not to say you won’t need a colorist or spend some time in Da Vinci yourself, but you’ll be able to spend less time on that stage, which is one of the most expensive parts of post-production.
final thoughts
Although I’ve laid out the reasons for choosing film in a digital world, it’s certainly not always the right choice. As I mentioned before, digital has come such a long way that it’s still the best option for the vast majority of productions today. The truth is, 99% of us are not filming our own narrative projects every day. We’re shooting commercials, music videos, and other projects for clients who don’t have the time, patience, or need for film…
But when you do have a passion project that could benefit from the aesthetics of film and the process changes that come with it, film is still an option. It won’t be the cheapest option, nor the easiest, but the challenges it presents can lead to some very unique creative results.
That’s it for now! Thank you for checking out this post and I look forward to sharing some snippets with you when the project is complete.
Update; I’ve just released my custom film grain packs – now available in Clean and Dirty versions – that allow you to add real Super 35mm, Super 16mm and Super 8mm grain to your digital footage. Check them out here!
