I agree with the above comments. Interestingly, I recently needed to re-create a super 8 look for a film being shot on the Alexa. I argued for actual Super 8, as that is the best way to achieve the look, but was not able to convince them. Anyway, I shot the sequence at 18fps and then transferred back to 24 in post, adding frames as you would if transferring from Super 8. I also shot it at a low ASA to compress the dynamic range, overexposed the highlights and extended the shutter speed. In the end it was pretty convincing, but I think the biggest convincing factor was the 18fps.
On Mon, Aug 8, 2016 at 2:36 PM, Francisco Torres <[email protected]> wrote: > I have given it some thought and so far what I have noticed is that > digital projection is very different from film projection, so even ''24 > fps'' mean very different things in each. You discussed the reasons why in > your OP so I will not go over them again, what I think is that there is > nothing in digital projection like the effect those film makers achieved > with film projection. Plus there are issues regarding how film was exposed > in the camera itself... So to achieve those kind of effects will require a > whole new and different practice in digital media. > > 2016-08-08 10:48 GMT-04:00 Robert Withers <[email protected]>: > >> Looking for information . . . writings . . . practices . . . thoughts . . >> . >> In film practice, certain artists such as Frampton, Sharits, Conrad, >> Lawder and others (even myself) sometimes built film rhythms based on the >> 24 fps rate, choosing shots or images of specific frame lengths (1, 2, 4, >> 8, 24, etc) for specific effects. The effect in projection was also >> modulated by the projection technology, which would typically project each >> film frame more that one time, with a black interval in between. We had >> different kinds of flicker effects interacting with the >> psychological/perceptual phenomenon of persistence of vision, with the odd >> result that audiences in a movie theater would be sitting in total darkness >> for a portion of any film screening, watching the images that persisted in >> their brains. >> >> Now in digital cinema there is a choice of "standard" frame rates, >> especially 24 fps and 30 fps, modulated to a more unpredictable effect by >> use of displays and digital projection systems, which have been >> standardized in commercial cinema theaters but not in all systems. So 8 >> frame sequences in 24 fps digital could conceivably have a different flavor >> than in 30 fps sequences. In digital display there is no more effect from >> closed film projection shutters: digital frames are projected in sequence >> with no significant interval between. (*Pace* the blanking interval.) >> Hence digital cinema is typically always "on" with no intrinsic (even if >> unperceived) flicker. Further, there are automatic background manipulations >> done by some display technologies that convert between 24 fps, 30 fps, 60 >> interlaced fps, etc., without the viewer being aware of this or tipped off >> in any way. >> >> I'd be very interesting in hearing about anyone who is writing, >> practicing, or thinking about these issues, and any references. >> >> Many thanks, >> Robert Withers >> >> cinesouvenir.com >> >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> FrameWorks mailing list >> [email protected] >> https://mailman-mail5.webfaction.com/listinfo/frameworks >> >> > > _______________________________________________ > FrameWorks mailing list > [email protected] > https://mailman-mail5.webfaction.com/listinfo/frameworks > >
_______________________________________________ FrameWorks mailing list [email protected] https://mailman-mail5.webfaction.com/listinfo/frameworks
