Curious, could you see where Z1 footage was used in Miami Vice? ;-)

The ViperStream was literally reprogrammed for this entire film alone, BTW. Grass Valley had two DIT's on site 24/7 during production.

I do find it really hilarious though that in Hollywood they can make a really grainy smeary film and call it a 'look'. But if anyone on a tight budget did the same thing it would be called 'looks like a handycam movie'!

I don't see the point of taking a really high latitude camea like the Viper and constricting the final look in such a way. And why bother with the Miami Vice connection? The series was very glossy. Hopefully Mann won't try and take on Magnum PI!

Thinking back, I can certainly think of a few shots that look like they could've been shot w/Z1 --- and that ain't a compliment! Re: the smear-thing... That seems an artifact of the path from video to film since I doubt that the original video files look like that. I should also mention that some scenes looked great but they were the more "controlable" scenes such as interiors.

The smeary movement was probably there on the original. Like Collateral and Ali Mann probably turned the shutter off a lot to gain sensitivity.

Sorry to drag up an old thread but this seems kind of relevant.

Interestingly one reason they went with film over video was they wanted more DOF than they could get with 35mm even though in practice they found video much harder to work with on location.

Bob.

I don't know how these movies are shot, or with what equipment, but I just saw Collateral for the first time and very much disliked the low-quality look. There seem to be many other films like this recently. If this is what HD produces when used in place of film, then all I have to say is YUCCH!

I agree whole heartedly.
To my eyes HD is inadequate for the big screen, 2K is almost there but compared to 4K it's chalk and cheese.
However one oddity I think I've noted might have something to do with modern cinemas. The newer ones have relatively larger screens than the older ones and this really highlights resolution.
I don't know much about cinemas in the USA but here pretty well all the old ones have been replaced with "Megaplexes" with larger screens. I've kind of got the impression that in the USA there's still more of the older cinemas surviving which might be why some in the USA feel differently about 1080 and the silver screen.

Bob.

The difference between 2K and 4K is not easy to see in real use today, because prodcution and post are just getting warmed up for it. It's also a case of diminishing returns.

Ditto between HD (1920x1080) and 2K (2048x1536).

2K has a different aspect ratio partly to suit those who are used to the freedom of non-anamorphic full frame 35mm where you can pick and choose different parts of the frame for the final composition (which is why it is also a popular intermediate format).

The first realistic 4K projector was only presented a few months ago (by Sony), but the cameras aren't quite there yet (only a few exotics).

I have seen D5-HD (10-bit 4:2:2) projection many times at industry screenings in Hollywood, feature films shown in real full size theaters, and at its best this looks in many ways better than 70mm (which I have seen a lot of at 70mm revivals here, including with new prints).

I say "in some ways better" because it's different. D5-HD sharpness is better than most real-life 70mm projection prints, because of emulsion alignment issues.

Shooting in 65mm IB Technicolor is enough of pain, making 70mm projection prints is a huge undertaking (only 10 prints per matrix, then you have to make a new one). We'll never see more than curio use of this in the future.

If you get a chance to see Ben Hur or any of the other few classics shot in 65mm IB Technicolor and projected in real 70mm, then cancel everything else and just go. It's magical and looks frankly three-dimensional.

Bob, next time you're in Los Angeles, lemme take you to the Arclight Cinemas in Hollywood. Stunning picture and sound quality, the staff is great, and you can bring a drink into many of the movies. Excellent, comfortable stadium seating, the best.
And real ushers who provide good service including throwing out babblers if necessary.

The Bridge here is #2. Both have lots of screens, and generally high quality everything. Lots of digital projection that really looks high class.

The biggest problem in U.S. theaters outside of the largest cities is that they often have really cheap projection lenses. Years ago they had a choice between a $158 decent quality lens or a $120 Coke bottle bottom, and you can guess which one they ordered.

This is getting better as people are getting pickier, and the biggest complaints here nowadays is about loudmouths commenting the movie throughout, and ridiculously priced popcorn and soda. So many people are angry over this now, including the young 'uns, that I think they will have to change to survive.
Netflix is still attractive to many people, especially if they have a big screen at home.

>>>>I don't know much about cinemas in the USA but here pretty well all the old ones have been replaced with "Megaplexes" with larger screens. I've kind of got the impression that in the USA there's still more of the older cinemas surviving which might be why some in the USA feel differently about 1080 and the silver screen.<<<

Seems like the opposite here. We used to have ( 1980s ) some huge screens which no longer exist. Everything has been replaced by multiplexes with smaller screens, obviously so they can fit more screens. I remember watching Aliens and a couple of other sci-fi movies on some huge screens in Manhattan, that were at least 3 times larger than an average screen today.

Smaller indepedent movies are shown in theaters with screens which are barely larger than a large TV ( like Angelika )

The most modest theater I ever saw was in a rural place in the 70s. Tiny town, with a very realistic-looking "theater" with a balcony and everything.

When the performance was due, they rolled a 16mm projector into the middle aisle, plugged it in, and everybody got to enjoy the flickering film on the screen and a scratchy optical soundtrack-fed speaker that barely surpassed the projector sprocket noise...

What a treat!

:O)