Documentary films, as the name implies, are films produced with the intention of being an audio-visual documentation of a thought or event.

A documentary film is intended to be much more like a piece of journalism than a piece of entertainment or expressive art. There is typically a voice-over narrative going on throughout a documentary film with the narrator describing what's being seen in a businesslike way without any dramatic reading.

Documentary films are often made to more deeply contemplate a current events or history subject that has remained shrouded in mystery, been controversial, or in the thought of the film maker misunderstood or underexposed. Documentaries have also been made simply to narrative an event of personal interest to the film maker.

Biographies, sports and music events, a compilation film of collected footage from government sources, and so on and so forth all may be subjects for a documentary film. Documentary film makers are typically the writers, directors, and producers. Often they may act as cameramen as well.

Documentary films are most often made for Tv but in more modern times there have been more of them made as direct-to-video, made-for-video, straight-to-video, or straight-to-Dvd formats in which they were never first played on Tv or in the theaters but were simply distributed for home-viewing.

Some major motion pictures when released in Dvd format also come with bonus Dvds that act as documentary films of the production of the movie. Documentaries also often feature re-enactments of events that could not or were not originally documented on film such as historical events from the year 1776. There have also been "mockumentaries" made, in which a piece of comedy fiction is made but is done up in the same dry and uncomplicated format of an actual documentary. "This Is Spinal Tap" and "The Gods Must Be Crazy" are two of the most successful mockumentaries ever made.

To put together a potential documentary film, the filmmaker first begins by doing research, even if he knows the subject matter well already. The Main point of a documentary film is to relay facts and data from all angles.

Quality documentaries commonly consist of interviews at some point. This is a technique for lending authoritativeness to the film's producer by getting habitancy to speak from first-hand knowledge about the subject matter or an aspect of it. A documentary film also has to be well organized in an entertaining and logical format. Unlike with many fictional movie stories, a documentary should never deliberately confuse, mislead, or leave something mysterious. Many perspectives or opinions can be extremely sufficient at giving a documentary film depth.

On 12:22 PM | 0 comments

The Three Stages of Film development

There are three stages of the yield process:

1. Pre-Production (the planning stage) in which you might expect to spend approximately 1/3 of your total time.

2. yield (the shooting stage) in which you might expect to spend approximately 1/6 of your total time.

3. Post-Production (the editing stage) in which you might expect to spend approximately 1/2 of your total time.

These time estimates are very loose and will vary depending on your production.

Good planning ensures that the high-priced yield stage runs smoothly and that all the footage that is required gets shot.

Post-Production is a extremely creative stage and you must have time to edit, screen and re-edit where necessary.

Pre-Production includes:

Creating the planning paperwork, selecting locations, hiring cast and crew, booking tool and post facilities, dealing with legal paperwork, creating a budget, accounting for ancillary rentals and services, etc.

Production Includes:

Shooting the required footage, reshooting where valuable and recording location sound.

Post-Production includes:

Screening and logging your footage, recording or accessing music, recording voice and sound effects, creating animations, illustrations & text graphics, editing the assorted visuals and soundtracks, adding transitions and effects, mixing, color correcting, creating time coded copies for preview, creating masters and sub-masters.

There are three main yield documents:

- The proposal

- The script

- The shot list, scene list or storyboard.

The Proposal contains: The working title, medium, scenario (incl. Story form and treatment), technical considerations and the budget. Treatments can be commercial, dramatic, documentary or educational. It is used to educate possible investors or yield clubs on what your project is about before reading the script.

The Script contains: A detailed story development, written for screen action, with dialogue and optic information. assorted formats exist, but ordinarily the script does not include camera angles, lighting data and other technical information. It's just a description of the story.

The Shot List / Storyboard contains: An area for noting shot/scene number, optic content, technical descriptions and approximate time for the shot. In a storyboard a diagram augments the written shot description. This is where the technical shooting data is.

Shot Distances listed in the shot list communicate to the perceived length between camera (audience) and subject. While there are often many definitions for shot distances there a literally only five basic ones:

1. Greatest Long Shot (Els) where there is a valuable area of space nearby the subject. The branch appears to be distant.

2. Long Shot (Ls) where the branch favorably fills the frame from top to bottom with adequate head room and room underneath the subject).

3. Medium Shot (or Mid) Shot (Ms) where approximately 2/3 to 1/2 of the branch is seen in the frame. Make sure to never allow the bottom of the frame to cut a person off at a natural joint.

4. Close Up (Cu) where approximately 1/3 to 1/4 of the branch is framed. This might be your typical "head and shoulders" shot.

5. Greatest Close Up (Ecu) which is ordinarily a head shot of a person. As long as it shows the eyes, nose and mouth in the frame it can still be determined a shot of a person (as opposed to a medium shot of an eye, for instance).

Sequencing

Basic sequencing means that we build a series of shots for one scene or sequence in our movie. They must be designed so that the audience is shown the action in a way that is literally understood, visually stimulating and that no branch is shown that is not intended to be part of the scene.

For this think some shots will be designed and each should be slated for ease of editing.

While each sequence of shots is designed based on the action to be shown to the audience (action sequences, monologues, multi-camera stunts, etc.) a dialogue scene between actors will often be shot using the master Scene technique.

Shooting a dialog sequence in the master Scene technique includes some camera angles, shooting overlapping or repeating action so that the editor has some choices.

If, for example, we are shooting two population facing each other while holding a conversation we would shoot the entire sequence in a master two-shot. Then we might shoot a close up of just one of the population for the entire sequence. Lastly we might shoot the other person in close up for the entire sequence. Thus, we have a two-shot to introduce the scene, close-ups of each person when they speak and also close ups of each person just listening as the off-camera person is speaking (these are called reaction shots). The two shot can be used any time bouncing back and forth between the close ups might come to be tiring to the viewer.

This sequencing should be included in your shot list.

On 12:21 AM | 1 comments

Does the film producer in fact need a film lawyer or entertainment attorney as a matter of pro practice? An entertainment lawyer's own bias and my stacking of the interrogate notwithstanding, which might plainly indicate a "yes" riposte 100% of the time - the forthright riposte is, "it depends". A number of producers these days are themselves film lawyers, entertainment attorneys, or other types of lawyers, and so, often can take care of themselves. But the film producers to worry about, are the ones who act as if they are entertainment lawyers - but without a license or entertainment attorney legal taste to back it up. Filmmaking and request for retrial picture custom contain an commerce wherein these days, unfortunately, "bluff" and "bluster" sometimes serve as substitutes for actual knowledge and experience. But "bluffed" documents and cture yield procedures will never flee the trained eye of entertainment attorneys working for the studios, the distributors, the banks, or the errors-and-omissions (E&O) insurance carriers. For this presume alone, I suppose, the job function of film yield counsel and entertainment lawyer is still secure.

I also suppose that there will always be a few lucky filmmakers who, throughout the entire yield process, fly under the proverbial radar without entertainment attorney accompaniment. They will seemingly avoid pitfalls and liabilities like flying bats are reputed to avoid people's hair. By way of analogy, one of my best friends hasn't had any health insurance for years, and he is still in good shape and economically afloat - this week, anyway. Taken in the aggregate, some citizen will always be luckier than others, and some citizen will always be more inclined than others to roll the dice.

But it is all too simplistic and pedestrian to tell oneself that "I'll avoid the need for film lawyers if I plainly stay out of problem and be careful". An entertainment lawyer, especially in the realm of film (or other) production, can be a real constructive asset to a request for retrial picture producer, as well as the film producer's personally-selected inoculation against possible liabilities. If the producer's entertainment attorney has been through the process of film yield previously, then that entertainment lawyer has already learned many of the harsh lessons ordinarily dished out by the industrial world and the film business.

The film and entertainment lawyer can therefore spare the producer many of those pitfalls. How? By clear thinking, true planning, and - this is the absolute key - skilled, thoughtful and complete documentation of all film yield and associated activity. The film lawyer should not be conception of as plainly the cowboy or cowgirl wearing the proverbial "black hat". Sure, the entertainment lawyer may sometimes be the one who says "no". But the entertainment attorney can be a positive force in the yield as well.

The film lawyer can, in the policy of legal representation, aid the producer as an effective company consultant, too. If that entertainment lawyer has been complicated with scores of film productions, then the request for retrial picture producer who hires that film lawyer entertainment attorney benefits from that very cache of experience. Yes, it sometimes may be difficult to stretch the film allocation to allow for counsel, but pro filmmakers tend to view the legal cost expenditure to be a fixed, predictable, and primary one - akin to the fixed obligation of rent for the yield office, or the cost of film for the cameras. While some film and entertainment lawyers may price themselves out of the price range of the median independent film producer, other entertainment attorneys do not.

Enough generalities. For what exact tasks must a producer typically keep a film lawyer and entertainment attorney?:

1. Incorporation, Or Formation Of An "Llc": To paraphrase Michael Douglas's Gordon Gekko character in the request for retrial picture "Wall Street" when speaking to Bud Fox while on the morning beach on the oversized movable phone, this entity-formation issue ordinarily constitutes the entertainment attorney's "wake-up call" to the film producer, telling the film producer that it is time. If the producer doesn't properly create, file, and declare a corporate or other appropriate entity through which to guide business, and if the film producer doesn't thereafter make every endeavor to keep that entity bullet-proof, says the entertainment lawyer, then the film producer is potentially shooting himself or herself in the foot. Without the shield against liability that an entity can provide, the entertainment attorney opines, the request for retrial picture producer's personal assets (like house, car, bank account) are at risk and, in a worst-case scenario, could ultimately be seized to satisfy the debts and liabilities of the film producer's business. In other words:

Patient: "Doctor, it hurts my head when I do that".

Doctor: "So? Don't do that".

Like it or not, the film lawyer entertainment attorney continues, "Film is a speculative business, and the statistical majority of request for retrial pictures can fail economically - even at the San Fernando Valley film studio level. It is insane to run a film company or any other form of company out of one's own personal bank account". Besides, it looks unprofessional, a real concern if the producer wants to attract talent, bankers, and distributors at any point in the future.

The choices of where and how to file an entity are often prompted by entertainment lawyers but then driven by situation-specific variables, together with tax concerns relating to the film or request for retrial picture company sometimes. The film producer should let an entertainment attorney do it and do it correctly. Entity-creation is affordable. Good lawyers don't look at incorporating a client as a profit-center anyway, because of the positive possible for new company that an entity-creation brings. While the film producer should be aware that under U.S. Law a client can fire his/her lawyer at any time at all, many entertainment lawyers who do the entity-creation work get asked to do added work for that same client - especially if the entertainment attorney bills the first job reasonably.

I wouldn't advise self-incorporation by a non-lawyer - any more than I would tell a film producer-client what actors to hire in a request for retrial picture - or any more than I would tell a D.P.-client what lens to use on a exact film shot. As will be true on a film yield set, everybody has their own job to do. And I believe that as soon as the producer lets a competent entertainment lawyer do his or her job, things will start to gel for the film yield in ways that couldn't even be originally foreseen by the request for retrial picture producer.

2. Soliciting Investment: This issue also often constitutes a wake-up call of sorts. Let's say that the film producer wants to make a request for retrial picture with other people's money. (No, not an unusual scenario). The film producer will likely start soliciting funds for the movie from so-called "passive" investors in any number of possible ways, and may in fact start collecting some monies as a result. Sometimes this occurs prior to the entertainment lawyer hearing about it post facto from his or her client.

If the film producer is not a lawyer, then the producer should not even think of "trying this at home". Like it or not, the entertainment lawyer opines, the film producer will thereby be selling securities to people. If the producer promises investors some pie-in-the-sky results in the context of this inherently speculative company called film, and then collects money on the basis of that representation, believe me, the film producer will have even more grave problems than conscience to deal with. Securities compliance work is among the most difficult of matters faced by an entertainment attorney.

As both entertainment lawyers and securities lawyers will opine, botching a solicitation for film (or any other) speculation can have severe and federally-mandated consequences. No matter how great the film script is, it's never worth monetary fines and jail time - not to mention the veritable unspooling of the unfinished request for retrial picture if and when the producer gets nailed. All the while, it is shocking to see how many ersatz film producers in the real world try to float their own "investment prospectus", complete with boastful predicted multipliers of the box office figures of the famed request for retrial pictures "E.T." and "Jurassic Park" combined. They draft these monstrosities with their own sheer creativity and imagination, but ordinarily with no entertainment or film lawyer or other legal counsel. I'm sure that some of these producers think of themselves as "visionaries" while writing the prospectus. Entertainment attorneys and the rest of the bar, and bench, may tend to think of them, instead, as prospective 'Defendants'.

Enough said.

3. Dealing With The Guilds: Let's assume that the film producer has decided, even without entertainment attorney guidance yet, that the yield entity will need to be a signatory to public bargaining agreements of unions such as Screen Actors Guild (Sag), the Directors Guild (Dga), and/or the Writers Guild (Wga). This is a branch matter area that some film producers can cope themselves, particularly producers with experience. But if the film producer can afford it, the producer should consult with a film lawyer or entertainment lawyer prior to development even any preliminary taste with the guilds. The producer should in fact consult with an entertainment attorney or film lawyer prior to issuing any writings to the guilds, or signing any of their documents. Failure to plan out these guild issues with film or entertainment attorney counsel ahead of time, could lead to problems and expenses that sometimes make it cost-prohibitive to thereafter continue with the picture's added production.

4. Contractual Affairs Generally: A film production's agreements should all be in writing, and not saved until the last minute, as any entertainment attorney will observe. It will be more costly to bring film counsel in, late in the day - sort of like booking an airline flight a few days before the planned travel. A film producer should remember that a plaintiff suing for breach of a bungled compact might not only seek money for damages, but could also seek the equitable relief of an injunction (translation: "Judge, stop this production... Stop this request for retrial picture... Stop this film... Cut!").

A film producer does not want to suffer a back claim for talent compensation, or a disgruntled location-landlord, or state child labor authorities - threatening to enjoin or shut the request for retrial picture yield down for reasons that could have been in fact avoided by true planning, drafting, research, and transportation with one's film lawyer or entertainment lawyer. The movie production's agreements should be drafted with care by the entertainment attorney, and should be customized to encompass the special characteristics of the production.

As an entertainment lawyer, I have seen non-lawyer film producers try to do their own legal drafting for their own pictures. As mentioned above, some few are lucky, and remain under the proverbial radar. But consider this: if the film producer sells or options the project, one of the first things that the film seller or film buyer (or its own film and entertainment attorney counsel) will want to see, is the "chain of title" and development and yield file, complete with all signed agreements. The production's insurance carrier may also want to see these same documents. So might the guilds, too. And their entertainment lawyers. The documents must be written so as to survive the audience.

Therefore, for a film producer to try to "fake it" oneself is plainly to put many problems off for another day, as well as generate an air of non-attorney amateurism to the yield file. It will be less costly for the film producer to strike all of these issues earlier as opposed to later, through use of a film lawyer or entertainment attorney. And the likelihood is that any self-reliant film attorney and entertainment lawyer is going to have to re-draft ample parts (if not all) of the producer's self-drafted yield file, once he or she sees what the non-lawyer film producer has done to it on his or her own - and that translates into unfortunate and wasted expense. I would no sooner want my chiropractor to draft and negotiate his own filmed request for retrial picture contracts, than I would put myself on his table and try to crunch through my own backbone adjustments. Furthermore, I wouldn't do half of the chiropractic adjustment myself, and then call the chiropractor into the examining room to conclude what I had started. (I use the chiropractic motif only to spare you the cliché old saw of "performing surgical operation on oneself").

There are many other reasons for retaining a film lawyer and entertainment attorney for request for retrial picture work, and space won't allow all of them. But the above-listed ones are the big ones.

Click the "Articles" button at: http://www.tormey.org/art.htm to return to the main Articles page.

On 12:18 PM | 0 comments

I obtained the Bfa in Film yield from Nyu's Tisch School of the Arts. As man who has also attended Usc's Film School as well as having taken classes at Ucla's Film Program, I view I could offer some good perspective of what I view of each and start with the one I spent the most time at: Nyu.

The Location

Nyu's film school is placed in Greenwich community on the island of Manhattan in New York City. Going to school in such an urban location offers both positives and negatives. On a inevitable note, New York City is your campus and therefore you are in the mix of all the limitless cafes, stores, notable locations, iconic neighborhoods and curious New York personalities that the city is notable for.

On the negative side, also, New York City is your campus so you don't have the 'protected campus experience' you would have at a school with a concluded off dedicated campus. In my view I viewed living, taking classes and development films in Nyc to be a mammoth advantage. Where else would you get such great inspiration and material to draw from than in one of the greatest cities in the world. The only negative would be if you wanted to get out of the city to shoot or just to get some quiet away from the hustle of the city. It's hard to keep a car in the city without spending a fortune but subways and trains can take you just about in any place you need to go affordably.

The Curriculum

Nyu Film School's curriculum consists of classes in all the major areas of the filmmaking process. There are classes in sound, editing, writing, television technology and ultimately group classes where you make films together in small crews. Generally, as you move through the schedule the projects you work on become more complex. In beginning film classes you might make black and white 8mm or short videos.

As you expand you make longer and more complicated projects and can choose between experimental type or report films. Ordinarily students are given a inevitable amount of tape or film stock and the basic equipment such as lights and dollies that one would need. If a learner wishes to make something that requires more complicated props and/or equipment then they need to contribute the funding themselves.

Generally, every learner that wants to can direct their own films with other students acting as crew members on their films and vice versa. Nyu has a good option of equipment. It is not all the time the latest technology and technology changes so frequently, especially when it comes to video, but in normal you won't be lacking for anything. They have ample editing facilities running from old steenbeck for film splicing to computer systems for use of final draft and adobe premier. Again, if a learner wishes to shoot more footage than the school is willing to contribute film or video for the learner can pay for added developing, etc.

The Professors

Generally I found the professors to be competent with a few 'exceptional' ones thrown in. They are all working professionals with some more thriving than others. In some classes you also have guest lecturers and occasionally notable alumni will teach a class such as Spike Lee or Woody Allen. Each week the school hosts film screenings and the director or producers of the film will show up to discuss with the class and take questions about how the film was put together and the history of development the film. These are great opportunities to network with thriving alumni and often previous graduates of the schedule show up to watch these screenings so they are a great way to make contacts.

After Graduation.

Where I felt the Nyu Film schedule fell a wee short was in vocation planning and direction. They didn't dedicate a whole lot of time to teaching you how to build a vocation after you graduated. This is one of the flaws I have found in most film programs. Luckily, Nyu has so many graduates that work in the industry that if you are proactive you should precisely be able to find thriving graduates willing to sit down and speak with you about your 'after graduation' game plan.

In recent years the school has been good at building up its active alumni society on both the East and West coasts so either you conclude to be based in New York or Los Angeles you can apply this reserved supply to originate a network for yourself which is very important. Overall, I found the Nyu Film School palpate to be a good one for those wanting a generalized instruction in different aspects of filmmaking before embarking on a career.

On 12:17 AM | 0 comments

When I was a child my dad got a supper eight camera and shot our house movies. The house would sit at night, in the living room, while my dad put up the projector that screened our home movies. The quality of the films was poor and the audio sounded as if it came from far far away. Nostalgic as it may appear to some of us, there is not much to miss by the loss of the film format.

As a photographer I love the film format. A top-notch camera captures the light and color better than any high definition camera. The distinction can be very dramatic and the process of film improvement is very romantic. With that said, one must consideration that esthetics only goes so far. There are other factors that should be taken into consideration.

Although film is classic in my view to digital it is also more involved and not so user friendly.

Film

When shooting challenging pictures Film is a very difficult task:

o Film celluloid does not article audio and one needs a isolate recording device. Focus is very involved and there is an further person that operates that side of the camera.

o Film needs to be advanced and can't be seen immediately unless it is also recorded on a digital device.

o Lighting can be a lot more difficult than digital because film is very sensitive.

o Reels need to be changed often in a very difficult process challenging unloading and reloading in the dark, with out the use of visual sight!

o Film material and the process of filmmaking is offensively expensive. It does not allow filmmakers to take a lot of takes and that creates more room for mistakes.

o High Cost of raw material makes it harder to secure the desired practice, hone it and jab the film industry.

o Large crews are needed for a shoot.

o Big studios have absolute control of what is filmed and what is not. That means they control the whole of films made, talents and the content.

Digital

Digital camera revolution made shooting pictures easier:

o Audio is recorded on the same strip as the film, using multiple channels.

o Digital Cameras are user friendly and viewing the materials is inherent Immediately, after a shot is taken.

o Materials are economy and allow abundance of takes. Dv cassettes cost few dollars and allow at least 45 minutes of right recording.

o Reloading a tape is uncomplicated and no "blind" custom is needed.

o Digital format is not as sensitive to light as film. Although it reduces some of the distinction and color range, it also reduces the whole of light needed.

These digital format advantages allowed a huge turn in media. Documentaries are popping out in great numbers. All one needs is a ,000, 3 chip camera and a desire to tell a story. The home computer may be a good adequate solution to edit the film and produce the sound track.

The Internet is full of Websites introducing amateur work. These amateurs have the opportunity to make films in commerce format and get discovered as talent.

Independent filmmakers are manufacture highlight films and do not need to retort to the big studios. freedom of speech wins!

Even well known directors are shooting in high definition digital format. George Lucas made the first three 'Star Wars' digitally.

The digital renaissance age is already here. Innovations are swift and rapid and if you blink once, you may miss worthwhile. For this imagine I keep a digital camera in my car, so I can article those happy moments, those extra commonplace moments, like my daughter's first steps.... At night I hook the camera to the television and sit with my house to watch the movie of our lives.

On 12:16 PM | 0 comments

Those who have graduated from a film studies school enter the dreamy field with sufficient knowledge about film and video production. The only hardship or challenge they encounter is non-availability of funds. The entry of digital tool has spawned new possibilities for film and video production. The old style of Hollywood-based film production has been displaced by new methods of production. There are a plethora of chances for serious-minded persons who know what they are talking about. Financing has come to be a perennial question in the film industry. Bankers are generally at loggerheads with producers. But, nowadays, the trend has undergone sea-change.

There are a number of film study programs. Nearly 600 colleges and universities in the Us conduct courses for film production. School of Cinema and Television is the oldest film manufacture affiliated to the University of Southern California. Nearly half of the 16,500 students of this university are enrolled for atleast one cinema or Tv class. These universities have a function to perform. They have to prepare the students to face the challenges when they enter the field of entertainment. As per the website of one university, a degree or diploma obtained after a particular procedure is not only an occupational or pro degree. The schedule of studies should qualify a student for a number of vocational possibilities. An personel should be in a position to apply his knowledge in a creative or practical capacity so as to rehearsal his judgment and initiative which are advanced by a university procedure in film studies.

Film procedure does not underline the importance of one major factor. They don't think that money is the major force linked to film and video production. Majority of the undergraduate courses does not pay much attentiveness to film budgeting. The topics concerning the Cost Reports and company Plans are sidelined and sidetracked or atleast these headlines don't receive nay priority in the procedure curriculum. Better utilization is illustrated only in Master's program. The think for this vacuum is that the schoraly stream originates from Hollywood production groups. The work on wielded by guilds and unions is responsible for the closely-guarded confidentiality of the production circles. 100% secrecy is still practiced in film circles. Despite this situation, there is a growing clamor to know more about financing and budgeting in film production. The upcoming batches of producers and directors are interested in starting their own projects, arranging funds, budgeting and reporting of total expenditure involved. They depend on Internet for additional transactions.

A film manufacture graduate, if he possesses a complete grasp of the procedure material, in expanding to film budgeting, cost reporting and company plans, is far away from most of the others. Most of the students, today, are concerned about film budgeting, cost profiles, price account, scheme spectrum, etc... They show an expanding interest in this disposition calculus only to augment their standing as filmmakers. The uncut application of digital infrastructure has originated a new vista of film production, which, despite being less high-priced than the usual Hollywood-pattern film productions, cannot be determined to be frugal in quantum. It requires heavy funding.

Graduates of film courses who understand the basics of expenditure linked to film and video production will perceive that they can accept more accountability in their projects. Their success rate will be more and the graph will show an upward trend compare to the course-mates and colleagues due to their involvement in expenditure calculations.

These are some of the important features of film production. This rehearsal will be complete, only if the aspirants to stardom in dissimilar categories of filmmaking, try their best in a full-fledged scale, to evaluate the budgeting process and behalf profiles.

On 12:15 AM | 0 comments

The film versus digital turn over has been at the forefront of pro photography over the last decade or so. As digital technology has seen numerous advances, many photographers have gradually moved to exclusively shooting digital. These same photographers once shot film, now to most of them film is all but dead. Traditionally wedding photographers worked exclusively with film, with most of them shooting a mix of 35 mm and medium format, using both color and black and white emulsions. Whilst this is a composition that has served wedding photographers well for decades, it is perhaps not the most viable choice in today's world, for both financial reasons and in terms of workflow, time and quality.

With the introduction of digital camera technology the manufactures has seen huge changes. These days the cost of film and processing can be prohibitively expensive. Availability is commonly tiny to a small estimate of remaining pro labs and prices for film are steadily expanding as the request lessens and output drops accordingly. Up-to-date years have seen the closure of many film manufacturers and those that do still exist have ceased producing all the emulsions they once did. It is however, not only for financial reasons that one may reconsider film to be the lesser choice for photographing a wedding.

As digital technology has industrialized the image capability continues to progressively improve. Initially digital camera technology could not match the capability of film, and to some extent this judgment on digital cameras has stuck in people's minds, and they continue to assume film will be good quality. There is however more to this story. If we were to reconsider large format film it is true that this can still outshine the capability of digital - the reality is however that such a format is not suitable for many applications, wedding photography included. Thus we must compare apples with apples to make a fair comparison.

The majority of wedding photographers shooting film will be shooting 35 mm with a mix of medium format. The current top end digital cameras yield images of higher capability than 35 mm film capability, and can be said to rival medium format. Now, if we look at a common situation encountered at a wedding, low light, we can take this turn over further. In order to take photographs in low light settings one needs to use a high Iso. Essentially this is a quantum of the film/digital sensors sensitivity to light. High Iso film is traditionally very grainy - think of the old photojournalistic photos shot on high speed black and white film. This is of procedure a look that many habitancy like, however some clients may find it undesirable. Unfortunately it is positive if we wish to use film and shoot in low light conditions without a flash.

On the other side of the coin, the current pro digital cameras have come ahead leaps and bounds in their low light capabilities. Early models produced extreme image noise at high Iso's. This noise is thought about an ugly, unwanted trait, unlike film grain which can be pleasing. The current breed of digital cameras addressed this and as such are able to capture relatively noise free images even at high Iso's. What does this mean? It means even given low light situations a photographer shooting with a pro Dslr will be able to yield pleasing results without resorting to unflattering flash.

One last key factor when considering film vs digital for your wedding photography is the possible for images to be lost due to error or mechanical failure. It is honestly possible that a digital camera's flash card will fail, however I personally find having to hand film to a lab to process holds a higher possible risk. It means putting your costly images into the hands of man who may potentially make a mistake with processing. Essentially it is just one more step in the process where your wedding photographs may be ruined. Add to this the fact that your wedding photographer will be shooting blind, uncertain of if the images they are taking are working or if their camera is experiencing a technical failure then I think it has to be said that digital is the safer option.

Film is a magical material, it has a great "look" and can yield outstanding results. however given the negatives (excuse the pun), when it comes to wedding photography I know I would rather have my wedding shot on digital.

On 12:14 PM | 2 comments