Is this why everything looks shit
>>217256222Shooting on digital is inherently third worlder-coded slop. Film is superior in every instance
>>217256222Tangerine with James Ransone was shot on iphone. Has he commented on Ransone's death??
>>217256222No. It's because lighting and shot composition is becoming a lost art.
>>217256222Digital can look as good as film, but 90% of the people working today are incompetent retards
>>217256222Sean has been making films on phones since the 00s, so no, its not his fault.
Can't you just use a certain lens attached to an iphone in combination with post process effects like editing contrast/gamma, and adding some grain to approximate that "cinema" film look?
>>217256222>Sergio Leone used Arriflex 35 IIc cameras in a 2-perf Techniscope configuration, which utilized two perforations of 35mm film per frame to create a wide 2.33:1 aspect ratio, saving film while allowing for deep focus and exaggerated grain, paired with wide-angle lenses (like Angenieux) for epic landscapes and intense close-ups, creating his signature epic, granular lookNOW THAT IS CRAFT!Now take that small digital nightmare and SHOVE IT!
>>217256222I wish the iPhone had never been created...humanity would've been better
>>217256361>third worlder-codedThat explains why muttmericans paragoned digital filming.
>>217257108Iphone saved humanity by pacifying retards and lowering the birth rate
>>217256222>rothchilds: tell an anecdote how good our phones are in the interview and we will add 100000 digital shekels to your bank account
>>2172571082007 was peak civilization and technology reallyEverything that’s been introduced since then has been to the detriment of humanity
>>217256222They filmed 28 Years Later with iPhone Pros and I think they left some shit image enhancement setting on. The grass looked too bright and it was the wrong shade of green than grass is in England.
Says you can shoot clandestinely and shows a young girl
>>217257487Lmao
>>217256222Fuck that scumbag, "he" should be killed
he's shilling the iPhone, but he's right (also cute).modern flagship phones are good enough to make decent looking films, if you're an aspiring young director just start filming stuff instead of waiting to have your project funded and produced professionally.
>>217256361Except that is the complete opposite of the truth. Digital is better in every possible way. The image is superior, you're able to just shoot shots without considering how much film you're using.This is the same as saying monochrome photography is artsy, it isn't artsy it's archaic
>>217256361>third worlder-coded slopGoyim aren't people.
>>217257754In fairness shooting on film sounds like a logistical nightmare and being able to look at what you just shot must be way more difficult. I know filmmakers managed with film for decades but you'd really have to know what you're doing with it, or waste many hours shooting.
>>217256222This guy gives me the creeps
>>217258876>you'd really have to know what you're doingDon't we want this?
>>217258951Well yes but the knowledge must be lost now. Imagine the time you'd need to spend experimenting to get the best out of film.
>>217258889He and his wife are sex perverts who fuck prsostitutes
>>217259070Why are creepy Christians on this board?
>>217256222This guy fucks trannies
>>217256222what did they mean by this
>>217256450Star Trek is a great example of this. Older series had distinct lighting and staging to set emotion. New series look closer to an SNL parody of Star Trek than the real thing.
>>217259121Stop spending all your money on whores it's not healthy you freak
>>217256450>>217259195Lighting takes time and effort and the shit loving masses don't appreciate it so why bother
>>217257148Where are you from?
>>217257259ok boomer
>>217256450>>217260084>lightinglighting is the kino maker and is incredibly cheapthe fag that made Hannibal talked about how good lighting was basically free and made Hannibal, which was otherwise pretty low budget, look much more expensive and luxurious than it would have otherwise beensay what you want about the gayness, but it was a very pretty tv show
>>217256222They're just a tool, he's giving a pretty logical explanation for their use cases. There's no reason why films have to look bad, it's just laziness or lack of knowledge of how to make them look good.
