Digital Technology Development

The use of DV cameras among audiences has significantly affected the film industry, in that audiences themselves can feel closer to the film industry and take part in similar processes of production. The decreasing price of DV cameras, as well as the introduction of new technologies over the last decade has increased the use of them, making them available to more people, and increasing the quality of the product. The use of DV cameras has benefitted the film industry, in that the audience can create their own productions, and extend the brand of the film, where users can upload their own ‘films’ to the internet, on websites such as YouTube, due to the increased number of broadband connections in homes, promoting the films in doing so. However, the use of DV cameras has also increased levels of piracy-the 2009 film, ‘The Boat That Rocked’, although having a large budget of around $50 million, grossed around $35 million. Although this is a large inflow of revenue, other British films, funded from abroad, have been known to triple their budget-2006’s ‘Casino Royale’ grossed $594 million, with a budget of only $150 million. With more people owning DV cameras, and the decreased size of the cameras due to technological advancements, cameras can be concealed upon entering a cinema, in order to record a film, to make it illegally available to others, through the use of DVD burning and the internet. The decreased quality encountered in pirate copies may make many viewers feel that the film itself was not exceptionally good, which may lead to viewers advising friends and family not to see the film, decreasing revenue for production companies, such as Working Title films, further.

Digital technology has also decreased many costs for production companies, so that films can be produced at a higher quality, with a lower budget. As many films are shot partly or fully in the digital format, some film can be offered to cinemas in the digital. However, films distributed in the digital format currently have low demand, because the costs of converting cinemas to theatres with digital screens are very high: up to $150,000 per screen or more, and it is debatable whether the picture quality is any clearer-there are also more risks of digital projectors having faults and may require a replacements after only 5 years. A simultaneous ‘blanket’ release could remove this problem, through digital distribution, as copies would be cheaper and faster to manufacture, and more could be produced (where smaller optical discs would be easier and cheaper to transport, rather than a large film reel), or it could be made available over the internet, with significantly lower costs to a distribution company, which may allow for more money to be spent on production.

Specific audiences may be deterred by the concept of digital film consumption. Some individuals, that may have a professional interest in film, may notice slight differences in quality of a digital film, and may decide that they would rather not see the film at a cinema, and may wish to wait to purchase the film when released to DVD, for example, which would decrease the revenue, and may have an effect on the budget of future productions, for the production company. However, it is evident that the repeated use of film reels, currently used in cinemas, can degrade the quality after a number of viewings-scratches and dirt on the reels will affect the quality and may deter many audiences from viewing the film after a period of time ahead of the release. Digitally distributed films, however, can be viewed repeatedly, without affecting the quality greatly, and may therefore continue to gain higher revenue, weeks after the release.

The recent developments in 3D might have something to do with it. With around 25 movies releasing theatrically in 3D in 2011, the money is clearly in the digital realm (yes, the industry is currently testing out more viable techniques for shooting 3D on film, but right now, as far as 3D goes, digital rules the day). But that doesn’t mean a filmmaker has to make a total switch and give up on film entirely. Yet, we have rarely heard from famous filmmakers who tested the waters of digital cameras and come away wanting nothing to do with the format again.

It is not uncommon for certain productions to devote segments of filming to the digital format. Black Swan used the Canon 7D to shoot its subway sequences because of its many benefits to a production. The DSLR cameras that plague film schools currently are the industry’s hottest new gadget. Anybody can shoot cinema-quality imagery for less than the price of a computer. When most professional film cameras cost tens of thousands of dollars, that’s quite a bargain. Arguably more importantly, it’s much easier to fit a DSLR into a subway car than a full film camera setup.

Film possesses a certain texture that is unrivalled by digital cameras. A talented editor or colourist can easily manipulate digital footage to look more like film, but this seems contradictory in nature. Do we alter digital footage this way because audiences are still not ready to see the true power of digital? It is possible. It seems more likely that those in charge of financing and distributing movies are not prepared to risk their investments on technology that they themselves are not ready to embrace entirely. But the look of a product on film is ingrained in our collective vision to the point that we don’t notice it until we see something different.

Many audiences today argue that a crisp image without the grain associated with film is better-looking. Audiences evolve just as fast as the technology presented to them. But a large contingent of those movie goers still want the classic look, regardless of the content of the film itself. That audience won’t be going away for a while yet – and neither will the classic film look.

The most important difference between film and digital might be seen on set. Film reels run out of film. Digital cards run out of space. But when a reel runs out, it is done forever. When a card runs out, it can be dumped and re-used rather quickly. This pushes production along financially in a number of ways