Because I had to say something....
Jun. 30th, 2008 05:16 am![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
raloriaI'm doing two things for one post, 'cause I'm lazy and all that. :P
Let's do the bad one first. Edit: Okay, they're actually both kind of bad...whatever. I love Lifehacker. It provides very cool and useful tips and ideas. But this post about Getting Drunk Faster....seriously???? Was this necessary???? I don't drink, never have, so my perspective on something like this might be different from others. But their over 100 comments certainly echoed my feelings....what a dumb article! "Yeah, let's not only endanger people's lives, lets tell them how to do it quickly!" Aaarrrrggghhhh! *headdesk*
Now on to a totally different topic, but one that is very close to my heart - film. There's a great article by Robert A. Harris: DNR... and Other Things That Go Bump in the Night. If you don't recognize his name, you might have seen some of his work. He's the man who helped restore such film greats as "My Fair Lady" and "Spartacus". This time he's taking on Blu-Ray discs and the possible new trend of removing film grain from the films that are distributed on that High Definition format. Apparently some studio executives see film grain as some kind of flaw which must be removed. The results? Certainly a "clean" image, but at the cost of making the film look like a video game. Ugh. Horrible!
I feel rather passionate about this because filmmaking is my career and I've been interested in the preservation of motion pictures for many years now. Films are supposed to have grain. It's what separates it from video. Film reacts differently to light and the grain in the film adds a special quality to the image that video cannot hope to reproduce. To put it in simpler terms....video tends to be flat, while film sparkles. I hate to think that we're going to start essentially ruining the works of the past just to appease today's video and video game viewers. I'm all for restoring a film to it's original glory by removing dust, scratches, and fading that have marred so many films over time. These are problems which degrade the film and need to be removed to return the image to the filmmaker's original product. But film grain is supposed to be a part of the image. It is not something that needs to be removed to make a better image. It has always been on film and will continue to be there for as long as the medium of film exists.
So please, read the article if you care about films. I know it's kind of long, but it's an important subject. *steps off of soapbox*
Sorry about my ranting. As you can tell, I'm pretty passionate about film. :)
Let's do the bad one first. Edit: Okay, they're actually both kind of bad...whatever. I love Lifehacker. It provides very cool and useful tips and ideas. But this post about Getting Drunk Faster....seriously???? Was this necessary???? I don't drink, never have, so my perspective on something like this might be different from others. But their over 100 comments certainly echoed my feelings....what a dumb article! "Yeah, let's not only endanger people's lives, lets tell them how to do it quickly!" Aaarrrrggghhhh! *headdesk*
Now on to a totally different topic, but one that is very close to my heart - film. There's a great article by Robert A. Harris: DNR... and Other Things That Go Bump in the Night. If you don't recognize his name, you might have seen some of his work. He's the man who helped restore such film greats as "My Fair Lady" and "Spartacus". This time he's taking on Blu-Ray discs and the possible new trend of removing film grain from the films that are distributed on that High Definition format. Apparently some studio executives see film grain as some kind of flaw which must be removed. The results? Certainly a "clean" image, but at the cost of making the film look like a video game. Ugh. Horrible!
I feel rather passionate about this because filmmaking is my career and I've been interested in the preservation of motion pictures for many years now. Films are supposed to have grain. It's what separates it from video. Film reacts differently to light and the grain in the film adds a special quality to the image that video cannot hope to reproduce. To put it in simpler terms....video tends to be flat, while film sparkles. I hate to think that we're going to start essentially ruining the works of the past just to appease today's video and video game viewers. I'm all for restoring a film to it's original glory by removing dust, scratches, and fading that have marred so many films over time. These are problems which degrade the film and need to be removed to return the image to the filmmaker's original product. But film grain is supposed to be a part of the image. It is not something that needs to be removed to make a better image. It has always been on film and will continue to be there for as long as the medium of film exists.
So please, read the article if you care about films. I know it's kind of long, but it's an important subject. *steps off of soapbox*
Sorry about my ranting. As you can tell, I'm pretty passionate about film. :)
