A debate is raging in the film world about the merits of shooting movies on 35mm film versus digital cameras. In one corner are those who believe digital’s practical and economic benefits make it impossible to resist. In the other, "purists" such as directors Quentin Tarantino and Christopher Nolan who cherish the visual "texture" of 35mm and warn that something important is being lost.
電影界正為了用35釐米膠片或數位攝影機拍片的優點，掀起一場激烈辯論。其中一個陣營相信，數位影片更實際和經濟的好處讓人無法抗拒；另一陣營則屬於類似導演塔倫提諾和諾蘭等「純粹派」，他們珍視35釐米影片的視覺「質感」，並警告某件重要事物正在消失中。
Others stress that even movies shot in 35mm are now quickly converted to digital for distribution and that the real clincher is the impact on the studios’ bottom line. Printing just one film on 35mm film and delivering it to the cinema where it will be shown can cost $1,500 alone -- compared to $150 for digital. With a copy needed for each of several thousand cinemas, it is easy to see why digital seems to have won the day.
其他人則強調，就算是用35釐米底片拍攝的電影，現在也很快就會轉為數位版本發行，真正的關鍵在於對電影公司盈虧所造成的衝擊。光印製一部35釐米影片、再送到戲院的成本就高達1500美元，數位版影片卻只要150美元。在數千家戲院都各自需要一份影片拷貝的情況下，不難理解為何數位影片會獲勝。
文章段落擷取：http://iservice.ltn.com.tw/Service/english/english.php?engno=803270&day=2014-08-10
留言列表
