Which one is better?

Film>Mini DV/low res digital>HD digital
any other answer is soulless
it literally can't. it can at best imitate with certain lenses in very specific lighting situations with incredibly in depth color grading, but you can't just take an arri out and shoot anything you want and make it look like film in post.

to piss off faggots like you
everything after 8K is diminishing returns anyways

>literally EVERYONE in the documentary agrees film's image quality is superior but shooting digital is more convenient
what did they mean by that

Attached: file.png (455x250, 157.61K)

Film by far. The kino is in toosbfooooohdjfif

People said the same when 720p was the hot new shit, retard.

FILITAL

Digital. The only thing film is better at is looking like film, and even that's not always true as proven by movies like Eternals, F9 or Space Jam 2. Film is kept alive because the natural imperfections of it is what we learned a movie is supposed to look like, it'll be gradually phased out over time except for people who try specifically to ape old films like the Lighthouse did.

They used to say the same about 480p

film is worthless without kino color chemical shit that they used to do in the 60s and 70s

Kek, I'm 100% sure you cannot tell the difference between digital and film if they show them side by side

i remember when they said that about 240p

You're ignoring the whole segment where they explain that the convenience of digital can take away from the entire process, with actors wanting to see their performance after every take

poops. big fat poops

Attached: 1627061300265.webm (640x480, 289.38K)

>learned a movie is supposed to look like,
the giga cope of relativity

yeah that's what i meant by "but shooting digital is more convenient"

>which color is better, blue or orange

Attached: baitman.jpg (640x500, 101.4K)

blue

Attached: 1647735559792.jpg (1024x930, 140.67K)