The Medium Is The Message: Film Vs. Digital 

Hope you guys enjoy this new video looking at the basics of film and digital capture and some of the different effects which shooting in different mediums has on an audience. As always any engagement in the comments section is appreciated!

It’s worth mention the notion of film as romantic and nostalgic only really became a thing in the 2010s with the whole “vintage” aesthetic becoming popular then

It's crazy how the opinion of filmmakers wildly varies in this topic, i remember watching the Hollywood's Reporter cinematographers roundtable in 2018 and how Robert Elswit said that shooting digital was to clinical, but Deakins didn't care if he shot something on a iPhone if he got to tell a story he likes. In the end i think it's essential part of the message what you choose to shot your movie with, even if the audience can't tell the difference i like to think they feel it in some way.

David Lynch noted that the thing about film vs digital would be that, with film tech--the slight blurriness and fuzzy texture of that medium allowed him extra more room to dream, while watching a film (not verbatim).

Directors like Tarantino and Nolan, who are diehard fans of film, have the clout to get the best chemical processing for their films (which are most likely transferred to digital for post production anyway). For the rest of us I think shooting film is too cumbersome expensive and unpredictable. Lens choice is, in my opinion, a much more powerful and accessible option for modern filmakers to give character ( vintage/clean etc) to their movies and have a greater aesthetic impact on the audience. Film grain and grading can be simulated in post. I will say that film could be a good choice for projection and excellent for archiving movies since digital projectors need to be calibrated properly (many are not) and codecs become obsolete.

If you look up Steve Yedlin, he has a whole website on how the Film vs Digital discussion is null and void when you take into account that digital can be changed to look like anything. For movies like Knives Out and The Last Jedi, he created custom LUTS that replicated exactly the effects and artiacts of film (like haloing and film grain), making the difference between them negligible. They even swapped back and forth between digital and film while making the movies, and in the final product, they're 100% indistinguishable. He argues that Film negative itself doesn't have an inherent look, but the look is given by the chemicals and processes used to develop it (in essence, color grading). Digital is more practical and can be made to look like film, so to me, it's the most effective medium.

There was a time when I could say if it was digital or film just looking at an image. Now I can´t, most of the time. But I think the greatest difference is in the process of making the film, not watching it. Guys like Steven Spielberg, Scorsese, Paul Thomas Anderson and Tarantino still like to use film because the mindset is different. On the other hand, a director like David Fincher is even more meticulous but he uses digital because he likes to shoot many, many, many takes.

I'm studying Cinematography now and these videos have been such a tremendous help. Eye-Opening and beautifully put together! Thanks for the videos!

I remember seeing something about shooting digital for Joker because they knew Joaquin had a improvisational style and didn’t want to be limited. Like the bathroom scene after he kills was partly* improvised

It's not so much the texture I love about film. It's that chemical color where everything in a film frame feels tangible. Real. Without being to saturated. The image is sharp but not made of lines. it's pure organics.

This was an intriguing and well thought out video. I also think that neither format is better than the other. Both have pros and cons that a director or DoP have to consider. But I think if digital is used wrong, it can look … too clean, too sterile, too digital. For example, Netflix's Enola Holmes falls into this category. Just pause in any exterior scene to see what I mean. Joker on the other hand, is a great example of doing digital right, in my opinion. Before watching this video I didn't even notice that it was shot digitally. It looks great, almost like film!

I only recently discovered your channel but you make some of the most insightful and fascinating videos about cinematography I’ve seen. I’ve been looking for this kind of channel (video essay-style discussions strictly about cinema) for a long time. Keep it up!

Food for thought - I'll need to watch this more than once to learn. Thank you.

This is my new favorite channel on RU-vid. Keep doing great work man

Great content! This channel is already one of my favorites, can't wait to see where it'll go in the future!

Oh man, what a great channel! 😍 thanks for putting in all the work for us to enjoy!

So now at 01 AM, it's like I've just found another good yet underrated channel on filmmaking! I like this kinda soothing voice with clear pronunciation and I love exactly this type of caring narration.

I use this video as a teaching tool! Great video. Your calm, clean and clear approach is very much appreciated.

One of the best videos I've watched , great storytelling with good educational insights, great job

Studying these videos alongside my screenwriting training, they’re incredibly helpful but also beautifully made! Cheers and more of the same please :)

Great stuff as always. Please keep making these videos.

This is such an underrated channel! Great content! You should make a podcast! Very soothing to listen to!

Love your page. As a lover of film, I can say this has truly helped me learn a lot

My new favorite channel. Thank you for making these!

I really love the content of your channel. So in-depth and driven for cinema as a whole. Keep it up!

Dude your videos are so fucking awesome and deserve way more recognition. Keep it up man.

Beautiful interpretation. Thank you for this point of view. I really enjoyed it!

as an analog photographer it’s so interesting to see how film stocks are used in films. i can’t imagine how expensive that is, though, since just buying and scanning a roll of 35mm is sometimes close to 30$

great video! for some reason the thought of how crazy it is that we can capture an image has been in the back of my mind for a long time. never looked up how it's actually possible though... but now, thanks to this video, I fiinally found out. thanks mate!

I am learning Cinematography and this channel has been a huge help! Thank you ❤

Thank you for this video! I’m really glad I stumble upon your channel. For years now people have been arguing over film vs digital and many have just starting adopting vocabulary they heard into the side of the argument they fall on. As you mention, the tool you use will affect the viewer subconsciously and all of that is part of the storytelling. And if you’re not considering this when selecting a lens or recording medium, I think you’re missing a large part of the equation of visual story telling. Many (but not all) people enter the argument thinking it’s a “technical/skill” debate. Shooting on film makes you a better photographer or something. How many times have we heard someone say “I only shoot film”..... nothing wrong if that’s the medium you only want to work with for the rest of your life. Maybe that’s just how you want to story tell. but we live in a world where so much is available to us. When we free ourselves to dream and to be storytellers, then why not use other mediums that’s could be at your disposal that can better put on display your vision.

Man this video is golden! As someone who didnt really know much about the differences this video really explains it well

Man, I’m watching everything you’ve made right now and I want to personally thank you for this knowledge. Film makers everywhere appreciate you bro. 🙏🏾🙏🏾🙏🏾

love this channel, keep up the good work, subbed!

Joker was suppose to be shot on 65mm film but Warner Bros denied Todd Philips this creative decision. However, 70mm theatrical release prints were still made of Joker. So movies shot digitally will eventually wind up on celluloid anyway for archiving and preservation.

Informative and interesting take on it! Great video... thanks!

That was a great breakdown and introduced some new concepts to me I hadn't considered when viewing film. You're absolutely right about the medium being the message. That's actually very profound, brother. Well done.

Very cool! Thank you for making this

Good stuff man!! Super interesting

Great Content! Thank you for sharing!

Your videos are so great! I learn so much haha

GREAT WORK, very informative thanks!

Your channel giving more information than some master classes out there.. Appreciate it so much .....

I was stunned when Iearned Joker was shot primarily on digital. They did an excellent job with the color grading and post-work to make it look as if it was made in the early 80's. I think more directors who use digital should learn from it.

Superb. Great presentation. Thank you.

The main problem with digital is that it becomes a toy for filmmakers who spend hours and hours toying with camera settings and color correction and completely forget that there is a film to finish, and then the whole thing turns out to have these fake lights and fake colours and fake shadows and nothing looks motivated or makes any sense. Film has the advantage of you needing to think about what you are going to do instead of just shooting a bunch of raw images and spend years in post while producers, clients and whoever, wait for you to deliver. Someone should be constantly shouting at filmmakers: digital tools are tools, they are not called digital toys.

Great presentation! Thank you for sharing your thoughts. I love the look of film!

Excellent video, both informative and interesting.

Great video dude 👌🏽

Wow. I learned a bunch. Thank you for explaining in such an accessible manner. :)

Thank you so much for such a good sharing! 😬

It's important to remember that there are film & digital capture methods and also film & digital display methods. You can mix the two. It happens all the time in modern film productions. A film might have been captured digitally but can be printed back to film to give it film texture at a more affordable cost. And films that are captured on emulsion ultimately get displayed digitally. So the two are mixed all the time. Neither is better than the other, and neither has an inherent look. It's largely about how it was captured and how it is prepared for display.

Your explanations shit on all the classes I took in film school. Good job man

Love your videos man keep it up! :D

We are learning great conceptual learning through you....keep going

Your videos are amazing!! Thank you sir!!

5:35 I'd like to correct this misconceptions. Digital sensors have only 1 sensitivity (unless it's a dual gain sensor). Changing the gain, literally changes the gain on the ADC, the sensitivity of sensor is still the same.

Amazing work!

very informative!! Thank you!!

Great content, bro!

Interesting video! Thank you👌 I personally don’t necessarily think anymore, that the story dictates the medium/camera anymore. You can always find things in the story to explain why good filmmakers masterfully chose that specific medium for that specific movie. But it’s also easy to turn it around: for example, if Nolan shot Tenet on a digital camera, we would strongly agree that this is a very scientific/futuristic story and therefore you would use a digital camera. But he shot it with film, now we might say: it’s a story about time travel and therefore analog fits the story better because it gives the modern viewer a sense of a different time... or whatever. But in the end, Film is just what Nolan shoots on, because that’s what he likes. Intuitively most of us would probably have chosen digital, (not that I don’t like the look... god! are those images wonderful🤤) but I think if Nolan chose digital, the choice of medium could have harmed the story, in the way that Nolan didn’t have the medium he is comfortable working with and then the movie wouldn’t have turned out as great as it did now. Because shooting on film also affects how Nolan works with actors and so on... Similar with Joker. If it was shot on Film, we would have strongly agreed that it was the right choice of medium, because it’s a very dark and gritty story and everything about it is very nostalgic/vintage, so therefore it’s an obvious choice to use Film... But it was shot digitally and we definitely find reasons that this was the right choice. I personally don’t think there’s a right or wrong medium for the story. I just think there’s maybe a choice that completely aligns with the story and therefore maybe makes you feel more comfortable as a viewer, but choosing the opposite medium/camera/style, makes it more interesting, because it doesn’t quite match up in the head of the viewer. And it shows the story in the different way, not in a right or wrong way. Another example, house of cards... that very clean smooth look and feel makes a lot of sense, it’s a political and very serious story. But I often thought about, what if it was told in a more documentary kind of way, maybe from the perspective of a reporter, or from Toms perspective who actually IS documenting Franks life in the series... So therefore it would maybe be shot mostly handheld, less dynamic range, well maybe it would even be shot on an iPhone, because that’s just what Tom is using, maybe even in portrait... That would be a Genius the decision! From a perspective never seen in a political show/movie before!!! (We would say) ... well but it was shot in a completely different way and it’s just as genius as the other way(maybe could have been). (But probably, if it was shot on an iPhone, it wouldn’t have resonated with a lot of people or maybe with even more, nobody knows...) I still think story is king. The medium is just one part of the way you can tell a story, I think some ways are more interesting, less intuitive, more provoking than the others and sometimes “the way the story is told” is not what it’s about, sometimes you don’t even want the viewer to think about it or feel it... Bottom line: If it’s a good story, the viewers mind will always find reasons, why it was “the right way” to shoot it and the viewer will be immersed. That’s what it’s about. (I don’t wanna say that gear doesn’t matter! I think it matters a lot! And “story is king” shouldn’t be the excuse to shoot everything in a documentary, trashy way. Cause I certainly wouldn’t enjoy Cinema a lot, if everything was shot that way) Sorry, I started rambling a bit, probably because writing this text was also a way for me of trying to understand this complex topic. I guess my reply leaves a lot of open questions... so ask them, I’m very happy to have interesting conversations to learn from 😊 (I think one question that is very important is, how do we define the word “story”, where does it end and where does it start? Sometimes a story is great as a book, but not as a movie. Are there stories that are just great by themselves? Are there stories, that are only great because the writer/director told them in a certain way, or was the idea of the story, what actually sold the story? Are these two things even separable? Does a story inevitably bring a storyteller and does a storyteller inevitably bring a certain way the story is told. Is there a “neutral” way to communicate a story?) So many questions 😄

Loved the way you explained!

That was a masterpiece explanation/inspiration.

great video dude very informative

Love your videos!! Thank you so much

Wow, excellent video! I subscribed!

Brilliant! Thanks for sharing.

Wonderful content !!!

Nice work. Thank you

Great video, thanks!

Well done!

This is just awesome content!

I stopped reading newsprint after it went digital. I still remember the musky whiff of the newsprint, when I opened it up, the coarse texture, the simple layout and fonts was so pleasing. Retired folks used to clutch it in their armpits and took it wherever they went and would find a spot in a park, cafe, market or even a bus to read it. They would go through classifieds even when they were not looking for a job or something to buy. They were able to spend their whole day with it without needing anybody's company or even when they were with their friends or in their home with family, it was never a hindrance to communication, you only had to peek behind your page to talk...

incredible video man! thank you :)))

I couldn't agree more. As you've said in the video, a lot of period films use film, but the 2015 retelling of Macbeth used digital, and made abstract adjustments to the color grading of the film, effectively delivering the surreal nature of the story.

Even the high end digital cameras like Arri or Red don't have that dreamy look that film has. High end digital cameras still look like Soap operas or home made video or like a best buy Canon cameras. It is what it is. Digital will never replace celluloid.

It is interesting that you picked Joker for this video since even if it was shot on digital, it was processed in post to look like film

great explanation and perspective...

Love these videos

Amazing vids!

This channel is amazing!

10 years ago I was pretty adamant about Hollywood shooting on film, and I still am, but the quality of digital has gotten pretty damn close. 10-12 years ago, I could easily spot the difference. Today, I really have to look at the image closely to tell the difference due to how post-production elements really bring out that nostalgic/romantic look with digital images. Film is still the most accurate medium out there in my opinion, but movies like The Joker really highlight the pros of digital. I think both have their uses. And as you stated, it just really depends on the director and the story they’re trying to tell. Great video!

Lord, your videos are some of the most beautiful on RU-vid!

awesome video !

Another excellent video, congrats! With film everything is organic the movie is breathing. Digital gives you the opportunity to unfold your story and vision with less budget but still has that cold crystal look. I wish more movies captured in film!

Nice job!

Wonderful! Thank you!

Well put :), thank for sharing.

I really enjoyed this video. One reason I would choose film over digital not mentioned is linear tone vs logarithmic tone capture. The tonality and dynamic range is rendered and spreads differently between the two capture mediums, and as discussed as with other visual elements, it too creates a different look and feel. I emulate the linear tone look and feel when using digital by lifting shadows and controlling highlights, and that helps. But there is a difference between the two, even if it's a 10% difference after skilful grading/processing, sometimes that's enough to change the subconscious feelings and emotions. But budget and practicality are also main medium deciding factors for enthusiasts.

Great video, thank you

Love this exploration of mediums.

this video was put together perfectly

amazing work bro, Saludos desde Cuba

Awe bru! great content! Love from Austria

So awesome!

Love your videos

Good work

nicely explained.

I've actually been seeing a convergence on the film vs digital. Film over the years used to have color looks often specific to a time period. Overall film emulsions have greatly decreased grain for a given asa/iso and more unbiased color reproduction. And even movies shot on film are rarely posted photochemicaly. A lot of that large and teal and other color grading ironically can turn a movie shot on celluloid into pseudo digital. Movies on film these days are moving towards 65mm sized format to compete and get a cleaner crisper look. Digitals color gamut and resolution increased greatly the last 15-20 years and on top of that grading and post still push it towards looking like print stock. Film will largely dissapear, but it's look is victorious and it and digital have come together on a general look and feel of what constitutes cinematic.

I have a 6x7cm film camera and a brand new mirrorless camera...I use the digital far more as its quick and easy and I can download the pictures on my phone immediately, but when I make prints in the darkroom from my film it’s not even close to digital there’s a tremendous difference that you would overlook without being the one to take the photographs