Timeline for Was film actually “better” than digital media?
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
21 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Dec 17, 2017 at 23:11 | answer | added | MmmHmm | timeline score: 0 | |
| Dec 6, 2017 at 22:21 | comment | added | MicroMachine | The past tense in the title implied undocumented assumptions. Film is still widely used worldwide. It is a better preservation method, cheaper and faster production method, the popularity of digital is more related to lobbying, uneducated consumer base and economical reasons than real quality of the medium | |
| Mar 10, 2016 at 20:39 | answer | added | J Presper Eckert | timeline score: 3 | |
| S Aug 12, 2015 at 15:46 | history | bounty ended | Walt | ||
| S Aug 12, 2015 at 15:46 | history | notice removed | Walt | ||
| S Aug 11, 2015 at 10:23 | history | bounty started | Walt | ||
| S Aug 11, 2015 at 10:23 | history | notice added | Walt | Reward existing answer | |
| Jul 11, 2015 at 13:22 | review | Suggested edits | |||
| Jul 11, 2015 at 15:11 | |||||
| May 19, 2015 at 16:40 | history | tweeted | twitter.com/#!/StackMovies/status/600702486492672000 | ||
| May 18, 2015 at 8:17 | comment | added | his | @BCdotWEB You know, that's why I wrote "when projected digitally". In a normal cinema, I meant. The quality, specifically for Interstellar, was a catastrophe. A joke to think that he intended a better quality. Unsharp, off colors, noise everywhere... no, thank you, if that is the result than don't give the man extra money for his pet peeves again. | |
| May 18, 2015 at 8:10 | comment | added | BCdotWEB | @his Ever seen a picture of an IMAX reel? Ever seen a BD of any of his recent films? | |
| May 18, 2015 at 7:59 | comment | added | his | @BCdotWEB Yes, and the quality when projected digitally was gruesome. | |
| May 17, 2015 at 23:17 | answer | added | Catija | timeline score: 55 | |
| May 17, 2015 at 21:47 | comment | added | DaG | @Catija, BCdotWEB, thanks: I have slightly edited my question. | |
| May 17, 2015 at 21:46 | history | edited | DaG | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
Little clarification
|
| May 17, 2015 at 20:56 | comment | added | BCdotWEB | "is no more used for movies" -- says who? Christopher Nolan for instance still uses pellicule. | |
| May 17, 2015 at 20:09 | comment | added | Catija | Are you talking more about film as a recording medium or as a presentation format? Or both? Can you clarify your question slightly? | |
| May 17, 2015 at 19:14 | comment | added | DaG | @Catija: I was under the impression that, almost always during filming and always when screening in theatres, digital media are used, but I will be ready to stand corrected. | |
| May 17, 2015 at 19:11 | comment | added | DaG | May I know why the question was downvoted, in order to try to improve it? | |
| May 17, 2015 at 17:52 | comment | added | Catija | It arguably still is better. Not sure who told you no one uses film any more, though. It's still widely used. | |
| May 17, 2015 at 17:29 | history | asked | DaG | CC BY-SA 3.0 |