6

It's unclear what you're comparing it to, but yes, there have been tons of technologies that have either come onto the scene or come down in price significantly over the last 30 years. Shooting on digital allows many more options for the filming, editing, and post-production portions of television shows. Digital cameras produce better quality output than the ...


3

All of your question are right. First, thanks to digital cameras producing of "for TV" materials are cheaper. When making a serial for TV companies were using film with different film grain. Second, because of the production time and costs the locations were usually filmed in studios reusing old scenography and avoiding "unnecessary" scenes (for example ...


3

The question comes down to what you want to get out of it. Most current Blu-ray, streaming, and other video technologies have recorded movies in the Rec. 709 (aka BT.709) color space. Having a monitor in a wider color gamut (as the one you mentioned appears to) won't make those things look any better and could even end up displaying them incorrectly if the ...


3

There are two related reasons. The first is that feature film production, from the 1920s onward when film cameras became standardized, was entirely designed around working at 24fps. Cinematographers learned to exercise fine control over exposure, image quality and depth of field by balancing shutter angle (how long the frame exposes--literally how wide the ...


2

This is not a real product; it is listed on a French blog post describing liberties taken with software in films; one of the features of the software in Eraser is that it shows the bytes being copied when you ask it to copy files. No real software does this.


Only top voted, non community-wiki answers of a minimum length are eligible