'To paraphrase Ansel Adams, we, as Directors of Photography or Cinematographers are 'techno-artists'. We must understand and embrace the technology so that we can use it wisely to create visual imagery, whether those images are created on 35mm film or on a digital chip. The artistry of lighting a movie has never been about the size or quantity of lighting instruments but about the ways they are used in telling the story visually.

I recently produced and photographed a movie entitled 'The 7th Lie' in France with a professional digital camera. The story and the actors were excellent and would have been considered excellent whether photographed on 35mm film or on a digital camera. I was looking forward to exploring the digital medium using digital acquisition equipment instead of on 35mm film for this movie. After testing several cameras, we settled on using the Sony Pal DSR500ws. This camera would give us the best quality digital image for the budget which could then be 'up rezzed' to 35mm for theatrical distribution in France.

I must say, the digital images captured were excellent as digital images but they are also quite limiting when comparing those images to a 35mm film image. Film images have a depth that no other medium can match at this time. There is the ability to isolate images when telling a story visually on 35mm film using a variety of photographic methods. Isolating an image with a long telephoto lens is quite difficult and relatively non-existent when using a digital camera due to the physics of the current professional 2/3" digital chip vs. a 35mm film frame. 35mm film also has a wider latitude [the acceptance of the lightest areas to the darkest areas of the frame] due to the film emulsion chemistry vs. the digital 2/3" chip. A digital image does not contain as much detail as a 35mm image due to the technical term, 'compression'.

Although the images are pleasant to look at when excellently lit, still a pattern on a garment would not necessarily show all the discreet detail or subtle shifts in coloration on the digital image; whereas on a film frame, due to its high resolution and the physical size of the frame, one would be able to see every subtle shift of design and color as the character moved through the scene. For example, this difference is very important when the actor shows a subtle shift in facial expressions which may not be able to be caught on a digital medium due to shadow and facial detail.

[...] When digital scenes are lit beautifully for the 'digital medium' in a manner consistent with making any well photographed movie, it takes approximately a similar amount of time and a similar amount of lighting units as when shooting 35mm film. When capturing images with a digital camera individual light units however must be more precisely controlled due to the way the digital video chip accepts light. By precisely controlling the scattering of light particles, the images created would be more dramatic in content and thus maintain a more 'filmic' quality which is what most 'digital filmmakers' thirst for.

I have now returned to Hollywood where we are running tests at several facilities including Eastman Kodak's Cinesite for 'up rezzing' the digital images to 35mm for theatrical release in France. This 'up rez' is performed at a considerable cost. Instead of the money being applied to the production budget, it is now being applied to the post production budget. After post production and the completion of the movie, it might be wise to look at the true cost savings. As we near the end of post production and review the cost vs. savings, we currently find that there is minimal savings of film vs. digital.

In this age of digital acquisition of information, as filmmakers, we have received this wonderful digital gift with delight. The digital camera is an excellent tool for acquiring complex imagery and will improve over time. Currently images developed on 35mm provide the audience with a more luxurious palette of visual information than digital imagery. This will, no doubt change in the future as the digital cameras improve, but the images created digitally will still need to be lit with artistry to help stimulate and thrill the audience.' [Cinematographer Michael A. Hofstein, 2003]

by Michael Goldman

[Fragment from article published on the 'millimeter-website, February 1, 2001]

'On Stage 22 at the CBS lot in Studio City, a TV film crew is spending a seemingly ordinary day shooting flashback and insert segments for the Fox sitcom 'Titus'. Those segments will be rolled in two days later in front of an audience, during a live shoot of the entire episode, titled 'The Last Noelle'. Jack Kenny, one of the show's executive producers doubling as director of this episode, is about to film a scene in which Titus' ex-girlfriend punches him in the face. 'A' camera operator John Dechene, however, asks Kenny to 'hold on', trots over to actress Danielle Weeks, and removes two tiny specks of lint from her black slacks. Shooting resumes.

'[Removing lint] is something I never would have thought about if we were shooting film,' Dechene explained later. 'But we're not shooting film - we're shooting [24p] HD. It was really just two tiny specks of dust, yet I saw them clearly, even though I'm looking at a flickering, black-and-white video image inside the viewing tube. The Sony [HDW-F900] camera picks up small contrasts, and I have to be aware of that fact when I'm shooting. In my entire career, I don't think I've ever noticed anything like that looking through ground glass [of a film camera lens]. But here, I noticed it on a tiny HD monitor, and if I could see it, then viewers would see it.' Such is life in the bold, new world of 24p, high-definition TV production.

'Titus' represents the best illustration to date of the highs and lows of 24p production. The show is believed to be the first multi-camera episodic sitcom to utilize Sony's 24p technology, in concert with first-generation Panavision Primo Digital 11:1 zoom lenses and Panavision's Ultraview, cine-style viewfinder. That viewfinder was designed by Panavision to mimic the ergonomics of a typical film camera, offering operators a higher viewing magnification rate than a film camera; but at the same time, limiting them to eyeballing a black-and-white video image while composing shots.

What makes the 'Titus' transition so important is that producers are using essentially the same film crew that shot last season on 35mm. That's because producers agreed to produce this season's 24 episodes under the IATSE film contract, rather than under the Guild's tape agreement, thus assuring the show would continue to employ a larger film-style crew. By changing the jobs of some crewmembers, adding additional crewmembers, and attempting to replicate 'traditional' production methods while using 24p technology on a multi-camera show, 'Titus' is travelling an uncharted and sometimes controversial path. In the process, every member of the crew has become a test case for what happens when a film-trained professional transitions to HD.

Director of Photography

Veteran film and television DP Bobby Byrne runs the show's camera department, relying for the first time in his career on HD technology. Byrne calls this season 'a learning curve,' in which he has received a 'strong education.'

Among Byrne's challenges: light issues, depth of field issues, and the need to evaluate camera shots in an entirely new way - using a 24-inch, Sony BVM-D24E1WU HD monitor on-set, controlled by a hand-held, electronic switcher that lets him check all four cameras on the same monitor. Last season, Byrne simply looked through a traditional, film camera viewing tube to evaluate color, light, and composition. But even though Panavision supplies a cine-style viewing tube with the Sony cameras, Byrne and his cameramen are limited to two viewing options: either a flickering, black-and-white image on the tiny monitor inside the camera, or an attached, top-view, color LCD monitor. While those monitors can show great detail to a trained eye - such as specks of lint - they aren't sharp enough to satisfy a veteran DP's needs. Thus, the on-set HD monitor has essentially transformed into Byrne's 'viewfinder' as he sets about determining what shots are suitable.

'I always depended on my own eye to judge quality of light and other things,' says Byrne. 'I could use the quad-split [video assist] monitor to judge operating skill, but for color and light, I always used my eye, like most DPs. Here, I use a switcher to flip between each of the four cameras - we call them A, B, C, and X for Steadicam. That gives me a beautiful picture that replicates what I would see looking through a film camera. I've now gotten used to it, but it took a while. Shooting HD, the monitor has essentially become the best way to evaluate the quality of a shot. In that sense, it replaces both the traditional video assist combined with the viewfinder of a film camera - for the purposes of what a DP would normally use them for.'

That monitor, however, also happens to be Byrne's only line of defense against lens flares and other optical oddities that can pop up on a typical TV set. With his operators limited to using video monitors, they no longer can assist Byrne in detecting flares, as film cameramen often do with the naked eye.

'The [Panavision] lenses are very good, but they do accept flares a little more than our regular [film] zoom lenses,' says Byrne. 'We have to be very careful about back-lighting to prevent flares, but I'm the only one who can detect them on the HD monitor if they do appear. My operators can't see them on their small video monitors. Flares, therefore, have become totally my responsibility.'

Besides extra care with back-lighting, Byrne has also made other lighting changes on the 'Titus' set. 'We have less latitude with light than I would normally have with any of the Eastman Kodak film stocks I would ordinarily use for a sitcom,' he explains. 'In particular, we have to be careful in dealing with reds and whites, so we are a bit more muted with our lighting scheme. That's why this format would not be good for outdoor location shooting - it just blows out the whites. But on a controlled set, with four-cameras and a film crew, we can compensate for that. Just be careful on the white side, the hot side, and I think you will be OK, if you are shooting on a set.'

Byrne's other major challenge is keeping HD's superior depth-of-field capabilities from overwhelming foreground images. In that battle, he gets lots of help from the show's production design and set decoration departments, combined with enlarged camera aisles on the 'Titus' set and increased use of lens filters. 'These cameras can see everything, and it's hard to get soft backgrounds,' says Byrne. 'Everything is so sharp all the time. We have muted our backgrounds, using darker paints and lights. I also diffuse the lens more, using different filters, and usually shooting almost wide open. Widening the camera aisle to about 18 feet - it was about 12-14 feet last year - has also helped a lot, because that allows us to keep the cameras further away from the actors and make the foregrounds sharper, while still moving the cameras on dollies.'

Byrne adds that other HD issues make his job slightly more complicated this year. Among them: the need to work around dozens of cables that, last year, were not needed on the 'Titus' set, and the inability to casually roll out a film camera on non-filming days and use the viewfinder to plan shot composition.'

By Nancy Gondo

[Variety, 2004]

'Despite false starts in the past and questions that continue to linger, all sectors of the entertainment industry - from equipment makers to post-production houses to cable and satellite operators - are now gearing up to use the new technology. Movies such as the upcoming "Collateral", major events like the Super Bowl and Academy Awards and a growing number of TV shows are being filmed in hi-def. After all, what's not to like about seeing lifelike, crystal-clear images?

Industry experts say the new medium is going to stick this time. Hi-def allows filmmakers to produce images that are much clearer and more colorful than what's possible from today's 35mm movie cameras. Also, the film cost and time spent waiting for it to develop are eliminated since images pop up instantly on HD camera monitors. "It's an evolution of technology," said John Galt, Panavision's senior vice president of advanced digital imaging. "It's not going to go backwards that I can imagine."

But like any technological advance, it takes a few successful uses before people get comfortable with it. That's what happened with Panavision's Panavise HDW-F900 camera. The camera, developed with Sony in 2000, was first used to film George Lucas' "Star Wars: Episode II - Attack of the Clones". Others, hoping to replicate the visual clarity showcased in the movie, now use the camera to shoot sitcoms like ABC's "According to Jim" and "George Lopez". Panavision hopes to pick up fans with its newest HD camera, Genesis, which looks, works and feels just like traditional film cameras. The camera was unveiled at this year's Cine Gear Expo and should be available for sale by the end of the year.

Meanwhile, across the pond, Thomson Broadcast & Media Solutions is using the fast action of live sporting events to show off its latest HD cameras. The LDK 6200 HD Super SloMo camera, for instance, was first used for this year's World Cup Soccer. It'll next be used to shoot the Summer Olympics in Greece. NFL games and NASCAR races will follow in the fall.

One of HD's biggest obstacles has been the variety of formats such as 1080i, 1080p and 720p. But the LDK 6200, as well as Thomson's LDK 6000 WorldCam, can shoot in all those formats, making it easy to use in both Europe and the U.S.

"We've been delivering the LDK 6000 because it does every format imaginable," said Mark Chiolis, strategic marketing manager for Thomson. "It has about 85% market share in the mobile truck market today."

Yet another Thomson camera, the Viper FilmStream HD, was used by Michael Mann to shoot roughly 65% of DreamWorks crime thriller "Collateral". David Fincher, director of such films as "Fight Club" and "Panic Room", used the Viper for commercials. Ditto for USA Networks' sci-fi series "The 4400". So what's helping drive the move to HD?

Prices have come down, according to Chiolis. Although using WorldCam gear to build a mobile broadcasting truck now costs about 20% to 30% more than standard equipment, it used to cost double or triple before Thomson made it possible to work with all formats. "That made it much more palatable if you're going to build a truck and you want to make sure it's future-proof, because you know people are going hi-def," Chiolis said. "I don't know of any trucks built in the last eight or 12 months that haven't been hi-def."

But plenty of competition exists between makers of HD gear, including ARRI, Canon, Dalsa, JVC, Panasonic and Sony. Sony's HDW-900 Cine-Alta was among the first HD cameras with mainstream acceptance from filmmakers. Director Robert Rodriguez shot "Once Upon a Time in Mexico" and "Spy Kids 2: Island of Lost Dreams" with the Sony cam.
Studios are also warming up to the new technology. According to TrendWatch Inc. in Mill Valley, Calif., 19% of U.S. studios and facilities now use HD in their operations. Another 47% plan to use HD soon. And behind the scenes, post-production houses such as Ascent Media, City Lights Media Group and PostWorks have been busy providing HD services. The number of one-hour TV shows for which Ascent Media does post-production has nearly doubled to 25 this year, said Bill Romeo, senior vice president of sales and marketing for the firm's creative services department. Two years ago, there were only eight. All of Ascent's facilities [Company 3, Encore, Level 3 and Riot] have been retooled to work in HD. Romeo, whose firm's post-production clients include ABC's "Alias" and NBC's "ER" and "Las Vegas", sees nearly all programming switching to HD. There are still some holdouts, though. "A lot of cable channels still do standard definition programming," he said. "But a lot of them want to at least finish in HD, so they have a high-definition master."

While the entertainment industry has been investing in the technology, the audience is still relatively small. HDTV sets still cost more than regular TVs, so even though there's more HD programming, the masses have to be convinced it's worth the high price tag. But that's starting to change. "Currently, only about 10 million homes have HDTV available to them," Kishore said. But he expects that to continue growing steadily, especially if prices come down and more content becomes available. In a 2003 Yankee Group survey, 78% of respondents said they had heard of HDTV, up 8% from the year before. Ten percent of those respondents had already bought a hi-def TV; 6% received HDTV programming.

A majority of subscribers, 63%, said they were interested in movies, which bodes well for HBO, HDNet and other channels offering such fare. Nearly half, 49%, preferred sports, where ESPN HD is a leader.

Luckily, the industry also has champions pushing the technology. Mark Cuban's upstart company HDNet was one of the forerunners of the hi-def content movement, showing hi-def programming 24/7. Cablevision Systems' VOOM satellite TV service launched last October with 21 of its own HD channels. HBO streams HD feeds of popular shows like "The Sopranos".

ESPN's also doing its part to get consumers to crave HDTV. In 2002, the network launched ESPN HD and began putting football, hockey and other games on the air to overwhelmingly positive feedback. On June 7, it opened a 120,000-square-foot digital center and started taping SportsCenter in HD every day. "I think we knew when we decided to do this it would have some impact on the business," said Bryan Burns, vice president of strategic business planning and development for ESPN HD. "I don't think we understood the size of the switch we were going to throw." And the network's not stopping with HD SportsCenter. Earlier this year, ESPN announced it would provide nearly 200 telecasts in HD. Plans are in the works for its NFL studio to go HD soon. And in 2005, Baseball Tonight should be ready for the new medium. "I think there is a virtual tsunami building up and waiting to explode," Burns said.' [2004]

See also: Thomas Burstyn

See also: John Alonzo

See also: website of the Digital Cinema Society

After several years of expectation and anticipation, the D-Cinema [Digital Cinema] revolution is firmly underway, with thousands of screens now showing digital movies. The big screen revolution is happening, both in public cinemas and private homes, with dramatically improved image quality over the analogue technologies that have served the entertainment industry so well for so long.

D-Cinema refers to the use of digital technology to distribute and project motion pictures. The final movie can be distributed via hard drives, DVDs or satellite and projected using a digital projector instead of a conventional film projector. Digital projectors capable of 2K resolution began deploying in 2005, and since 2006, the pace has accelerated. HDTV and pre-recorded HD disks could put pressure on movie theaters to offer something to compete with the home HD experience.

The Digital Cinema Initiatives [DCI], created in March 2002, working in conjunction with members of the Society of Motion Picture and Television Engineers [SMPTE] standards committee, has published a system specification for digital cinema that was agreed upon by 7 major Hollywood studios: Disney, Fox, Paramount, Sony, Universal, Warner Bros. & Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer [withdrew in 2005]. In 2008, the DCI published a new version of the Digital Cinema System Specification [more than 100 pages]:

Digital cinema conforming to the DCI Standard is referred to within the film industry as D-Cinema while all other forms of digital cinema are referred to as E-Cinema. E-Cinema may be anything, ranging from a DVD player connected to a consumer projector to something that approaches the quality of D-Cinema without conforming to some of the standards. Even D-Cinema itself has evolved over time before the DCI standards were framed. However, the current DCI standards were made with the intention of standing the test of time, much like 35mm film which has evolved but still retained compatibility over a substantial part of a century.

There are currently two types of projectors for digital cinema. Early DLP [Digital Light Processing] projectors, used primarily in the USA, used limited 1280x1024 resolution which are still widely used for pre-show advertising but not usually for feature presentations. The DCI specification for digital projectors calls for three levels of playback to be supported: 2K [2048x1080)] at 24 frames per second, 4K [4096x2160] at 24 frames per second, and 2K at 48 frames per second.

Three manufacturers have licensed the DLP technology [developed by Texas Instruments - at the heart of every DLP projection system is an optical semiconductor known as the DLP chip, which was invented by Dr. Larry Hornbeck in 1987 - first prototype projector was introduced in 1994]: Christie Digital Systems, Barco and NEC. Christie is the maker of the CP2000 line of 2K DCI-compliant Digital Cinema projectors, and long established in traditional film projector technology throughout the USA and is the market leader in terms of units sold and deployed internationally. While NEC is a relative newcomer to Digital Cinema, Christie is the main player in the USA and Barco takes the lead in Europe and Asia.

The other, soon-to-be-deployed-technology, is from Sony and is labeled 'SXRD' technology. Their projector provides 4096x2160 resolution.

Digital cinemas can also deliver live broadcasts from performances or events. For example, there are regular live broadcasts to movie theaters worldwide of Metropolitan Opera performances. [Using quotes from Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.]

>> Voor bezoekers die de Nederlandse taal beheersen: de website www.cineserver.nl verschaft alle noodzakelijke informatie over Digitale Cinema in Nederland.