For some further information, it looks like they’re shooting on an ARRI 435 camera, on film. (It says 5219 on the mag, which is Kodak’s VISION3 500T stock). Looking at the aspect ratio, it’s more than likely a spherical lens on a Super 35 gate.
Because it’s being shot on film, the crew needs to have a reliable form of monitoring on set- typically we do this with playback operators but film is not digital and cannot be played back until its downloaded, processed, scanned and sent back to the production office in the form of dailies. Since you can’t reliably review footage on the day, we often rely on video tap cameras that capture light refracted off of the spinning shutter inside the camera- Guess what? video tap playback sucks. It’s barely capable of providing a standard definition image and the sensitivity of the video tap has to be cranked insanely high.
and so follows that you need to have a certain amount of people watching the take as it unfolds to ensure that the director’s vision is being communicated. Obviously there’s the camera operator, who’s eye is glued to the eyepiece- if they were to take their eye away from the eyepiece, light would come in and double-expose the film. But in the room there’s also the focus puller, the second assistant, the dolly grip, the assistant director, the script supervisor, the director, the director of photography, a producer, and likely a stylist as well. All these people need a reliable feed on what’s going on, so rather than risk wireless transmission issues, it’s best to just go with a reliable monitor cabled directly out of the video tap. It’s not important for seconds to watch the take, but shooting on film, you don’t want to waste footage letting them escape the room.
In most cases, when you’re shooting digital, you don’t need to worry about a lot of this stuff- takes can be reviewed and played back immediately on set, wireless transmission is HD, digital footage doesn’t cost anything, etc. so this sort of wild goose chase happens less and less these days as digital cameras have risen to the point of being workable cameras in our industry.
However, the limits of digital in a creative form still pale in comparison to the academy (4-perf) format of 35 millimetre film- Not only does film boast a 26-30 stop dynamic range in exposure latitude (Depending on the stock) vs. Digital’s 17, Digital cameras on set are only shooting 3.2k-8k resolution (which is great, i guess) but 35 millimetre film shot with optically perfect lenses at a 2.0 T-stop will resolve an image up to 20k resolution. IMAX 65 millimetre film is an entirely different ballpark (aka why Christopher Nolan films look so fucking good)
dailybridgerton
theartofmadeline
origamiaround
pixelskylines
snowghoul
baratheonpilled
