As the Covid dust settles, I have (been) pledged to return to teaching once more; I've already started screenwriting, albeit hesitantly. I've been requested to develop an entire digital filmmaking course; to which I've tentatively agreed. But if I'm going to do this – I'm going to do it right (or not at all).
Here's my dilemma; in order to bring up to contemporary nomenclature standards – what do I call it?
I'm from ye oldie days when film meant film and we made movies. I'm comfortable with 16, 35 & 70mm film and I have a basic knowledge of tape. I've blithely moved on into the digital age but I recently ask myself if I should be talking about film in this digital era and if not, what should I call it? Right now, I'm calling DSRL filmmaking; nobody has complained so far - I'm just asking if anyone has a more suitable moniker.
I reckon a film will still be called "film" even in the next century, irrespective of whether being shot on digital, DSLR, or some new invention. Audiences tend to think of "a film" as being a journey where characters take them to a different place, irrespective of whatever gadget it's been made with. Don't let being a perfectionist with a track record make you worry about names of your future creations, teach what you know and the art will out. I went to several "Film Schools" some used DSLR, some Digital, some both and one school had studio cameras I can't even remember the names of. If I was running a digital film course I would not mention the gear used but maybe have a course title that mentions a context of it being user friendly. I met John Boorman director as one of my mentors who made films Zardoz, Deliverance and Excalibur, cameras of 60s/70s/80s but has made films since. Quote. "Digital is similar to when the eye and brain work together." Happy days for your up coming course @Doug!
You may want to consider what to call it once you know what its components include. When I taught Film & Television Production to teens (luckily I didn't have to name it), but I knew it was an introductory course and that by the end of it they would be able to confidently take any small role on a big set or a bigger role on a smaller set. It wasn't about theory as much as it was about production.
I think the components required as “needs must” may differ for particular needs of each film executed. It may shrink possibilities of a cool general title for this new educational course to put out a one stop shop label. My two cents is make title broad spectrum, EG “Filmmaking for the Future” or “Hitchcock and Beyond” or even “Doug’s Digital”. The course is “User Friendly” for the now, yet encompasses the knowledge of past successes for students to make original films that can be catapulted way into the future.
filmmaking 2.0
Filmmaking in the Digital Age, or The Art of Digital Filmmaking.
I thanx all for your input. Bamutiire - it's not a history lesson; it's a 'hands-on' workshop. I think I'm pretty much stuck with the film/movie title at this point; so I'm labeling it as a DSLR Filmmaking Workshop. I'm more from the creative/visionary side rather than the technical side which is why I prefer shooting manual on a full frame DSLR (that's not a contradiction). I'll start with a prerequisite Basic Introduction to DSLR Filmmaking before moving on to the more involved/intense workshop. It'll start in the winter term - Covid permitting.
I think I would just call it "Filmmaking" as that still says it all. Unless you are talking about a lot of technical issues, which may be counter-productive in an overview or basic skills course. For example, DSLR is good for students, but DSLR per se is the very bottom rung of digital filmmaking. The best DSLR sensors (still in 2020) don't register action without serious unrecoverable rolling shutter issues, so in the professional world they're really only useful for interviews and low-action sequences (there have been exceptions, but those inevitably have involved extraordinarily talented DPs and extra costs beyond the amateur budget). On the other hand, already within financial reach of many is the new Blackmagic camera which now is at 12K and does 8K at up to 160fps beautifully. I think that reference to film is still relevant, as it has never gone away, never will go away, and is experiencing a revival of sorts from 8mm to 35mm at least.
Yeah Shadow, I'm sticking with Filmmaking. I realize that DSLR is on the lower rung but I've managed to get some pretty good moderate action shots on a full frame 4K sensor showing very little jelly-wobble. And I'm willing to let 'em play with my old Red-1. I haven't used the new Blackmagic 12K yet and I'm impressed at its entry price but I have to take into account its massive computer editing needs. I'm designing this workshop to expose wannabe aspiring filmmakers to the real world filmmaking environment and business needs. I wanna keep it real.
Doug Nelson We'll be using the new Blackmagic in December on one of my projects. Testing on it looks fantastic - 8K at 160fp. The 12K image isn't as nice as the 8K, which according to my consultant is amazing. Also, the whole RAW format litigation is throwing the industry into a bit of a quandry on editing, and Blackmagic's Braw does seem a superior answer at the moment. I am frightened about editorial pipeline, but then again, the industry has always used for proxy editing in the past (well... I haven't, my system works fine up to 4K but I think 8K is going to be an issues).
1 person likes this
I haven't got to play with it yet - and see no reason to. I'm strong at 4K but my antique computer pants a lot much above that.