Its not always about latest and greatest

[hmcindie]

The movie would have looked better if he shot a lot of it on ancient low tech film.

 

Not better. Just different.

[Mark Isah]

It's weird that many people add artificial grain to their footage to make it look good. 

 

But them, I'm a film shooter. I'm biased.

[Rudolf]

 

It's weird that many people add artificial grain to their footage to make it look good. 

I am a film shooter either but I have also added grain in the past to digital video when I ran out of money/film I was disappointed about the

look. 99% percent want the filmlook and therefore older lenses are used and artificial grain or several filtersuits we all know.

But sometimes film can be a very tough thing... ! Video is often more easy: Just go out, don't think about it and shot five hours and watch/cut it immediately...

[StrangerSong]

These 60D films would only ever really fall apart if they were projected on a theatre screen, but they most likely never will be and they play to their medium really well.  The complex thing about film really, and what I'm realizing now, is how much doing everything other than the camera costs.  I mean you need good sound, grip equipment, writing, planning, lighting, stands, transportation.  At a certain point there are just diminishing returns if you're investing so much in the camera instead of the rest of it all, it's only 30% of the equation.  Especially if you're doing narrative stuff, where the post production and stuff like capturing performances is much more essential.