logo Sign In

Post #306710

Author
zombie84
Parent topic
Film grain is not your enemy.
Link to post in topic
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/306710/action/topic#306710
Date created
17-Jan-2008, 12:03 PM
Originally posted by: Johnboy3434


Originally posted by: zombie84
Your assumption that grain is an undesireable "fault" of the filmstock" is incorrect.


Which is incorrect: that it's undesirable, or that it's a fault? If the former, that's simply artistic preference. If the latter, then I'm afraid you're the one that's incorrect. When people make film, they don't go down the list saying "Celluloid? Check. Sprocket-holes? Check. Grain? Check." Grain is a side-effect of the use of film, caused by imperfections in the film itself. From an engineering (read: purely technical) standpoint, imperfections are inherently undesirable. Does that mean nobody likes it? Of course not. Some people are only attracted to those in the 300+ pound range, as well. Doesn't mean the object of their desire is in good shape. You like lower-grade film (not the movie itself, but the film), and I respect that. You just need to admit it.


Sorry, your still making assumptions. Its not a "fault"--that its a "fault" lies on the presupposition that a crystal-clear image is an asset, or that anything less is undesireable. Maybe you would never want anything less than crystal clarity, but guess what? Thats just you. Grain is not an "imperfection", its simply an element of a photograph, one that is often desired by filmmakers, and as I said at the very least accepted as an aesthetic element in the art of motion picture photography.

The whole clarity=quality argument is a fallacious one created by HD. Its an aesthetic. Film is another aesthetic. Film is softer, film is higher resolution, film has a texture created by the silver halide crystals that compose the image (what gives it its grain). Don't confuse assumptions and personal aesthetics with "imperfections" in anything lacking those elements.