We know about apps like Instagram and PhotoFunia that can make pictures and film look like they were shot in a different time. But, there's now a huge resurgence in popularity of the original format that inspired that retro look - Super 8 film.I'm increasingly sceptical about this type of attention-seeking authenticity. It may feel tangible and romantic, but working with film is incredibly difficult and inconvenient. In most cases, this inconvenience only works against the creative vision.
Sunday, 30 September 2018
Tuesday, 5 September 2017
Every year the Channel 4 Amazing Spaces Shed of the Year throws up cinema designs that are ingenious or just plain wacky. They leave me slightly jealous (as well as wondering how people ever find the time and energy).
But this cinema shed is easily the most impressive I've seen for its attention to historical detail. It's not a cinema-themed entertainment room with a DVD player; it is a real, functioning facsimile of a 1930s-era supercinema. (The builder describes it as 1970s or 1980s era, but it hasn't been subdivided into lots of substandard smaller screens.) Not only does it look like a vintage ABC Cinema, but it is equipped with authentic fixtures and fittings such as genuine ABC carpets and signage.
The cinema has its own Facebook page.
Wednesday, 30 August 2017
In the Independent, the debate rumbles on. Or, rather, is endlessly repeated.
"No-one denies the magic of holding film or of feeding it through a projector."
Where this article differs from other recent efforts is in its focus on 35mm / 70mm / IMAX film as projection media, rather than shooting media.
"Prints for the films aren’t all in pristine condition but audiences don’t mind. In the same way that a new generation of music lovers are re-discovering vinyl, cinema enthusiasts are discovering, or re-discovering celluloid."
Tuesday, 11 July 2017
According to this Guardian article:
"Nolan’s second world war epic the most widely released 70mm film in 25 years. They are piggybacking, to some degree, on the Weinstein Company’s work convincing theater [sic] owners to procure functioning 70mm projectors in advance of Quentin Tarantino’s The Hateful Eight."
The article goes on to applaud the "automatic prestige" of shooting on this format - an echo of my own sentiments comparing 16mm to camcorder shoots.
Friday, 9 December 2016
Just uploaded: three "new" OFU films from the archives. If you liked seeing the early shots of Stag Hill in the Rag '69 and Under Construction films, why not take a look at Peter The Cow, in which a panto cow tours campus? Then, head over to our most mysterious film, Kidnap!, a short thriller.
Finally, for a more modern look at student life, check out our coverage of River Sports Day 2000.
Thursday, 7 July 2016
"The ritual of 35mm is gorgeous. But it's only a ritual. It's not the movie."
Article in The Guardian by Danny Leigh.
It's an argument we've heard before, and with which I largely agree: it is more satisfying to make a film (or a photograph) without artificially constraining yourself by the technology. Unfortunately, one of the article's specific examples backfires: comparing David Lynch's gorgeous, thoughtful analogue Mulholland Drive with his interminable and impenetrable digital Inland Empire. Had Lynch shot the latter on film, the constraints of the medium would have put an automatic check on the director's over-indulgence.
Monday, 15 February 2016
Friday, 15 January 2016
Wednesday, 13 January 2016
Against all the odds, Kodak - which went bankrupt as recently as 2012 - has announced that it's "reviving" Super-8 cameras and film. Kodak's got a press release from CES 16 and here's the Super-8 Revival product page. They've also lined up a load of top Hollywood directors to sing the praises of this "analogue renaissance".
It appears that the camera will have built-in audio recording to SD card. When you send off your reel of exposed film for processing, Kodak will return it to you in digital form with the soundtrack synchronised.
Returning to the Guardian article in the first link, commenters seem reasonably split over whether this is a good idea or whether it is simply pandering to hipsters. At issue: can you do something with analogue film that you simply cannot do with digital? Years ago, I'd have thought this was a brilliant idea - shooting on OFU's 8mm and 16mm cameras brought an implicit level of professionalism that mucking about with a camcorder could never have achieved. But the convenience, cost and quality of digital makes me doubt this. Should we not be spending our creative efforts on the actual creative process, rather than simply selecting a tool for the sake of nostalgia?