It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
^ Back to Top
The MI6 Community is unofficial and in no way associated or linked with EON Productions, MGM, Sony Pictures, Activision or Ian Fleming Publications. Any views expressed on this website are of the individual members and do not necessarily reflect those of the Community owners. Any video or images displayed in topics on MI6 Community are embedded by users from third party sites and as such MI6 Community and its owners take no responsibility for this material.
James Bond News • James Bond Articles • James Bond Magazine
Comments
Source: http://www.deakinsonline.com/forum2/viewtopic.php?f=3&t=1761
Also use of the Alexa means Bond is going digital, does it not? I hope this move works out for the best. It was bound to happen one day - and here it is.
(No, i was not there. :) )
Thank you for the update @PanchitoPistoles. Roll on November!
I like computers and digital data (even we are writing there thanks to it). But there is a little problem - the maximum resolution.
If You want to make next ultrahipersuperduper standard film from e.g 2012 Bond 23 in 2050 You will have a very little chance to improve it. There are not so good expanding algorithms and even if classic films have some borders like ISO of crystals that is really easier and possible to make bigger resolution.
And in digital You just get what You have - even if You tried to resize Your films from old digital cameras You know what I mean. But maybe there would be better resizing programs - but I don't believe it. Sadly or not we have XXI century...
http://vimeo.com/channels/inconversation#25509722
As for shooting in digital but then converting that to film it makes sense as it takes the projectors out of the equation. But if you're projecting in digital then it wouldn't make a difference anyway, would it?
the problem isn't shooting in digital - because almost everyone does it now..... but since the majority of theaters are refusing to upgrade all their projectors to digital - and keeping them standard film projectors, you lose a great deal of quality....
..... it's like watch watching a Blu Ray movie on a screen that is only 720p, not 1080p or higher - there's a noticeable difference..
besides, digital filmmaking is the more viable, and economic way to go - true, you may lose some that old magic that film creates - but in return, you aren't wasting your money on film stock - everything is saved on memory cards and portable hard drives - not to mention, editing digital is soooo much easier - than using that old torture device for splicing film together..... there are some editors who still use it, and are very efficient with it - god bless them... but i am a digital child, and prefer editing on my Mac lol :-D
You're a good man after all !! :-bd
i used to have a PC (and part of me for gaming reasons, wishes i still had one)... but once I got my Mac, i never looked back... I am a Mac for life guy now lol.
- once you go Mac you don't go back.. :-))
but other than gaming - which i didn't do a whole lot of to begin with... there isn't anything that i can't do on a Mac, that i could on a PC..... plus, navigating on a Mac is 10x easier once your used to it...
i am a design and film guy - so this is the machine of my industry - it's pretty much a necessity to have one... and i'm glad i do :-)
Thanks for posting that @PanchitoPistoles.
http://www.ign.com/videos/2011/07/21/in-time-sdcc-panel-footage?show=H
( http://www.deakinsonline.com/forum2/viewtopic.php?f=3&t=1854 )
The film he mentions is obviously Bond 23. It is not big news, but it's nice to know that it looks like the start of principal photography won't be delayed. (It happened with QOS:
http://www.mi6-hq.com/news/index.php?itemid=5458&catid=106&t=mi6&s=news )
In other news, Daniel Craig confirms that Bond 23 won't be a 3D movie but it will be shot digitally (which is a first in the franchise):
I like the fact that he takes part in the creative process behind the making of Bond 23. I just hope our James Bond will never take producing credit.
As for Deakins, why is he in the UK two months early? He could have waited a while longer, unless filming does begin in October. On second thoughts maybe it's more to do with discussions of how to shoot Bond 23.
deakins teases at a return.
his currently preping filming of
this
http://www.bleedingcool.com/2013/07/10/angelina-jolie-and-top-class-dp-roger-deakins-go-scouting/
to be released for december 2014.
I imagine this will allow for bond 24 to being production in the autumn of 2014 to meet the 2015 release.
If Roger Deakins is onboard again for Bond 24........everything is in motion for another 1 Billion Dollar Bond.....and a few Oscar nods :-).
Not only is this an older link, but I saw this thread and instantly got excited. I thought Deakins was on board for 'Bond 24.'
Postby Roger » Sun Jul 21, 2013 11:46 am
Funny expression that, 'bated breath"!
july tease creasy, the dates i provided sync with bond 24 2014 shoot...
read between the lines
you and me both Creasy47! :))
Make that three gents. We've got a long way to go, perhaps a full year before Mr. Deakins and EON decide whether to renew their highly successful partnership or not. Not since Moonraker has a Bond film been as visually striking as SF. It's a feast for the eyes and senses.
In my mind, Deakins was the real 2013 Oscar winner for cinematography. It's more than enough proof that CGI is overrated and in many cases unnecessary. The Academy needs to find a way to fairly differentiate genius like Deakins from computer button pushing. Sometimes the old ways truly are the best :)
I want to hear that Deakins is on board as the 2nd most important news for me, after Mendes. I hope it is NOT a year for us to wait to get Deakins confirmed for the next Bond film. He did stunning good work in Skyfall - I really hope nothing gets in the way of his return.
Yes, I think he deserved the Oscar. He did win other awards, didn't he? Anybody know? Skyfall was one of the most beautifully shot films, not just Bond films.
To be honest, I don't think the cinematographer plays much of a part in reaching the billion dollar mark. The average moviegoer probably has no clue who Roger Deakins is.