updates on recent happenings (such as they are)
1) Issues in my personal life have come to a most unsatisfactory conclusion, which leaves me generally unhappy and depressed, and also really wanting to re-resolve them in a different way, though now it's not down to me. If things change, it's really gotta be done by the other person in this relationship (or, rather, lack thereof). Still, I don't
( Read more... )
Anyway, to start with answering your last line, if you can afford the film to shoot something, I don't think it's ever a waste. Cause maybe it'll work, maybe it won't, but if people never tried we'd still be shooting films like the Lumiere brothers did. And not that there's anything wrong with the films they made, I think they're really interesting, but I also think it'd be a damn shame if that was all that was out there.
And, if you were wondering, I answered that question cause I don't really have an answer to your bigger question, of whether it would work or not. Cause I don't really know. When it comes to things dealing with technology, I'm pretty much useless. But it'd probably be worth a try, cause it does seem like just taking what was done before to the next level. Also, I'm not entirely sure what refresh rate is on a computer, but I do know that my professor said you can generally shoot things off laptops, and it'll work, but not desktops, something to do with the way the screen works. Unless the desktop has a flat screen, I think. I dunno. Computers confuse me. I just type on them, and watch DVDs.
Now for my possibly stupid question, but what does frame size have to do with depth of field? I thought depth of field was pretty much determined by bunches of factors that happened before the light ever hit the film?
Reply
Leave a comment