Quote Originally Posted by StoneNYC View Post
I agree to a point, I don't agree that a $250,000 they could use film. I've been on $2,000,000 budget films where they were shooting on a Canon 5D II and that was because they could afford to get more footage, lens options, and tighter shots with it and less expensive lighting, over a traditional film camera. (I'm an actor also so this was what the crew told me, I didn't see the financial sheets).

If I were to shoot a film, and I could afford film, I would try to use as much Kodak XX as I could get away with

If I could have it specially made in 70mm, that would be even better! I would be the the George Lucas of B&W haha.


Sent w/ iPhone using Tapatalk
I agree it's difficult to make a movie on film on less than a 2 Mio Dollar Budget but it's doable using a Canon 5DII as A camera for a 2 Mio Budget Movie is something I don't get. Some of the greatest Movies were shot with a single lens or very few lenses The Last Picture show only used one lens Cititzen Kane only used a few lenses. Richard Boddington a Canadian Director Producer shot all his films except his last one on film and he usually has a below 2 Mio Dollar Budget. I also fully agree with you about the Kodak XX thing