Just over a year ago, shooting a feature on video was largely considered the poor man's way to make a movie. It provided an affordable alternative to film, but failed to produce a look professional enough to get many distributors to take notice. Then, a director by the name of George Lucas announced plans to shoot his next feature, Star Wars Episode 2 on video, and an entire industry suddenly took notice.

The technology that is revolutionizing the way movies are and will be made is the new 24p high definition format. Developed by Sony and supported by specially designed lenses from Panavision, the HDW-F900 24p digital high definition camcorder is slowly becoming a viable alternative to traditional 35mm cameras and film. Unlike digital video equipment before it, Sony's camera features a 24 progressive frame rate which is identical to that of a 35mm movie camera. This, along with its 16 x 9 aspect ratio and 1920 x 1080 lines of resolution, allow for a look much closer to that of film.

Director of Photography Derek Wan, president of New York-based All In One Productions, recently shot Manhattan Midnight, a Chinese-produced motion picture starring Richard Grieco, in high definition. After showing collaborators footage from his $3 million, 27-day shoot, he says,"They were surprised by the sharpness, smooth tonal reproduction and faithful color rendering of the issues/42/images. They never thought it was possible in a video format." Wan had been looking at HD for 10 years but was never happy until seeing the 24p format."It not only gives me the pristine picture quality that I need to project on big cinema screens, but also provides great flexibility in post-production and distribution."

Wan points out, however, that,"HD should not be regarded as traditional video nor film. It is a unique medium that doesn't look like either one of them. Some die-hard film fans say the HD still doesn't look as good as film. I say if you treat it with the same respect and skills as you would treat film... you can get pretty comparable results."

Many people who have tried the 24p format are pleased by the outcome, yet acknowledge that it's not a substitute for film. Film has a grain, imperfections and more depth of shading. Video is cleaner and crisper. Bob Harvey, Senior VP of Sales for Panavision, says,"[24p] has a look of its own. Whether that look is better, worse, or just different is up to you to decide." In addition, the image will look different when it is projected digitally than when it is transferred to and projected on film.

The decision of whether to shoot a movie on film or in high definition video depends on many factors, including budget, distribution goals and type of project. Michael Polish (Twin Falls Idaho), along with his brother Mark, recently shot the independent feature Jackpot in 24p HD."We wanted to go digital because our story lent itself to that texture," says Polish, whose tale about a soap salesman turned country-western singer uses numerous optical effects. Although video had become accepted in the independent film world, Polish was unsure how mainstream distributors would take to the new medium."We didn't know if it would be a selling point or a distraction, but we knew we'd get noticed," he admits. It worked. Sony Classics picked up the film, shot for about a half million dollars in 15 days.

One of the biggest advantages of shooting on video is the ability to see your issues/42/images right away on a monitor. The director instantly knows what he or she is recording in terms of color, brightness and contrast throughout the entire production, allowing them to make adjustments and do immediate re-shoots, if necessary. Unlike film, there are no unpleasant surprises a day later when viewing dailies."In 35mm you must rely on the DP," says Derek Wan."This can cause a problem between the director and cinematographer if communication is not good. [With video], you see what you're going to get."

What you get, however, is determined by the skill of the crew that is using this new equipment. It takes time to become proficient. So far, descriptions of the issues/42/images created have ranged from"looks like shit" to"absolutely gorgeous." However, the learning curve for DPs is not as great as some people expected it to be. Richard Wurman, General Manager and CFO of Boston Camera, a film camera rental house in Massachusetts that recently started renting high-end video equipment, adds:"DPs are smart enough to get on staff people who know what they're doing."

Nonetheless, Derek Grover, a freelance digital cinematographer, has seen some frustration among his colleagues in accepting this new format."An operator spends 15 years bustin' ass [to get to be a DP]. Then a guy walks in with a video camera – a freakin' computer – and all the experience about what he has learned is out the door."

The bottom line is, those who don't adapt may soon find jobs harder to come by. But as Michael Schwartz, marketing manager of Sony Pictures High-Definition Center says, most DPs are showing interest."[Even] older DPs are taking a shine to [Hi-Def]. It's speeding up their work. You're lighting by monitor, not meters." This makes it ideal for multi-camera shots, particularly large action sequences that you only want to have to shoot once.

Shooting on video saves time in other areas besides lighting."Episode 2 finished ahead of schedule," continues Schwartz."It was an easier camera to handle. Film loading alone saved them 40 minutes a day." Plus, using video instead of film saves tens of thousands of dollars in film stock, processing costs and telecine fees."It's $75 for a 50-minute load [of tape]," says Schwartz."Now, you don't have to budget film." This helps money-conscious independent productions in particular by allowing them resources to shoot additional coverage.

When shooting on film, a big chunk of money is spent up front before determining whether or not the finished product is worthy of distribution. With video, if the finished product does not live up to expectations, you can cut your losses more easily, sending it directly to the video store, saving money on theatrical prints and marketing. The independent moviemaker can save on the initial costs of film, finish his/her product and have a distributor pay for the transfer fees should the movie get picked up.

Shooting in HD also provides numerous visual possibilities quickly and relatively inexpensively. On a motion picture that involves many computerized effects, it's a lot cheaper and more time efficient to shoot digitally than to have to first transfer film to video, then back again to film.

But the benefits of digital video extend far beyond cost savings. The medium opens up whole new storytelling possibilities. Derek Grover recently worked on New Line Cinema's upcoming feature film Simone starring Al Pacino, and written and directed by Andrew Niccol. The story centers around a Hollywood producer who decides to digitally create

an actress when a star walks off his picture. The actress, who everyone thinks is a real person, becomes an overnight sensation. "One-eighth of Simone was shot digitally," says Grover,"intercutting 35mm and Hi-Def. It was never before possible because of frame differences."

Grover captured the actress in front of a digital projection screen using the 24p HD camera. Her performance was fed live to two plasma monitors and HD digital projectors and synced with both the digital and film cameras, while Pacino's performance was being filmed in 35mm on an adjacent stage. The scenes, originating simultaneously from separate stages, were cross-formatted and captured to 35mm film and 24p High Definition to produce the desired effect.

With video, there is also no need for a director to ever call Ôcut'."The camera just stops," says Michael Polish, who finds that actors' performances come out different on video."They're more comfortable getting in and out of scenes."

While the advantages of shooting in 24p High Definition are plentiful, there are still a number of downsides."The current version of digital cameras, like any traditional video camera, won't let you do under- or over-cranking like a film camera does," notes DP Wan. This makes it impossible to shoot in fast or slow motion."We can only rely on post-production to recreate the effects, and they don't look the same as in-camera effects," he admits.

Another drawback is in the focus of the lenses. They provide a deep depth of field, more similar to that of a 16mm camera, making it difficult to throw things out of focus."Special attention needs to be paid to art direction, camera positioning, choice of focal length and iris openings," continues Wan,"so that the audience will stay focused where we want them to see."

Polish found other aspects of this new camera to be challenging."It's bleeding-edge technology. Nobody knew about certain things. We had to learn how to keep things in sync, do time codes with sound, [deal with] pre-roll and post-roll." He also faced problems in post-production while editing on an Avid, finding sometimes he"had to trick the thing" to get the desired effect. Many of these problems, however, will be addressed in future generations of equipment as more moviemakers become proficient in using it.

Will shooting on 24p HD save you money? That depends on the type of project you're making and your ultimate distribution goals. A camera, viewfinder, lenses and accessories cost hundreds of thousands of dollars and rent for several thousand a day, slightly more than 35mm equipment."This is not the stuff you buy at Circuit City," notes Bob Harvey of Panavision. And if you ultimately need to transfer your video back to film to be projected in theaters, a large chunk of the money saved on film stock and processing will be eaten up here.

When a customer comes to Panavision in search of camera equipment, Harvey says,"The choice of medium and format is theirs, not ours. Once they make the choice, we go to work on making sure they are proficient in the chosen medium... and we stay with the customer all the way through the project." And the choice of what medium to use is not necessarily an economic decision. It also must be organic to the script. With science fiction or a Blair Witch documentary-style film, it makes sense to have the look of digital video. On an Out of Africa, it would obviously still be foolish at this point to try and replace the visual contrasts of a vast landscape with electronic photography.

Derek Wan feels that, in general,"HD is best suited for medium-budget productions. The range of $500,000 to $5 million can best benefit from the technology. In this range, the time and money savings are most significant." For low-budget films, the cost of the equipment is too much. For higher budgets – regardless of Mr. Lucas' pioneering work – it's probably best to stick to the tried and true, at least for now.

Murman, of Boston Camera, agrees that film is better for bigger budgeted projects."35 is still king. Currently, HD is not less expensive to shoot [in total costs]. Eventually it will come down and [also] have a higher resolution. 24p is not the end-all in chip resolution."

How soon will the Hollywood studios embrace this new 24p format? They already have. Besides the new Star Wars movie and Simone, Michael Mann is shooting parts of Columbia Pictures' Ali in HD, and others companies are gearing up.

Right now, however, there are less than 50 theaters worldwide that have digital projectors, which cost upwards of $150,000. That number is expected to double every year. Eventually, movie prints will become obsolete, saving enormous distribution costs by eliminating expensive prints along with lost revenue due to bootlegged copies.

Television is also benefiting from the new 24p high definition format. It's quicker and faster than working with film, and allows you a multitude of distribution options. This becomes quite apparent with MOWs. Here, you get a high quality image but don't have to spend the money on film costs. Then, you can air the movie on a high definition TV set in its 16 x 9 aspect ratio, in a 4 x 3 ratio for standard broadcast, or transfer it to film for foreign theatrical release.

Episodic series benefit from the fast turnaround time in a post-production process that doesn't involve film processing, telecine transfer and location sound sync-up. The A&E Network recently shot 100 Centre Street, a show about a Manhattan night court, created by Sidney Lumet, in high definition. DP Ron Fortunato, whose background is in film, was initially unimpressed when he looked at older, 30i (interlaced) HD formats."I was horrified at the equipment. Then Sony came out with a [24p] camera, we got to test it, and I thought, there's something to this." His only complaint was that he didn't have enough prep time to master the new equipment, especially in doing a three-camera shoot."It took me about two episodes [to get it down]. It was a new experience, but I'd do it again," he says."It turned out to be a very good choice."

Even on television, 24p Hi-Def video has a look of its own, and the look on a standard TV set is different than that of an expensive HD monitor."[On a television set], you'd be hard pressed to know it's not film," says Fortunato, who feels it's an excellent medium to shoot TV.

While most everyone agrees that video will not be replacing film in the near future, the video industry is getting to be more like the computer industry, with technology advancing at lightning speed. As cameras, lenses, monitors, projectors and editing equipment become technically better and more widely available, its use will take off. DP Grover notes,"[Studios are run by] business guys who want to find ways to save money." If high definition gives them a great product for less, expect to see more productions using the new technology." MM