Early Moving Image

In this assessment I will be evaluating and comparing the difference between film and video, and
digital and analogue. I will be taking quality, ease of use, cost of production and ease of distribution
into consideration when concluding the differences of them and which one might be considered best
to use. In addition to this I will consider the purpose of film and in-camera editing.
Film vs. video
Firstly, you can look at the difference between film and video by the quality of it; film was the
earliest motion picture first captured by the Lumiere Brothers who invented the cinematograph
which was a camera as well as a projector which allowed people to view their shot films. They
displayed some simple short films they created. Some comedies, a train at a station and some of
people simply walking out of their work place, these became a very popular source of
entertainment. The quality of this was quite obviously not as good as the quality of more recent
videos but at the time it was good because there werent any other options. Films shot on a video
camera have a higher quality as were seen as a step up from film with the quality, this is because
film is a material whose light-sensitive surface can record lasting images, it is a great way to capture
complete images, limited only in that film frames are captured only 24 times per second making its
motion less smooth and quality worse so harder to see. In comparison, video quality is a lot higher
than film quality and appears a lot smoother to watch. Film is harder to use than video as there are
many different steps to follow when processing the motion picture, for example you must load the
film within a light safe area so that it isnt exposed, then it must be developed, processed and
digitalised to be edited on a computer, whereas with video you can record it on a memory card, then
upload your files on a computer and edit it then without any complicated steps, you can also watch
it straight after filming. The cost of production of film is very expensive as there are many steps to go
through when making it which costs money, this mostly includes the film to shoot on; for a roll of
film, and resulting in 11 minutes of footage it would cost 60, so video is a much cheaper option.
Then, the ease of distribution is also better on video as it is digital so can be copied on a computer to
another devise which you cannot do when using film.
Digital vs. Analogue
Furthermore, I will consider differences between digital and analogue to conclude which is best to
use. Examples of analogue are an analogue electric devise or the human voice in air, an analogue
signal is identified if its time-versus-voltage graph is shown as smooth and continuous. It has less
flexibility of use because it can only be used in analogue devises and is suitable for audio and video
transmission. Examples of digital is computers, CDs, DVDs, and other digital electronic devices, its
signal is identified by looking like square waves on their time graphs. Digital is suitable for computers
and digital electronics, making it more versatile to use. As analogue signal is continuous it means
there are no breaks when you listen to it when digital signals can often miss subtle gradation,
however can use a higher sample rate making the sound more realistic. Some argue the quality of
analogue is better but others argue digital is better being more similar to the original source. The
cost of analogue is cheaper than the cost of digital whose cost is very high. The ease of distribution
of analogue not great as the quality can often deteriorate as it is copied and distributed, whilst the
quality of digital doesnt worsen as it is distributed.

In conclusion, I think that between film and video, video clearly surpasses film as it has a lot more
advantages being cheaper, easier to use and distribute and having better quality. In addition, I
believe that analogue and digital both have advantages as well as disadvantages making it hard to
conclude on one being more suitable than the other, although, in my opinion digital is better as even
though it is more expensive, you can transfer is to a different devise without the quality worsening,
it is easy to use and with a few errors in quality it overall sounds more similar to its original source.
The purpose of film
The purpose of film was to entertain people, providing stories, and giving people something to do. In
1890s there werent many other forms of entertainment, especially for lower class women who had
no other forms of entertainment other than books and allowed them to socialise. Films gave people
an insight to different places around the world as many people never travelled so could watch a film
and experience different places and cultures. Furthermore, going to a theatre was very expensive so
many people had no ways of entertainment that they could afford. This is why film was good; it was
cheap so lots of people could visit the cinema. In the 1890s film had progressed from just moving
drawings, spun on a wheel, to moving pictures of actual people doing normal things, such as leaving
work. This developed to people being recorded acting for the film and it being edited with effects
and transitions.
In-camera editing
Often when film producers shoot a video they film with the thought of editing it later in mind,
however deadline pressures or other problems can cause difficulties making it hard to edit the
production after. This is why some producers decide to edit in the camera, meaning planning to
shoot in order of the story. It can appear less professional but often looks more interesting as it is
better planned and more organised.

Research Links
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nyUqa97ytgs
http://www.avsforum.com/forum/44-movies-concerts-music-discussion/855038-film-vs-video-tapedifferences.html
http://www.elementsofcinema.com/general/film-digital.html
http://electronics.howstuffworks.com/digital-versus-analog1.htm
http://www.diffen.com/difference/Analog_vs_Digital
https://learn.sparkfun.com/tutorials/analog-vs-digital
http://www.personal.kent.edu/~lhanson/incamera.htm