Home / Blog / General / Shooting

What Cameras Did Sundance Filmmakers Use?

Indiewire posted an article this morning listing a bunch of films from Sundance 2013 sorted by the cameras they employed. It's definitely not a comprehensive list (it seems to be limited to the filmmakers that Indiewire got face time with at the fest), but it's an interesting look at how low-budget filmmakers are thinking about acquisition.

Based on Indiewire's sample, the Canon 5D Mark II and Mark III are still go-to cameras for indie filmmakers, followed closely by the ARRI Alexa and the Red Epic.

The absence of film cameras from the list is striking, but not surprising. Indiewire found just five movies for its list using traditional film cameras from ARRI and Panavision: Austenland, Circles, Houston, Shopping, and The Spectacular Now. But Kodak, ever-vigilant about this sort of thing, spotted another eight that Indiewire missed: Grand Jury Prize and Audience Award (drama) winner Fruitvale (pictured, above) and Best Cinematography winner Ain't Them Bodies Saints, plus Don Jon's Addiction, Kill Your Darlings, Lovelace, Mud, Stoker, and Sweetwater.

Kodak focused on verifying the celluloid origins of movies that showed in the festival's high-profile dramatic, spotlight, and premiere programs. So there could be more film-originated titles in the mix — but probably still just a handful out of the 193 films screened at Sundance this year.


Categories: Blog, General, Shooting

  • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100001652092663 Ole Bob

    Producers are short sighted to creat content electronically. If their work has no value commercally or culturally beyond small image display for a short shelf life, then memory cards and hard drives are the way to go. If they would like to make money in the future with their creative content, it better be recorded on film. Archives can take an element from 1895 from the vault and make a print viewable anywhere in the world. Is there an electronic image format more than a decade old still in wide use?
    Is there an image format as versatile as film to convert to new disply and distribution systems?
    I love Lucy is still broadcast every day somewhere on earth because it was shot on film.

    • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=1643048794 Ken Steiger

      You sound like my colleagues in the audio world who declared that everything should be mixed to analog tape forever. This too shall pass. It’s only technology.

    • Ole Parke

      Your’re right, film is a good archive medium, but this has nothing to do with acquisition format. Every single film produced today, regardless of the camera being digital or film, is edited and finished digitally. Finished movie masters don’t exist on film and they haven’t for quite some time. From these digital masters, film prints can be made as well as DCP’s for theater and compressions for VOD and Bluray. You can argue against using computers in post-production (if you want), but this is completely different and independent from arguing about camera formats. Regardless of camera, it all goes thru the same process to become a movie. A better argument would be to demand all movies get a film archive produced, but that doesn’t have the same ring to it.