A not-so-sunny day of classes culminated in a small blizzard that formed over South Mountain during my 3pm tour. However, the clouds broke overnight. I managed to take a few pictures on my way up the mountain to watch the inauguration:
There are many things Baraka has going for it. The editing, the methodical, detailed camera work and the wide variety of locations. The same goes for Planet Earth. But technologically speaking, Planet Earth was easier to make. Most of the footage was shot using Panasonic’s Varicam HD Cameras. The remaining footage was shot on traditional 35mm and Super 16mm film cameras. However, I thought the picture quality on the Baraka DVD was so amazing, so professional and so methodical that it must have been shot digitally.
It turns out that is only slightly true.
The DVD version I watched in my South Mountain College seminar class has been restored, digitally (more on this in a minute). But even more so, the original footage was shot in 65mm film. PE has the digital advantage: the ability to see what you recorded instantly. The ability to capture video at a lower cost, and combined with the innovations in film-editing (I’m talking about you, Final Cut Studio), it was just easier to produce Planet Earth.
Baraka’s 65mm film has multiple times the resolution of traditional 35mm film, giving it that crisp feel. It was also designed for a Todd-AO screen, a curved theater screen that had a much wider field of view. Now, however, the film has been digitally remastered. At what’s known as “8K” resolution, the film has 16 times the resolution of traditional digital film, shot at “2K” res. At 8k, Baraka’s image quality reaches the limits of our physical perception. In data terms, that means the restoration's raw digital scan produced thirty terabytes of data. Unfortunately, Baraka's highest quality digital format available is the Blu-Ray version, which has only 2K res, in this case the more common 1080p, aka Full HD. And you thought "HD" looked good.
In the end, what's the difference?
More recently, the IMAX format still uses 70mm film, which is pretty much the same as the 65mm film used. Digitally, this is the equivalent of 8K.
On the far right is traditional 35mm film, most movies you will see use this. Baraka was shot on the film in the center, the Todd-AO film stock. The Dark Knight, and many other IMAX films are shot on IMAX film stock.
Most people, in fact, unless you’re Mr. Nolan or the production crew of TDK, have seen the movie in a downsampled 35mm version, aka. the tiny little film stock on the right of the above picture. The original film is, and on January 23, filmed and presented in IMAX format.
Why the re-release? Says Mr. Nolan:
It’s more of a visceral thing. You can see something way off on the horizon. You can see a little glint of light, a reflection in Batman’s eye. You can’t see it in a conventional theatre. And you definitely can’t see it on a plasma screen at home.
I digress. My point is that film quality is only as good as the original film stock. Yes Baraka is gorgeous, because it’s meant to be so. The original film, if you compare it to the raw footage of Planet Earth, has at least 16 times the information being presented to the viewer at any given moment. And I have yet to see the Blu-Ray version, though Roger Ebert tells me it's the finest video disc he has ever viewed. I wish every big-budget film cared about the image quality of their film as much as Christoper Nolan does. Yes, you may have seen The Dark Knight, but you have not seen it.(If you haven't read any of my hyperlinks in this article yet, read this one)
The Dark Knight: The IMAX Experience comes out Jan 23 to IMAX theatres only.
