Yes, because clearly the Oscar would have been won squarely on the quality of the iPhone's camera.
Not what I said but, that's what everyone would probably think which is why I made my original comment.
Yes, because clearly the Oscar would have been won squarely on the quality of the iPhone's camera.
While the story is cool, unless his Oscar relates to the quality of the filming itsn't it a bit pointless to mention it is Oscar nominated? I mean, if the film wins for best screenplay or best supporting actor, it doesn't really matter on what device the film was shot on...does it?
Still a really cool story, wonder if he used FCPX to edit it
Oscar nominated film despite being filmed partially on an iPhone. It's important.
This cannot be serious...with an iPhone app? Lol he couldn't buy a point and shoot that's a million times better than any cellphone camera?
Come on now...this is just...wow bad...
"I realized that there was this $1 app here on my iPhone and I tried it and it was basically the same as the real stuff."
really..... a tiny, 8mp sensor is basically the same as 8mm film...
More amazing than this guy using the iphone to finish the movie, is that he also seems to be blind..
Producers don't like hearing that their directors "ran out of money."
The overall effect might work well in the movie and could explain the shaky cam/bad lighting we from many other filmmakers who serve it up without commentary.
I know, and it was that word "despite" that initially made me think he was nominated for a cinematography category; which if so, is a huge deal.
Pretty cool. Hopefully he didn't need any low-light shots, though.
iPhone camera actually performs better than 8mm film for low light.
Remember, 8mm film frame is very tiny. If you use film with an ISO high enough for low light shots, the grain becomes unbearable.
Technology has gone a long way.