Actually, many people use reversal film for motion pictures. If you shoot w/ negative film and project it onto a screen, all you are going to get is a negative image. At some point, negative film has to be transferred to positive film for projecting, so if you shoot w/ reversal film to begin with, there you are.
......................and it is easier (better?) to make duplicates from negatives than positives (although I believe the motion picture industry had methods to convert every format to every other format)
also I think exposure latitude probably enters the equation, color negative materials have more than color positive materials so the negative film is more tolerant of camera exposure variations, and exposure inconsistencies can be corrected when the positive is made.
If you are making a movie in 35mm, it is unlikely to be the family waving at the camera (a home movie). Reversal stocks were never good to make duplicates from: color, contrast and film speed all suffer greatly. If you're making a movie one must work from duplicates, and negatives are better for that. And you would NEVER project camera original images, too much risk of damage.
That said, reversal direct projection stocks can really be magical when projected as intended. So amateur 8 and 16mm film sizes enjoyed popularity back in the day.
Hollywood movies are shot in many takes. And one can be today and then the next much later. With color negative it's easier to keep the exposure and color match from on take to another. Color or exposure don't have to be really good but it would look bad if the scene suddenly changes color or brightness.
The question has already been answered, but I have long been impressed how rigorous and demanding cinematography is. Just the differences and the reasons for them between a cine lens and a still camera lens, for example, is impressive.
The question has already been answered, but I have long been impressed how rigorous and demanding cinematography is. Just the differences and the reasons for them between a cine lens and a still camera lens, for example, is impressive.
Cinematographers always buy film from the same batch, and clip test every roll. This gives them exposure correct to a fraction of a stop and no colour shifts.
I would think that colour negative film would be the prefered medium because there is a greater latitude for any exposure errors. (not that there would be many)
I would think that colour negative film would be the prefered medium because there is a greater latitude for any exposure errors. (not that there would be many)
It would be nice if I could get that latitude from reversal film but then I wouldn't be able to watch it on my projectors. I shoot most of my home movies on 8mm and Super 8 using my stockpile of Ektachrome 100D. If I shot it just to telecine it to digital then I would probably shoot negative film but half the fun is watching it with a projector.