|
|
|
|
|
by Raidion
1623 days ago
|
|
I mean, this isn't for movies that are bought by Netflix from an existing rights holder, it's movies and series that are commissioned by Netflix. It seems reasonable that they'd want to capture as high quality as possible for as much content as possible, as you can always lose quality in post (or distribution). I don't suppose this would preclude directors using cameras that wouldn't work otherwise when needed (like clip from a cell phone camera). I also have a hard time believing Netflix would be ok putting up money to capture a picture/series all in 16mm film (or that anyone would suggest the commercial success or artistic vision demanded it). So it doesn't stifle creativity, it future proofs Netfix for the lucrative high end market, AND Netflix is paying (at least indirectly) for that level of quality. I don't see the problem here. |
|
The problem is that the camera requirements are defined, presumably to try to have some lower bound on the quality of the visuals, there is no requirement for audio such that it sounds good on stereo speakers, which is probably what the majority of consumers are using.
The idea that Netflix have such a strict definition on camera quality is also a bit of a farce, given how woeful the image looks after it goes through their incredibly overenthusiastic level of compression, but that's neither here nor there.