I used this video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cfNKtxGMHig

• Digital is cheaper in the end process but more expensive to buy in the first place
• Film looks better in terms of colour etc
• Film has a higher dynamic range, film is better at capturing details in whites and blacks and can’t be replicated with digital cameras. Also film can capture subtle details lost in digital photography
• Digital cameras are generally lighter weight than film cameras.
• Digital looks more high definition but this can make it appear unrealistic whereas film has the opposite effect
• Several recent films have financially proven that movies shot on film still have a place in today’s society and film industry

Theories

Kim Longinotto
Longinotto has said ‘I don’t think of films as documents or records of things. I try to make them as like the experience of watching a fiction film
as possible, though, of course, nothing is ever set up.’ Her work is about finding characters that the audience will identify with – ‘you can make
this jump into someone else’s experience’. Unlike Moore and Broomfield, Longinotto is invisible, with very little use of voice-over, formal
interviews, captions or incidental music. As the ‘eyes’ of her audience, she doesn’t like to zoom or pan. She says she doesn’t want her films to
have conclusions but to raise questions.

Michael Moore
Moore, like Broomfield, is a very visible presence in his documentaries, which can thus be described as participatory and performative. His
work is highly committed – overtly polemical in taking up a clear point of view, what might be called agit-prop documentary. He justifies his
practice in terms of providing ‘balance’ for mainstream media that, in his view, provides false information. Part of Moore’s approach is to use
humour, sometimes to lampoon the subject of his work and sometimes to recognise that documentaries need to entertain and hold an
audience.