This is my attempt to present a visual of the two mediums (film and digital) using some of the films, I personally believe, have been shot with great care and a level of craft that very few have mastered. The question I ask to the viewer is "How much does the medium contribute to the craft of the story being told?" I personally think that the medium does contribute to the story. I don't think someone could say it doesn't matter. To me, film looks different from digital. But I also find it very difficult to determine whether film is absolutely better than digital or vice versa. Each is beautiful in their own environment and uniquely different.

I can certainly see reasons for shooting on film when telling some stories and shooting on digital to tell others. Thankfully, we live in a time where we have a choice (albeit, I acknowledge that film does cost much more at this point in time for most of us...perhaps that will change as the years go by.)

Tell me what you learn from watching these different clips about the medium of film versus the medium of digital. Is it truly all about what's "in front on the frame" and the medium doesn't matter? Or does the medium absolutely matter, similar to the view of Quentin Tarantino. Or does the answer lie in the middle somewhere...?