Then again, shakey cam doesn't always = home video. I just saw "Y Tu Mama Tambien" and looks like 80 per cent of it was handheld shots.

And it was a well-directed film.

sure, it looked like film - that's my point. Film looks like film, shakey, smooth, long DoF, short DoF, good lighting, bad lighting.

It's motion capture, resolution and latitute that make film look like film. The other stuff is quality not medium related.

DoF IS mostly medium related. More specifically larger format related. That's why you have to use specific lenses and an adapter to get it with video cameras.

But no need to go on. The proof is in the pudding.

I'm not backing down on this one :)

It's not medium - it's imager size. Super 8 does not have the same DoF that 35mm does and they are the same medium, film.

miniDV does not have the same DoF that HD does and they are the same medium, DV.

It's not the medium that determines DoF. It's imager size and focal length.

If super ultra HD comes out with 10 inch CCD's, DoF will be very different than today on HD.

I agree.

are they coming out with super ultra HD ? Tell me more.

I was just theorizing. The only new thing in the HD world is the Thompson Broadcast Viper Cam:

http://www.cinematography.com/index.asp?newsID=15

stephenvv...

I think your points are very correct (after reading through all these discussions!). Film looks like film whether your filming a Hollywood movie or the bottom of your toilet bowl! Video looks like video and 24 frame video looks like...welll you know. :)
The technics are nothing but "technics"!
It's funny how we all try to get that "film look" ! We should all just buy a film camera or be happy with our "simulated film look"! :) ( I am!)

As for this topic going a bit off track...cool! Good reading!