With a series of five digital features planned, Chris Zimmer, president of imX communications in Halifax, has a demonstrated an interest in one of the newer forms of filmmaking technology – digital cameras.

‘We’re interested in the production technology. It offers the cinematographer, the director and the cast a different way of working,’ says Zimmer.

‘With digital cameras, you can work under different lighting conditions and different production conditions. It allows for creative latitude, more time for directors and actors to get another take. So a director would be able to take more chances.

‘The cameras are not as bulky, not as intrusive [as conventional cameras are]. It offers freedom for the actors, the director and the cinematographer to experiment a bit more. Both in front of the camera and in post, a lot of things haven’t been explored that can be. Also, there are modest savings to be had [from the use of this technology].’

The versatile and compact cameras also mean a variety of enclosed spaces can be used as locations, which comes in handy bearing in mind the premise of the series of films, Seats 3a & 3c, from five directors. Each film begins with two strangers meeting on a flight and experiencing events that alter the course of both their lives. This is a setting that is more effectively explored with a smaller, lighter camera.

‘It’s easier to put a camera on boats or other potentially high-risk situations when using digital technology. Damage to the camera is not as big a deal if it costs $5,000 rather than $500,000. Digital also offers the ability to use special effects more easily and cheaply. With digital you can do effects on Avid or other systems, you can test and experiment more freely,’ explains Zimmer.

‘I wanted to give five directors a chance to explore these options on a technical level in a loose context. We’re testing the field out, seeing what talented directors are going to do with the technology; trying to come up with a new approach to storytelling through the medium.

‘Could they have done any of these films with traditional film? Probably. Would they have? Probably not – because of the cost. There’s a certain ability to experiment with digital not offered by a large-event movie. With a lot of pressure, the choices tend to narrow very rapidly,’ he says.

‘One of the things we’re looking for is to create more on-camera thinking time for the director and the cinematographer. We’re not interested in making films that would normally be produced as feature films. Changes in this technology will change what filmmakers make. It’s another tool.

‘When acrylic paints came out [in a market dominated by oil-based paints], artists ended up with a different look and feel. It didn’t eliminate oil paints, it added to the artist’s repertoire. Digital won’t eliminate film or replace it, it’ll add another artistic choice; that’s what we’re interested in, we’re not interested in doing low-rent Hollywood.

‘It’s going to be interesting to see how each of the five filmmakers tell the same story in a different way with the digital technology available. To do that they are going to have to think in a different way. We’re presenting the problem; the solution will come through the writing and direction of each filmmaker.’ *

-www.imxcommunications.com