How can O Brother Where Art Thou be the first film done on a digital intermediate?

You think a film, for example, with box office returns of 150m against a budget of 100m would equal a box office success.

You really don’t, snowflake.

Sure do

I know more technicals like cameras, lenses, film stocks, digital cameras, and the technicals of filmmaking

Im not an accountant not into that shit, safespace
 
It was shot on film
Well, it seems like your question has been answered. They digitally manipulated the tone/look of the film and may have been one of the first to do it. I don't know enough about the history to know if it was definitely the first film to do so or not.

As far as the Coen Bros shooting digitally, I must've got confused between O Brother and No Country For Old Men. I'm pretty sure they filmed that on a RED... but I could still be wrong.

<Fedor23>

All I know is that they're both fuckin incredible films and one of the major reasons why the Coen Bros are some of my favourite filmmakers of all time.
 
Well, it seems like your question has been answered. They digitally manipulated the tone/look of the film and may have been one of the first to do it. I don't know enough about the history to know if it was definitely the first film to do so or not.

As far as the Coen Bros shooting digitally, I must've got confused between O Brother and No Country For Old Men. I'm pretty sure they filmed that on a RED... but I could still be wrong.

<Fedor23>

All I know is that they're both fuckin incredible films and one of the major reasons why the Coen Bros are some of my favourite filmmakers of all time.

Nah dude, No Country was film

The first and only thing so far they shot digital was Buster Scruggs
 
I dunno but it’s a great film either way. Very underrated imo
 
Nah dude, No Country was film

The first and only thing so far they shot digital was Buster Scruggs
Fuck. I think that I'm getting it confused with them doing some sort of digital post production work, similar to O Brother. In fact, now that I think about it more, I think that's what it is. Something to do with digital editing suites and post production. I distinctly remember watching some video with them talking about the advantages of the new digital editing and colour grading software.

Or something.

I clearly don't know lol
 
lol at the people that gave you shit replies they guessed up.

The novel thing about O Brother was it was entirely done with a digital intermediate, beginning to end. previous films only used it for portions.
 
lol at the people that gave you shit replies they guessed up.

The novel thing about O Brother was it was entirely done with a digital intermediate, beginning to end. previous films only used it for portions.

For the theatrical run maybe.

But I guess they used DI's since 1997 on dvd's. Pretty sure they did full length DI's on the '97 Star Wars special editions too.
 
For the theatrical run maybe.

But I guess they used DI's since 1997 on dvd's. Pretty sure they did full length DI's on the '97 Star Wars special editions too.

I'm trying to find a source but this is all I get - the way it is written it seems like beginning-to-end DI weren't used for the VHS, just the DVD after.
https://thedigitalbits.com/item/star-wars-a-new-hope-uhd

For the 1997 Special Edition release, the cut negative was scanned in 2K, new digital VFX were produced at sub-2K resolution, and a new film-out master interpositive element was created. This process was repeated in 2003-2004 by Lowry Digital, with a new 10-bit 2K scan done for the DVD release (complete with more digital VFX tweaks and a color grade supervised by Lucas), resulting in the creation of a 2K Digital Intermediate. This source was used again for the 2011 Blu-ray release, though with a bit more Lowry Digital remastering (and still more new digital VFX and color timing tweaks).

If I'm understanding correctly, generating the VHS from the interpositive means it wasn't a true DI. This appears to have been the case for the 2001 The Phantom Menace DVD and it wasn't until the later releases they were using a true digital intermediate.
 
Last edited:
Jason X was also scanned from film onto a digital intermediate for mastering around the same time ('99/2000), I don't think either were the first in general, just the first for theatrical releases or larger budget releases in general to have a digital master. This is also barring films shot digitally like The Last Broadcast (which was the first film to be filmed, edited, and screened/released into theaters entirely digitally).
 
Jason X was also scanned from film onto a digital intermediate for mastering around the same time ('99/2000), I don't think either were the first in general, just the first for theatrical releases or larger budget releases in general to have a digital master. This is also barring films shot digitally like The Last Broadcast (which was the first film to be filmed, edited, and screened/released into theaters entirely digitally).
Jason X was 2001. The first film to be fully DI was low-budget Urbania in 2000 which I think was shot in 16mm to DI to 35 mm. I think Sorted was the first feature length 35 mm one in 2000 right before O Brother.

It's funny that these film production milestones happen in a mix of acclaimed movies and complete hot garbage like Super Mario Bros.
 
It has a pretty good repuation and wouldnt call it underrated


Yes, amongst those of us who have seen it. Most people I know have never seen it. It’s very underrated in that sense.
 
TS: asks a boring question.
Sherdog: answers boring question.
TS: gets angry and uses articles from google to answer his own question.


<Lmaoo>
 
Last edited:
You're thinking of Jaws (1948) which is why the shark looked so fake.
 
Back
Top