>>4232171>That are more similar to memoryMy memory doesn't have film grain, halation, scratches, dust, or anything. My memory doesn't have bokeh. My memory doesn't have motion blur. My memory doesn't look a single thing like film. It isn't pictures. It's a movie, it has changing perspectives and motion and you can't tell what it was shot on. If something isn't in focus it's just not there, it's an incomprehensible emptiness that nothing in a single frame can express. Cinema or a novel, possibly, could communicate a concept so abstract, but it could not show it as I - not as I see it, not as it looks - as I feel and understand it. Maybe your artificial memories do, because most of your life has been spent locked up so your "memory" is composed of other peoples film photos and you didn't actually personally experience any of it (and if you did, you don't remember, you just have some film snapshots your mom took). This is an issue very common with milennials, they forgot everything but they have their moms photos.
I see film as more similar to painting. It is a lot like painting. It's pigments overlaid with each other. It was, in fact, invented by someone who was frustrated that he didn't have the skills to paint. And I can't imagine digital being a copy:paste of reality because I don't know about your nintendo-playstation world but I don't see a single fucking pixel or #RGB computer code anywhere.
