This article originally appeared onDen of Geek UK.

Well to be precise, it is shot on 65mm, and then converted to 70mm.

It is also perhaps, part of Tarantinos usual attempts at legacy building.

Thus it is hardly surprising that Tarantino sought this form of projection for his upcoming picture.

Throughout shooting, he used decades-old lenses that had been collecting dust sinceKhartoum.

The feelings of a classical time not hampered by the noise and technological androids that plague cinema today.

A time more associated with grand roadshows, the handing of programmes, and bumper running times.

Lucas developedAttack Of The Cloneson digital, and since then things have not really been the same.

To be fair to digital, there are plenty of positives to be recognized.

Digital processes of filmmaking are everywhere, and are so much more accessible to the filmmaker.

Some of the most interesting and unconventional shots and images owe a debt to digital cinema.

Otherwise there is an over-reliance on the cinematographer, and the dailies being what you wanted them to be.

Another factor into the mix is the breakthroughs in stereoscopy.

Though it is a technique as old as time itself, James Cameron made 3D plausible withAvatar.

The fact that it was artistically credible and not a gimmick, meant it was a commercial gold mine.

It was a forefather that made the way for other 3D wonders likeHugo,Life Of Pi,andGravity.

What cannot be ruled out either is the sheer variety of directors that support digital.

Since the early 21st century they have all, in their own ways, been enthusiasts for the technology.

Also worthy of note is the emergence of converts to digital like of Danny Boyle.

Troubling in the extreme is the bigotry that has crept into the debate.

This is not like defending a Betamax player or leaded gasoline; this is defending the name of cinema.

Something that is worth keeping as a medium of expression, alongside the great strides in digital projection.

There is also a fundamental ignorance of storytelling being exposed in the digital shift.

The digital wipe-out of film ignores that role it must play in preserving our culture.

Tarantino is part of a movement that hates this complacency.

Tarantino is acting out of concern and a passion for cinema.

As stated before, I consider his rationale sincere.

He can motivate people, and the wider community to see cinema differently, and to value film.

Cinema after all, is a place to be revered.