Common side effects of majoring in film may include excessive analysis of subtle themes, obsessive attention to technique, bouts of pronounced feminism and having normal people avoid seeing movies with you.

Not really. No. Video is not the new Film. When Art dips into the technology pool it changes flow of advancement. We’re no longer looking at a series of replacements but instead a tangential development of mediums. Film is not video. Therefore you cannot claim that video is here to eventually entirely replace film. Many artists ply their talents in programs like Photoshop, but does that also mean that pencil portraiture is no longer worthwhile? And yes, the tools we use progress and experience some elements becoming obsolete. Martin Scorsese certainly doesn’t have to spend any time considering whether or not to use Edison’s “black Maria” camera. Film vs video though, is not a choice of tools. They are independent mediums. Oil paints vs watercolors? You do end up with a painting either way, but what vastly different aesthetic experiences these paintings would be.

I have fallen for film but I cannot escape the current practicality of video. An unmercifully low personal budget is the main factor behind my dependance but the texture… just isn’t the same. Video is my mule until I can afford to expand with film as my artistic work horse.