Despite being in tech industry I went to film school back when it was still very common to be taught to shoot film so I'll have a go: > I've seen analyses that

Despite being in tech industry I went to film school back when it was still very common to be taught to shoot film so I'll have a go: > I've seen analyses that suggest that 70mm is roughly equivalent to 8K resolution, once digitized. It's tricky to give an exact number because it's an analog format, but in most cases it will be higher than that. You can get a good 4K transfer off 35mm, and 70mm is four times the area - so 8K would be very conservative. Of course, the big advantage of film is you get the grain, as well as what some people consider to be a better look (although that's subjective). > Given that 8K cameras exist, and would presumably allow as much shooting as you can attach auxiliary storage capacity, When shooting digitally your ratio would usually be 10:1, even 20:1 (as in, you shoot 10 times more material than you end up using). You're right that lots of directors see that as a great benefit. But when shooting with film - and especially 70mm - you have to be really conservative. A ratio of 3:1 would be much more common because you just can't afford any more. And that means you have to be very careful in layout your shots up, getting your actors prepared, etc. There's a minority of directors who appreciate this.