Settings for best film look option.

[creconfilms]

Hi All,
Just wondering what settings everyone is using to get the best film like look possible. Are the cinema settings pre-stored in the camera teh ones being widely used?

Thanks
Art

[roygbivfilms]

i too would like to know this , however besides shooting in 24 p its mostly up to either using special scene file settings , and if you for example crush the backs soo much or crush the whites .. then when you get to post and your like ,crap i don't like the way that looks .. then your stuck .

you can't really bring back picture information thats no longer there . so i would recomend shooting in your desired frame rate then and shoot flat with most settings at zero also add cinegama and matrix, do some color timing to it . i use magic bullet then i just tweak it a bit to my desired effect . another good plug in is cinelook 2 . and you can get presets for specific film stocks . if you really want a film look you will have to ask your self a few questions . first .

1. what peroid film look do i want early 20th century fritz lang look? or perhaps a technocolor wizard of oz look .maybe even a 70's kubrick look ie clock work orange . if you answerd early 20th century .. well you may have to shoot at 12-18 fps . or harder still find away to simulate hand cranking .(nobody has touched this as far as i know ) or if you wanted to do kung fu fight scenes you would shoot at 22 fps .

2. do i want my image crisp and clear , like a fine grain modren 35 stock .. or do you want more of a 70's feel to it , if so then simulate a 16mm desired stock . or even super 8mm .

3.lighting for film and dof . are the last bits .. depth of feild is the big one and you need it id say if you really wanna get a true film look . theres many examples on this site from 35 mm adapters from companies like redrock .

and im sure this convo has been repeated a million times on this forum too so i think thats a goo d start .. but id shoot withthe following

-redrock m2 adapter (or any other) with a nice nikor lens 50mm or zoom , even better would be a cooke prime . but thats pricy
-if shooting out side shoot close to magic hour .
-set most of the scene file settings to default except for cinegamma and matrix ,, pick cinegama d or v up to you ..
- make sure you have set up your shots ok .. good cinematography is a huge part .
- and then when all done .. use magic bullet or cinelook 2 for desired stock effects

hope that helped im sure i left tons out but yeah its a start.

[SurJones]

It would also help getting this is the right area.. Try technical. :)

[roygbivfilms]

agreed.

[MiniMan]

And don't forget to light properly. It has a huge effect on the footage.

[Indy]

And don't forget to light properly. It has a huge effect on the footage.

I agree but there are many times when lighting can't be controlled.... are there any general pointers in cases such as these that people should follow?
cheers

Indy.....

[Ryan Patrick O'Hara]

You can always control light, it depends on your resourses and motivation. Many people think the outside is an excuse not to light or be able to light. It takes large flags, prob large butterflies, relfectors, bouncecards, and nets. You can then use some high power lights (HMI's or seniors) to add light if you wish, from the source direction you want. Remember that subtracting light is just as helpfull as adding light.

I think documentry and reality tv is the only time you can't light, because you are always on the go,..... but then again those dont require the "film look".

[janusz]

I HAVE A DVX SCENE FILE setting that is used when you shoot 24p and will actually print to 35mm. These settinsg will best translate the data to film.

Now you can assume that these settings will also yield results that make your video look as much like film as possible. Good assumption?

Interested in the settings?

I've used them anf they look great!

[bosindy]

I HAVE A DVX SCENE FILE setting that is used when you shoot 24p and will actually print to 35mm. These settinsg will best translate the data to film.

Now you can assume that these settings will also yield results that make your video look as much like film as possible. Good assumption?

Interested in the settings?

I've used them anf they look great!

Well I guess that leaves us with a couple of questions:

1) If you have this setting, why don't you share it with us rather than coming off coy?

2) why do you feel this setting translated to HD and the HVX or could you be in the wrong location within the forum?

[andy_starbuck]

I'm shooting the HVX with the M2 and a Nikon 50mm f/1.4 lens and using in-camera coloring.

I generally shoot in 720pN / 24. The HiDef gives better resolution, which is more like film than SD video. The DVCPROHD gives 4:2:2 color which is more like film than video. The 24 frame per second gives motion characteristics (motion blur) that has the "film" signature, so motion looks smoother and edges look softer than video.

The M2 35mm adapter does two things. First, it provides the 35mm lens projection and 35mm depth of field control. So now I can get blur in images when things are moving (24 fps blur) and blur that separates objects in space (depth blur). Second, the Cinescreen in the M2 is ground glass that gives the image a kind of grainy look. When the Cinescreen is rotating it provides a different grain pattern on every frame, which softens the image but makes it look a lot more like real film (to me) than images from less grainy static adapters.

Now I'm experimenting with in-camera coloring. By changing the settings in the scene file, you can alter the gamma, the color interpretation, and the detail enhancement. My understanding is that all of these adjustments are applied to the "raw" image -- so 4:4:4 color at 1920x1440 resolution, before the image is reduced and compressed by the codec.

Because the processing occurs on the raw image, it produces results that can't be created in post, after the codec has dropped out a lot of that information. The quality of the in-camera coloring is just awesome. Its fast. It gives immediate results. The only drawback is that because the color and quality are changed in the camera, there is no way back if I should change my mind later. But this really isn't much different from the color grading process with film and selecting a chemical process to get a certain film look.

I do a white balance and a black balance from the basic scene file before I start changing the color settings.

I've just started experimenting with the in-camera coloring with the M2. So I don't have any favorite settings to pass on yet. But I think the effect of in-camera coloring adds something akin to control over the film grade and chemical processing. So from my perspective its not just whether it looks like film, but what kind of film it looks like, and what kind of chemical processing it looks like it went through. I'm not really seeking one look, but a whole range of looks that are recognizably similar to film.

Oh ... and with respect to lighting ... don't forget that the light intensity on the object doesn't increase or decrease linearly. It changes by the square. So moving the light half-way forwards towards the object doesn't double the intensity, it squares it. If you don't have enough light, consider shooting tighter and moving the lights in closer. A closer light is a lot brighter and I can sometimes get a good exposure even under poorer lighting conditions if I rethink the shot and move the camera and lights much further in than when I have all the light I need. It makes you think about editing. Because in order to tell the story with tighter shots you might have to shoot around more or cut more. But its one way out if you don't have bigger lights or power to support them on the location.

Andy

[smelni]

If your final output is to film I would caution against using the M2 without testing first - it may perform well but I would be nervous about softening the image.

if you are not going to film out then the M2 is a great device - takes some finessing and adds time to every shot

[janusz]

I am sorry if i did sound coy by not telling you, but I cannot locate the scene file info. I have it written down in two places, in my ditty bag and on my desktop mac, which are both not with me! I am shooting an MV in two days and can't find my own damn settings!

When I find it, you will all know what it is.

The DP of 'November' used it, knowing they were printing to 35 (she did pre-prod. tests with it).

[AshG]

I HAVE A DVX SCENE FILE setting that is used when you shoot 24p and will actually print to 35mm. These settinsg will best translate the data to film.

Now you can assume that these settings will also yield results that make your video look as much like film as possible. Good assumption?

Interested in the settings?

I've used them anf they look great!

Actually, that makes sense but in fact is just the opposite. The settings for a film bump are NOT for a film look, they are for the cleanest image possible. That means slightly muted colors with minimal chroma noise, lighter blacks, etc. Unless you are on a commissioned project that is destined for film, dont even factor a film out in.

Film look, is not a camera setting, it is a production value and skilled operation. It is like asking what setting makes my guitar sound like Eddie Van Halen? =o)




ash =o)

[janusz]

That is very true. One must light the scene, compose the shots and choose the moves wisely to look as cinematic as possible. If this is done correctly, then the production value is there.

Are you saying perhaps I should ignore using the aforementioned settings?

[UncleBenji1977]

I would like to see your settings... I have a scene file that I got from Shooting Digital, but is yours different from these settings???

[DavidBeier]

I agree with Smelni, the softness the M2 adds might outweigh the gains if you plan to project this thing (looks ok for SD though).

As for settings, there's no one that will make it look like film as there are so many different kinds of film stocks. Honestly lighting it properly is the most important thing. Film can look like crap too after all.

I tend to use Cine-D at 720 24pN when I shoot. I set the master pedistal to -7 to crush the blacks. I up the detail to +5 because I like a little extra sharpness and I put the detail coring to +7 to try to deal with the extra noise uping the detail creates. I also tend to mess with the color temperature a bit, after I white balance to give it a bit of a tint. Setting th chroma level to -2 is also good sometimes to avoid colors getting blown out looking.

[DavidBeier]

Just look at footage on this site. Most people post their settings. Look at what looks most filmish to you.

[smelni]

To throw this in the mix now:

My footage looks great on a PC - but when I output to dvd, the motion becomes very videoy - I have another thread about this but this is killing me. Not really sure why - the dvd has the 2:3 pulldown and I output 24 frame timelines from avid.

TO make it even more confusing, the same dvd looks good on a pc monitor but videoy(in motion only) on a tv