boy went thru this thread lickity-split - i have ten pages left of a salinger bio im dying to finish - but got hijacked here -
See the top rated post in this thread. Click here
Thread: Being Cinematic
Results 111 to 120 of 127
02-03-2012 12:06 AM
- Join Date
- Mar 2011
Adobe CS6 Production Suite, Win7 Pro
AF102 : RR baseplate & Lens support, F/F, Shoot35 Cinebox, Panasonic 1700HD Monitors. Adaptimax adapters. Ikan VX7e.
Prime Lenses: Nikkors . 20/f2.8, 24/f2.8, 28/f2.8, 35/f2.8, 50/f1.4, 50/f2, Micro 55/f3.5, Micro 60/f2.8, 85/f1.8, 105/f2.5, 135/f2.8, Contax -Zeiss 28/f2.8, 35/f2.8, 50/f1.7, 85/f2.8
VariPrimes: Nikkor 17-35/f2.8, 28-70/f2.8,
GH2. Olympus 14-54 MkII
Cartoni , Weaver Miller Heads , Miller legs. Slider
04-21-2012 09:52 PM
- Join Date
- Apr 2012
Love this useful guide! Hopefully it gets updated (the couple saved spots)
This really helped me understand a bit more about cinematography. I'd like to consider my self as a Cinematographer, even though I haven't done a short film yet (which i hope to soon!) Only a few music video.
Anyways I was wondering if any would recommend me some glass to shoot with the 5D Mark II.
I currently own a Rokinon 35mm f/1.4 and a 50mm f/1.4
I like primes a lot. It's very sharp. Would you guys recommend shooting with Primes over zooms when it comes to shooting a short. Similar to the feature film in Sundance "Like Crazy"
Any suggestions would be great!
04-23-2012 08:03 AM
It's not just about Hollywood Movies.
Forget the saccharine 'Filmic' Look via heavy Bokeh which is useful for filming flowers and engaged couples dashing across meadows. All I want is this DR (lighting accepted) and color grading. After all, All I want is to make TVCs
Too much emphasis on shallow DOF reduces 'context' between ground and field.
watch at 1080p....
04-23-2012 08:09 AM
this plugin is so helpful to make your footage look better!
11-14-2012 08:42 AM
Thanks for this. Any chance this will ever get completed\updated?http://www.refocusedmedia.com
Film / Photography
esse quam videri
11-14-2012 01:55 PM
- Join Date
- Feb 2011
I have been in prep for quite some time for a feature that will be shot sometime next year. Lately, the director and I have been searching for a particular look to fit the genre, and have settled upon a few answers. To lay it plainly, we agreed on a look very similar to that of 500 days of summer / The Five-Year Engagement, focusing on a 'naturalistic' lighting approach, with good contrast, but still retaining comedic high-key tendencies. For visual reference... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PsD0NpFSADM and http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7x6ToEsGiZM.
Now here comes my issue, everyone always asks what makes something look 'cinematic' or 'why do Hollywood movies look the way they do' usually being followed up by a general answer that there a larger number of people contributing in many different ways (art direction, lighting, etc.) to achieve a "simple" looking scene, but the argument is much more than that, and I really am trying to get down to the nitty-gritty of what gives a film it's particular look.
Let's take The Five-Year Engagement as the primary example. Shot on an Arri Alexa w/ Zeiss Master Primes (as so many are, such as Young Adults, and even Skyfall), the film was shot with a minimalistic lighting approach, the cinematographer explains himself how he used over half as many lights as he normally would in lighting a feature when he shot on the Alexa. Now, when you take other examples: http://vimeo.com/30859426 , or even the professionally done camera shootout http://vimeo.com/42806211 (check it out around 20:00 in), shot on the same cameras, there is something unnaturalistic happening with the colors, something I can't pinpoint, and something that drives me insane.
It's this variance in image that I am trying to tackle, and I am trying to really nail down the cause. Lighting obviously is not the immediate answer, for the camera shootout is lit primarily by a highly-knowledgable member of the ASC, and plenty of contrast exists in the scene to test the cameras. And I don't think its as straight forward as color correction, for each of the clips in the shootout went through a color-correction process as well. It's also not lensing, considering almost everything was shot on the Zeiss Master Primes.
The answer to this could be something so simple, or complex, or something I even mentioned already. Seemingly to me, the only 'amateur' films I have seen shot on the Alexa that actually achieve a look very similar to film are stylistically graded. I can't seem to run into any that go for a normal look, that don't have that odd, seemingly washed-out color look that reminds me of video (something acceptable for a commercial, not a feature film).
So if anyone has any opinions on what actually is primarily causing a 'look' in a film such as The Five-Year Engagement. Is it completely set by contrast of the lighting? Is it set by intensity of the lighting? (I know a lot of people will shoot close to, if not, wide-open, due to lighting restrictions, which usually isn't the sharpest or sweet spot of the lens, and adds a softness to the image) (Also, I've seen behind the scenes of Skyfall, shots that look exactly the way I want, are simply lit with two tweenies bounced into a muslin sheet, with some practicals in the scene acting as natural fill, so I know that high output lighting (meaning much lower shooting f-stop) is not required for the 'look') Is it the color correction? (I have seen things shot with Rec 709 in mind, others with log C, either way, the colors have been manipulated in some way to avoid that super-smooth color gamut that I am trying to avoid).
11-14-2012 10:55 PM
You should really give the Blackmagic camera a try - the way it renders motion and color - it's really hard to NOT look cinematic, when shooting in raw with it, even with the cheapest glass.
Shooting it in ProRes/DNxHD mode instantly looses some of the magic though.