Cinematic Aesthetic.. is it impossible to see in your own stuff?

[Azmyth]

I try to make my stuff look as cinematic as I can with my skillset, and no matter what I do it still doesn't seem to "look" cinematic to my eyes. Although others watch it and say that it does. Is that just something thats going to happen? Something I can't really put my finger on?

I mean, there's other people's stuff that I watch that doesn't look cinematic to my eyes.. but its like I can't figure out why none of the stuff I do looks that way to me.. either it really "isn't" or its just impossible for you to see your own stuff that way.

[kittykatro]

Show us some examples that you don't consider cinematic and some that are...

[j1clark@ucsd.edu]

I try to make my stuff look as cinematic as I can with my skillset, and no matter what I do it still doesn't seem to "look" cinematic to my eyes. Although others watch it and say that it does. Is that just something thats going to happen? Something I can't really put my finger on?

I mean, there's other people's stuff that I watch that doesn't look cinematic to my eyes.. but its like I can't figure out why none of the stuff I do looks that way to me.. either it really "isn't" or its just impossible for you to see your own stuff that way.

I also suggest showing footage straight from the camera, then after you have post processed it to 'cinematicness'...

Part of the 'cinematic' look is lighting, staging, etc. that affect the captured image. The other part is the post processing. Modern 'cinematic' tastes tend to be desaturated from 'technicolor/kodachorme' bright/saturated colors, except possibly for comedies or other 'light' fare. Even there there is scene to scene matching of colors.

If you are really worried, zap all your color, give your B&W image a good contrast, and look at the values. If you image looks like something you'd want to put on your wall as an 'art print', you're getting there...

[Azmyth]

Here's some lighting tests I was doing last night.





And some from a previous camera test I did.

http://vimeo.com/34783127

A teaser thing I did...

http://vimeo.com/34300544



and then some stuff that looks cinematic to me.. using similar gear...







http://vimeo.com/18351709

[Lammy]

Your stuff has harder lighting and the blocking with the camera height and angles is also harder too.

Cinema is more soft and more seamless. Generally lighting as more of an atmosphere and some soft sources, mixed with hard sources.

Lens choices are also more standard as well, 24mm, 35mm, 50mm, 85mm, etc (Super 35mm / APS-C sensor size) each for specific type of shots (Wide, Normals, Close up)

[Azmyth]

Yeah, but I was using "soft" lighting... so I guess I am confused now.

[Lammy]

Your soft lighting is very close to the subject (ye can see it in your eyes) so the effect makes it harder with the shadows and reflections and what not

[Azmyth]

I thought the rooms in my house were fairly big... Not sure how to get it further away. I was using 2 softboxes.

[Andrew Luczenczyn]

Despite being called "softboxes" I find softboxes very directional. Unless you are using softboxes at least 4x4 or larger, you basically getting a hardlight with diffusion.

This is why I prefer 4x4 or 6x6 frames

[Andrew Luczenczyn]

Oh. And I feel your two shots that you called not cinematic would improve with some small dolly movement like from a slider. Can't tell from a still, but that might help carry the emotion of the actor.