Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 11 to 18 of 18
  1. Collapse Details
    #11
    Senior Member hscully's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Hawthorne, NY
    Posts
    1,826
    Default
    I recently listened to a podcast with John R. Lionetti, DP on The Conjuring (http://www.theasc.com/ac_magazine/podcasts.php) and he suggests that when working digitally you're better off getting it clean and adding grain, etc in post with plugins. I almost bit on some matte box filters in an auction but I'm going to see about implementing his suggestion. Anyone have any suggestions on plugins for grain, or Tiffen ProMist looks? I know Tiffen a software suite that models their filters.

    Mud is a really good film and looks beautiful. That's a nice look to want to get! ;)


    Reply With Quote
     

  2. Collapse Details
    #12
    Default
    Quote Originally Posted by hscully View Post
    I recently listened to a podcast with John R. Lionetti, DP on The Conjuring (http://www.theasc.com/ac_magazine/podcasts.php) and he suggests that when working digitally you're better off getting it clean and adding grain, etc in post with plugins. I almost bit on some matte box filters in an auction but I'm going to see about implementing his suggestion. Anyone have any suggestions on plugins for grain, or Tiffen ProMist looks? I know Tiffen a software suite that models their filters.

    Mud is a really good film and looks beautiful. That's a nice look to want to get! ;)
    Well, I guess you are right.
    I tried some filters, but actually you can do all that also in post (just need a good program).
    I think magic bullet has something comparable to tiffen pro mist...but I'm no expert.

    I just saw Speed from 1994 once again.
    It was a barely sharp version. But it reminded me of some test-pictures I got from the dvx.
    I think I won't get the mud look. It's just to good. But maybe it'll look like that:

    http://media.theiapolis.com/d4/hMO/i...speed-1994.jpg


    Reply With Quote
     

  3. Collapse Details
    16mm ??
    #13
    Default
    What do you think, do the following pictures look like ANY 16mm you know?

    I hope the colors will be the same on your PC as on mine.
    Again the cinematography is pretty ....half-baked..because it's all stills and then just trees and boring things,.. and all that isn't even quite sharp and so on ;)
    I hadn't had much time and no tripod etc.

    I shot with dvx and the anamorphic lens with recommended 16mm look-alike settings, but did a bit of coloring in post (with a not-so-good-program)


    16mm.jpg
    This one looks most like film to me.

    vlcsnap-2013-10-01-23h37m08s35.jpg

    vlcsnap-2013-10-01-23h37m26s223.jpg

    vlcsnap-2013-10-01-21h47m04s197.jpg

    vlcsnap-2013-10-01-20h53m26s247a.jpg
    Lens flare ;)

    vlcsnap-2013-10-01-23h13m53s158.jpg
    This one looks a bit like MUD ?! --> the look I'd like to create.

    vlcsnap-2013-10-01-23h13m59s254.jpg

    16mm2.jpg
    Maybe I went too far with saturation ?

    vlcsnap-2013-10-01-23h14m41s145.jpg

    vlcsnap-2013-10-01-23h36m38s253.jpg

    vlcsnap-2013-10-01-20h13m21s223a.jpg
    I tried this one with squeeze and the anamorphic lens.
    Don't know if there is any change...

    I just want to get the look right and then I can start filming something that's worth to be filmed really good.

    If everything looks like sh*** you can tell me, too ;)
    I don't like my own screen layout / image formation (what'S the right word?) = composition of the elements of a picture.

    (I still don'nt know why the picture size differs)
    Attached Images Attached Images
    Last edited by Stefanus_maximus; 10-01-2013 at 03:20 PM.


    Reply With Quote
     

  4. Collapse Details
    #14
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    168
    Default
    Looking good Stefanus!


    Reply With Quote
     

  5. Collapse Details
    #15
    Senior Member David W. Jones's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    La Petite Roche
    Posts
    6,721
    Default
    If it were me, I would concentrate on my ability to tell a story, rather than obsess over getting your camera to look like 16mm film.


    Reply With Quote
     

  6. Collapse Details
    #16
    Default
    Quote Originally Posted by David W. Jones View Post
    If it were me, I would concentrate on my ability to tell a story, rather than obsess over getting your camera to look like 16mm film.
    I suppose you have a better cam and professional post-production programs, so that you can focus on the story and lightining and stuff.

    I already have several stories. I've discussed them over a year's time. By now they are 10.
    But only one can be done without a big budget.
    I already know how to tell this story.
    I have planned a route where the actors will walk, and where there should be the camera and how it would affect the story and the things said. Everything is already done, but felxible for changes.
    The only thing left is the look.
    And then of course the shooting.

    The problem today is, that I don't have the spare time to shoot a full featured film or even a short story.
    So I try to figure out how to get the best look with the camera instead.

    I also don't have any money to get new equipment or to pay actors. So everything must be managed with less time and therefore has to be well prepared.


    I don't know how you do your filming. But I like to do everything as planned and I also don't like weeks of post-processing trying to fix the mess I shot, because I just shot everything I could in different ways.
    I heard that many people shoot 300h and more for a 90min movie.
    I think about 300min is more that enough.

    But yes, you are right!
    The look isn't THAT important.
    But then it's the first thing you will see...so...it's important in some way ;)


    Reply With Quote
     

  7. Collapse Details
    #17
    Senior Member David W. Jones's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    La Petite Roche
    Posts
    6,721
    Default
    When I go see a movie, I could care less what camera it was shot on.

    Either I was entertained, or I wasn't.... Bottom line!


    1 out of 1 members found this post helpful.
    Reply With Quote
     

  8. Collapse Details
    #18
    Default
    Quote Originally Posted by David W. Jones View Post
    When I go see a movie, I could care less what camera it was shot on.

    Either I was entertained, or I wasn't.... Bottom line!
    Good for you.
    I can see whether the movie was shot on ari xy or red with xy lens..maybe it has something to do with knowing about things.
    But I don't watch movies to be entertained.

    But anyway. Who cares?
    The question was, if the image looks like 16mm and NOT if you or me like this or that.
    The question was NOT if somebody needs a specific look to get entertained or not.

    Maybe your opinion was just a statement because you can't say anything about the question.
    So why I am answering to statements nobody needs ?

    If it isn't worth trying to get the wanted look, why losing time reading my post?
    I think you're just pissed off and have nothing constructive to say.


    Reply With Quote
     

Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •