Camera settings and filters to achieve film look
- Thread starter Jay Mills
- Start date
Ryan Patrick O'Hara
Veteran
I don't know what a Tiffen "Film Look" filter kit is... sounds a little unprofessional. I don't think you can package the 'film look', but hey.
First things first, is to identify the characteristics of the type of film look you want. This will do with film stock, camera, and lighting. After the analysis, I and others here can try and match up the right kind of modern equipment to help your inspired look.
OK, so you want 1970's film stock... that is a vague and unhelpful description. Many films were made in the 70's and they all have HUGE variations in the way they look. If you could post some example looks, I think we here could help you much more. Name some types of movies which have that 'look' and images or videos would be a huge plus!
-rpo
First things first, is to identify the characteristics of the type of film look you want. This will do with film stock, camera, and lighting. After the analysis, I and others here can try and match up the right kind of modern equipment to help your inspired look.
OK, so you want 1970's film stock... that is a vague and unhelpful description. Many films were made in the 70's and they all have HUGE variations in the way they look. If you could post some example looks, I think we here could help you much more. Name some types of movies which have that 'look' and images or videos would be a huge plus!
-rpo
Last edited:
Thank you both for your replies. I apologize for being vague in my original description. Some examples of what I'm talking about are documentary films like Woodstock, Burden of Dreams, and Medium Cool. I'm looking to create similar color and grain levels to these film stocks. I know I'll never be able to match the depth of field with video, nor will I be able to achieve the overall "look". But the closest I can get to this look the better.
Woodstock clip
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bfV_tqBW_5A&feature=related
Burden of Dreams clip
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pI8jl6V-gyk&feature=related
Medium Cool clip
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=90mqG8I2xR0
Thanks for your help!
Woodstock clip
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bfV_tqBW_5A&feature=related
Burden of Dreams clip
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pI8jl6V-gyk&feature=related
Medium Cool clip
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=90mqG8I2xR0
Thanks for your help!
Ryan Patrick O'Hara
Veteran
Thanks for the examples! I am sure this will help many of us. I will mostly be referring to the woodstock footage and what you can do to emulate or create a similar inspired look.
From what I can tell, the woodstock footage you gave me most look like Kodak 1970's 16mm color reversal (Not negative). On the bright side 16mm has more depth of field then 35mm, so shooting with 1/3rd chip camera is not the end of the world... (2/3rd chip camera would be ideal though)
I have not shot with the XL2 in years, so I have forgotten the amount of image tweaking the camera allows. I will continue to give some suggestions on tweaking the image so if it is not possible in camera, do it in post.
1) Color reversal film will have punchier blacks, slightly desaturated colors. There might be a slight discoloring or red/bronze overtone to the film (very very slight)
2) Shoot 24fps... a must.
3) Standard 16mm film is 1.37:1 aspect ratio. Which is close to 4:3 (1.33:1), therefore I would shoot 4:3 if you want to emulate the documentary footage.
4) The image must be in focus but perhaps softening some detail level so there is not ultra crisp video like images. This means not seeing digital artifacting or aliasing.
5) Adding post video scratches, edit pops, flash frames, dirt, etc will make the footage look more 'old' but it must be done in a very careful, subtle, and sophisticated way. Please don't throw on some cheap post effects filter it will sometimes work against you.
My suggestions. In the end, the way you shoot, edit, and your on set art direction will make or break your film.
P.S. Don't forget that classic 70's documentary audio!
From what I can tell, the woodstock footage you gave me most look like Kodak 1970's 16mm color reversal (Not negative). On the bright side 16mm has more depth of field then 35mm, so shooting with 1/3rd chip camera is not the end of the world... (2/3rd chip camera would be ideal though)
I have not shot with the XL2 in years, so I have forgotten the amount of image tweaking the camera allows. I will continue to give some suggestions on tweaking the image so if it is not possible in camera, do it in post.
1) Color reversal film will have punchier blacks, slightly desaturated colors. There might be a slight discoloring or red/bronze overtone to the film (very very slight)
2) Shoot 24fps... a must.
3) Standard 16mm film is 1.37:1 aspect ratio. Which is close to 4:3 (1.33:1), therefore I would shoot 4:3 if you want to emulate the documentary footage.
4) The image must be in focus but perhaps softening some detail level so there is not ultra crisp video like images. This means not seeing digital artifacting or aliasing.
5) Adding post video scratches, edit pops, flash frames, dirt, etc will make the footage look more 'old' but it must be done in a very careful, subtle, and sophisticated way. Please don't throw on some cheap post effects filter it will sometimes work against you.
My suggestions. In the end, the way you shoot, edit, and your on set art direction will make or break your film.
P.S. Don't forget that classic 70's documentary audio!
Last edited:
S
SeanEmer
Guest
You mean more depth of field :thumbsup:
The trailer you posted as an example brings up a good note on mimicing the film look: remember that back then the film was different, as well as the lighting styles. Even in contrasty areas there seems to be soft lighting on actors, and the entire image seems to be softened (this might be youtube, but hey... I'm trying). With that in mind, be sure that your lighting matches the period. You don't need any Michael Bay back lights, side kicks, or other effects that don't appear in the film look you're trying to achieve.
MikeGunter
Well-known member
Hi,
The Tiffen filter kit is designed to reduce contrast and is in their "Pro Mist" series and does most of what Ryan suggests. Magic Bullet from Red Giant is a terrific plug in that really helps, too.
I would likely leave of the hair and scratches in the film gate. In my opinion, it adds little production value.
There were a lot of film stocks used in the late sixties and early seventies, both reversals and negatives. Some were more contrasty than others, some had more saturation, some had more edge, but most lost some detail in the shadows (although not as much as video outdoors in sunlight). There are a lot of looks to emulate.
Frame rate was 24 frames per second and that cadence should be matched, too. Moreover, you should try as you can to "expose" to 1/60 second when you can. That's an artistic decision - there are reasons to go against it, but staying with it where you can helps to sell the look. Adding neutral density in camera and filtration will have some good impact outside.
Woodstock... Good times... I remember most of it well...:engel017:
The Tiffen filter kit is designed to reduce contrast and is in their "Pro Mist" series and does most of what Ryan suggests. Magic Bullet from Red Giant is a terrific plug in that really helps, too.
I would likely leave of the hair and scratches in the film gate. In my opinion, it adds little production value.
There were a lot of film stocks used in the late sixties and early seventies, both reversals and negatives. Some were more contrasty than others, some had more saturation, some had more edge, but most lost some detail in the shadows (although not as much as video outdoors in sunlight). There are a lot of looks to emulate.
Frame rate was 24 frames per second and that cadence should be matched, too. Moreover, you should try as you can to "expose" to 1/60 second when you can. That's an artistic decision - there are reasons to go against it, but staying with it where you can helps to sell the look. Adding neutral density in camera and filtration will have some good impact outside.
Woodstock... Good times... I remember most of it well...:engel017:
Ryan Patrick O'Hara
Veteran
DOH! Yes, I have corrected my error. Seems everyone here is a little dyslexic at times.
rogar-Shock(DBG):Thanks for catching me!
There is a colour technique in After effects called Instant Sex, that makes the colours more saturated, more contraty, and gives a sort of dream like blur.
Add an adjustment layer over the top of your footage, add fast blur press f4 choose overlay as your mode then scrub the adjustment layer's opacity. Also tick edge repeat on the fast blur settings.
I did that effect on this short film here. http://www.vimeo.com/1053489
And here's a still
Oh I should also mention this was filmed on the Canon HV20
Add an adjustment layer over the top of your footage, add fast blur press f4 choose overlay as your mode then scrub the adjustment layer's opacity. Also tick edge repeat on the fast blur settings.
I did that effect on this short film here. http://www.vimeo.com/1053489
And here's a still
Oh I should also mention this was filmed on the Canon HV20
Ryan Patrick O'Hara
Veteran
Here is a new Coldplay video which you should check out. It has a very authentic, old 16mm feel.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IakDItZ7f7Q
I guarantee they shot this on film to look like film, but if this appeals to the look you desire, look at it carefully.
Enjoy:beer:
-rpo
EDIT: I'm going to add this (below) as to avoid a double post!
Take a look at the following video which was posted in the User Films section just above cinematography.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tcUekltqA0g
This person was aiming for an older film look. The colors of the video looked somewhat convincing. The 'hair in the gate' and 'old film projection' filter was a bit overt, remember to be subtle. These effects can work well, but do it like this and the illusion is gone. We can tell it's just a post filter. The video overall is a success, but where he lost his '50's feeling was in the camera work. It had a much to modern docu-drama feel. The handheld 'The Office' type of camera work isn't at all what otherwise would have been a classic studio type of production had this been made in the 50's.
I do not know the intentions of this film maker, and his is by no means a failure. The joke was funny (in context) and it otherwise worked great. I am simply dissecting his attempt at emulating a period of time in his film making. It is really funny to think that we, a people, will disbelieve a period piece video on the basis that it does not fit the film making vernacular of that period. Had the filmmaker shot the short film in the style of a 1950's 'Leave it to Beaver' sitcom, I think we the audience would have gotten that 1950's feeling even more vs. the modern day invisible cameraman style.
This has nothing to do with your desired 1970's look, but it demonstrates the importance of not only matching the camera settings to emulate a certain old film look, but to incorporate art direction, costume, and appropriate camera vernacular. On that note, I must say it is also possible to shoot something which is supposed to take place long ago, but use modern camera techniques. This is more difficult to pull off, but none the less quite acceptable.
-rpo
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IakDItZ7f7Q
I guarantee they shot this on film to look like film, but if this appeals to the look you desire, look at it carefully.
Enjoy:beer:
-rpo
EDIT: I'm going to add this (below) as to avoid a double post!
Take a look at the following video which was posted in the User Films section just above cinematography.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tcUekltqA0g
This person was aiming for an older film look. The colors of the video looked somewhat convincing. The 'hair in the gate' and 'old film projection' filter was a bit overt, remember to be subtle. These effects can work well, but do it like this and the illusion is gone. We can tell it's just a post filter. The video overall is a success, but where he lost his '50's feeling was in the camera work. It had a much to modern docu-drama feel. The handheld 'The Office' type of camera work isn't at all what otherwise would have been a classic studio type of production had this been made in the 50's.
I do not know the intentions of this film maker, and his is by no means a failure. The joke was funny (in context) and it otherwise worked great. I am simply dissecting his attempt at emulating a period of time in his film making. It is really funny to think that we, a people, will disbelieve a period piece video on the basis that it does not fit the film making vernacular of that period. Had the filmmaker shot the short film in the style of a 1950's 'Leave it to Beaver' sitcom, I think we the audience would have gotten that 1950's feeling even more vs. the modern day invisible cameraman style.
This has nothing to do with your desired 1970's look, but it demonstrates the importance of not only matching the camera settings to emulate a certain old film look, but to incorporate art direction, costume, and appropriate camera vernacular. On that note, I must say it is also possible to shoot something which is supposed to take place long ago, but use modern camera techniques. This is more difficult to pull off, but none the less quite acceptable.
-rpo
Last edited:
MikeGunter
Well-known member
Hi Jay,
I have the Looks Suite for Vegas 7.0 which might be different than what you have and have different presets, too. But it could be a start.
In my version, you can pick from a few presets, and vary from them based upon Saturation, Diffusion, Color and Gradient, and so on.
Perhaps something like a "Buffalo" and "Max Diffusion" combined will give close look. (Uses two of the same filters is another trick; a more talented guy/gal might just tweak the filter, but it could be faster to lay two instances of the same filter down.
I have the Looks Suite for Vegas 7.0 which might be different than what you have and have different presets, too. But it could be a start.
In my version, you can pick from a few presets, and vary from them based upon Saturation, Diffusion, Color and Gradient, and so on.
Perhaps something like a "Buffalo" and "Max Diffusion" combined will give close look. (Uses two of the same filters is another trick; a more talented guy/gal might just tweak the filter, but it could be faster to lay two instances of the same filter down.
Daniel.Valle
Member
This is a cool thread.
I personally would like to emulate a particular "film look"; I'm a huge fan of the cinema from the 1960's, (mainly those from France, Japan, Chekoslovakia, Brazil, etc)
And a specific look I love is of the black and white films of the period. According to what I read they did a lot of this stuff with natural lighting only, as they didn't have money. This is an example:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dfZQpLSuxKE
I wonder if I could pull this off in Apple Color. But still, what in-camera settings do you guys think work with the early-to-mid-60's black and white look? (I assume most of these films were also shot on 16mm?)
I personally would like to emulate a particular "film look"; I'm a huge fan of the cinema from the 1960's, (mainly those from France, Japan, Chekoslovakia, Brazil, etc)
And a specific look I love is of the black and white films of the period. According to what I read they did a lot of this stuff with natural lighting only, as they didn't have money. This is an example:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dfZQpLSuxKE
I wonder if I could pull this off in Apple Color. But still, what in-camera settings do you guys think work with the early-to-mid-60's black and white look? (I assume most of these films were also shot on 16mm?)
Last edited: