Difference between these two shots?

H

HeyAndy

Active member
In terms of aesthetics, what is the difference between these two similar shots?

DSC00893.jpg


DSC00871.jpg


Even though they look identical, howcome they still look different? Does this have something to do the kind of camera used?
 
Last edited:
I think it has little to nothing to do with cameras used here. Your footage looks sharper in these particular grabs. The depth of field looks a bit shallower in the original grab, but I wouldn't really call that "shallow".

Makeup/Wardrobe and exposure are the two biggest things that stand out to me here. Your colors are much more vibrant and the clothing looks brand new. The original has a nice weathered look to the wardrobe as well as the makeup. The wrinkles in his face give lots of definition where yours just looks flat and doesn't really say much. The originals makeup just says so much.

Exposure seems really low in the original - no highlights. Your starting to lose detail on the camera-left side of your actors nose. The green cast of the original is also a big factor. Probably also why his hair and vest don't seem to pop in the original. The wall is also heavily treated and quite nasty looking.

Other factors - Camera angle and field of view. While the original is definitely looking down to the actor as is yours, they appear to be using a longer lens. Notice how the lines of the tiles in the original grab aren't converging to rapidly as they travel to the back/left. You also aren't seeing much to the left or right of the actor. In your shot you can see quite a bit to the left and a decent amount of convergence of the bricks in the wall. A tighter shot would also probably get rid of the floor in the frame.

Your actor also could give a little more of the mood that Ledger gives with his head tilted down. See the whites in his eyes (Ledger's)? He has that intimidating, pissed off, inquisitive, look that is absolutely menacing. You don't have that in your actor.

Those are what really stand out to me. But camera differences, not really.

Ad FYI I think you mean aesthetics, instead of anesthetics.

edit - failed to mention composition. The position of the large swath of empty space behind your actor vs the empty space position in front of the original makes a difference. Can make or break a connection with off-screen characters.
 
Your actor needs to have his hair sprayed with water, to give it a darker wet look, the color grading is a bit different, brick size is different, wardrobe is different, I would cruch your blacks a bit. Also your actor looks almost like he's smirking, he should have that crazy look like the above poster mentioned.
 
Makeup, composition, lighting, engaging actor, set design (yep, see the edges of the bricks on the wall have been messed up and dirtied), professional colour grade. Picture A has all these right. Picture B lacks a lot of these elements. I would go as far to say that the actor in B is one of the main issues. Even with perfect makeup, his facial structure just couldnt have that messed up, Im going to eat your children look to it.
 
I think Jeff hit it on the head and Noel hit the nail as well. Also, notice that the only shadow is very subtle and it's not coming from above. If you lose the overhead light and add a very soft light from the left, you'll get a more subtle shadow on the wall and better lighting on your actor. Doing that would also make the actor's hair darker to help set the mood better.
 
There are a lot of things you could do with your shot to make it more faithful to the original but I think that the one which will have the biggest impact is colour grading. Here's three minutes of messing around with RGB curves:

dark_night_grade.jpg


And, for comparison

DSC00893.jpg


DSC00871.jpg


-Andrew
 
If the camera shot was shot again with an SD camera and colour grading was applied would this make the shot looky grainy?
 
Last edited:
As Jeff mentioned the angle is quite different.
I agree that the original is using a longer lens, plus it was shot at a higher angle. The camera is definitely aiming down much more in the orig.
 
The make up is fine, but the clothes are too new. Did you shoot in 1080i or 24p? It looks a bit like interlaced video, but I don't know why. Someone hit a huge nail on the head when they said color grading. Most indy productions, including my first two, do not color grade at all. "Wages of Sin" came out okay as it "looked like" a movie" and we did some color grading in camera. The scene in the drug dealer's apartment. Here, watch the whole thing. Let it be a guide for some indy do's and don'ts. It works better viewing it on line as some of the don't aren't so in your face. But check it out. Pay attention to the scene in the drug dealers house, in fact the image below is from that very scene. I may try to get it as a sticky as a what to and what not to do.

 
Nathyn said:
The make up is fine, but the clothes are too new. Did you shoot in 1080i or 24p? It looks a bit like interlaced video, but I don't know why. Someone hit a huge nail on the head when they said color grading. Most indy productions, including my first two, do not color grade at all. "Wages of Sin" came out okay as it "looked like" a movie" and we did some color grading in camera. The scene in the drug dealer's apartment. Here, watch the whole thing. Let it be a guide for some indy do's and don'ts. It works better viewing it on line as some of the don't aren't so in your face. But check it out. Pay attention to the scene in the drug dealers house, in fact the image below is from that very scene. I may try to get it as a sticky as a what to and what not to do.

Click to expand...

I don't know because I didn't film it. I got it from a youtube video.

I will look at your trailer.
 
Great thread, interesting question, and good exercise to figure it out. I agree with Jeff and Noel. I would disagree mostly with Andrew and Nathyn. Christopher Nolan hardly uses color grading as far as I know, he didn't in Inception, not sure about Dark Knight. He gets the look in camera.

What you did does help simulate the look, but I think it is in no way the biggest factor, I would say it's low on the list compared to what Jeff and Noel said.

Also, I would say cinder block just feels pretty different from that brick.
 
stejahen said:
I would disagree mostly with Andrew and Nathyn. Christopher Nolan hardly uses color grading as far as I know, he didn't in Inception, not sure about Dark Knight. He gets the look in camera.
Click to expand...

I would be extremely surprised if absolutely zero colour correction was used on The Dark Knight or Inception. Even if it's not heavily stylised, colour timing and correctional grading must be applied when the film is developed and scanned for the digital intermediate. Even just matching one shot with the next. The director's vision would naturally be kept in mind when these changes were made.
 
And the bricks, angling towards the upper left of the frame, makes my eyes want to follow it into the blank space
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top