DVX vs HD (for film look)

ciencin

ciencin

Well-known member
Had my DVX and HPX170 doing side by side shooting and it might be just me but does the DVX look more like film? :-\

I might just be imagining things but the very fine detail that you get from the HPX just kills the film look a bit (I do love both of the cameras though).
 
The DVX will give you what you perceive as a softer image, but on closer inspection it doesn't look all that great at all. The HPX has sharpness controls I'm sure, make sure that is all the way down. After that it's a question of lighting, set dressing and everything else. Lighting makes the 'film look' a lot more than the camera does. Just look at what other people have been shooting, the camera can be used to create what you want.
 
I agree totaly, there is something about the lofi dv look with all it's quirks and percieved flaws that is almost reminiscent of 8mm film or something, whereas these cheaper hd cams seem to have a synthetic quality which looks a bit to clean.
 
I love my dvx and 60d, but neither look like film. It's not the lenses, it's the way it handles skin tone, dynamic range of film that is unmatched. An SD telecine can look like a dvx (if you screw it up), but a 2k DI or 4k DI looks like a film and nothing else.
 
If people spent 1/10 the amount of energy on making a good film look as they do on trying to get a film look, the indie industry would be thriving right now. In April I was asked to shoot a "bad movie". I spent a month trying to light it as best I could, train a boom op, and try to DP/Cam Op/Etc. to rescue it as best I could. Now I am trying to to do all I can in the edit suite, the grade, etc.

Sometimes I look at the stuff people throw up and I wonder if they did anything at all. I am spending 5-7 hours a night for a month on a 20 minute short. And it's not even 25% what it should be.

The HECK with the film look. Just shoot a decent film!
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top