Film Look

shortnstout,
My apologies, I meant the expression "magic bullet" not the program. I meant there is no simple "press this button" solution , but you haev to use your eyes to do matching.
I have limited experience in post and was only talking about matching during shooting. I bow to your greater knowledge and perhaps there literally is a "magic bullet" in this case. However even then you would need to use your eyes & skill to make it work rather than apply the "match to Redrock & nikon" filter.

Lenny Levy
 
I knew you meant the expression "magic bullet." I just thought it was a funny coincidence that there IS actually a program that is in part used for this very purpose. I wasn't trying to sound like I know everything about post color correction and am superior to you. Its fine you were just talking about shooting, I was just letting the user know of another tool they can use to get the shots in the final output to match up.
On THAT note, in Magic Bullet the program you can save custom filters so you could have one called "match to Redrock & nikon" that you throw on your footage to do just that. But of course you'd have to set that up and also make little tweaks anyway. I've always thought the product name was misleading but it is a good tool.

i guess there is no magic bullet in conveying tone over a forum.
i still love you.
 
Well... if you can come up with the "match to Redrock & nikon" look then I will stand completely corrected! Unfortunately I guess even every "magic bullet" has its price. How much is the program?

And thanks for the love baby!

Lenny
 
:Drogar-Happy(DBG):
definitely has its price, but you can see if you like it with a demo version for free (has a stupid watermark over image): http://www.redgiantsoftware.com/demos.html
takes some time working with it to get it to work nicely. again, i never ever use the presets, just make slight changes, but usually to everything right before output (shouldn't use it if going to film out).
 
Kholi said:
Forgot to mention that there will be a difference in the footage's look. Not just the selective focus, but it'll look different so you'd have to figure out how to match it to the naked cam.

That's what I'm attempting to do, myself. I haven't found a solution to make the naked HVX footage match the look of the adapter footage just yet. Aram suggested a 1pixel blur, I'll have to expirement.
Click to expand...

TimurCivan said:
1 pixel may be too much. but shoot like cinegamma D when shooting naked and Bpress when shooting adapter. that may matchthem up a bit.
Click to expand...

Jack Daniel Stanley said:
on FCP expiriment between point 1 and point 25
Click to expand...

This is a great thread. Timur, great post on page 1.

I am curious about this talk of 1 pixel blur and Jack's comment about "point 1 and point 25." I use FCP and I don't know what this means.
 
Think they're just talking about using a blur effect on the naked footage to take the edge off it to better match the softer adaptor footy. I think when Jack said point 25 he meant '.25', as in a quarter pixel blur.
 
Thank you Timur for a Great post. I just downloaded your work reel and I'm blown away. Your techniques definitely work. Everything looks like film. You're incredible.
Thank you for sharing knowledge
 
musicprogirl said:
Thank you Timur for a Great post. I just downloaded your work reel and I'm blown away. Your techniques definitely work. Everything looks like film. You're incredible.
Thank you for sharing knowledge
Click to expand...

thanks!
That stuff is over a year and a half old... new reel soon! im so excited.....
 
well to be fair the best equipment helps... but what it really proves is that filmmaking is a team effort. between the art director, dop, director, producers, actors, makeup etc....
 
I echo comments re your initial post(great looking reel Timur).Film designer- the least understood role in movie making.He/she does not necessarily design sets/costumes, but is one of the three initial craftsman before a film begins shoot.He in conjunction with the cinematographer and director establishes the"look"and moreso how to obtain it ie lighting/camera movement texture etc.I laud all the creative efforts on these threads,but often wonder what a designer could have brought to the end product.
P.S. I have been a " student" of film design for over forty years.(yes, read old fart.)
 
What about exposure ? Dont overexpose your footage should be rule no.1
This is obvious and clearly visible on any big film where whites are not blown out anywhere.
 
bwwd, not sure about your comment. i have seen plenty of films with blown out whites. it all depends on what your going for.
 
But i talking about real film look ,like back to the future or jurassic park, you know,films.You wont find blown out whites in them.
 
Last edited:
bwwd said:
But i talking about real film look ,like back to the future or jurrasic park, you know,films.You wont find blown out whites in them.
Click to expand...

I can name plenty. Jarhead and Domino come to mind. Plenty of blownout whites. It depends on the style.
 
but i talking about 80s 90s ,where they didnt had cpus to have fun with contrast and brightness for stylistic purpose.
Its like giving advice about film look and talking about blair witch project and how stylistic it is because of the look.
I just checked domino and it looks quite ugly for a film.Jarhead sometimes looks like if it was shot on minidv camcorder , its not the film look that i would want to have.
 
Last edited:
bwwd said:
I just checked domino and it looks quite ugly for a film.Jarhead sometimes looks like if it was shot on minidv camcorder , its not the film look that i would want to have.
Click to expand...

You don't want to have. But that's exactly the point: there's no such thing as "the movie look." It's not a neat mold that you fit in. If that were true cinematographers wouldn't be artists, they'll just be copycat, replicating the same look over and over. The DPs on those films are all professionals with decades of experience and they choose those looks, would you say that they don't know what they're doing? That's the cool thing about cinematography: there's so many elements going into it that you can completely throw out the rules (i.e have blown out highlight) and still have a good looking film.

And I hardly thing Blair Witch is a fair comparison. That movie looked like that because the filmmakers couldn't afford to shoot any other way. But when you know how to create the look you want and you go for it even when it's unconventional, that's called style.
 
But those extreme looks with blown out whites didnt existed in films from 80s and early 90s ,i know whats your point.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top