Help me with my cinematic look please. Why my 2 films have a totaly different look?

S

Stab

Well-known member
This post is not to show of my video's, but a sincere ask for help and insight.

I started in this business 3-4 years ago. In most of my films, I am the director and cinematographer. Often also the camera operator as well, as I work mostly on small productions on small sets.
I made a lot of improvements over time and I think my skills are getting better. I know there is still so much to learn and to master, but I hope I will get there eventually.

Anyway, the problem is that I can not explain and 'clarify' for myself what is happening sometimes. This is in terms of the 'look' of the film and how to get it to look as you want. I'm really into the 'organic film look' recently and that's how I want my films to look like.
Lately, I have shot 3 films. A short film, an advertisement and a wedding. The short film looks rather good and organic to me. The wedding as well. The advertisement was meant to look a bit more 'modern' and 'clean' so actually I'm not unhappy with the results, but I can't put my finger on what it causing it to look more 'video' like. More plastic, digital...

I shoot everything with the same camera (GH3), the same profile settings, and the same LUT (film convert). However, they are totally different in terms of 'look' and the advertisement really stands out for me, in a negative way.

Ok, maybe you should watch the video's (partly at least) to see what I mean.

https://vimeo.com/75397428 - The wedding
https://vimeo.com/75399131 - Advertisment (with a short story)
https://vimeo.com/64377878 - Short film 'Clash'

The thing is, that to get the look I wanted in the wedding, I simply added a Film Convert layer and 'boof', it looked awesome. Did some minor color correction in indoor scenes, but outdoor it looked great immediately. At least in my eyes. The same thing happened to Clash. Did a lot more color correction there, but looked instantly organic the moment I applied Film Convert.
Now, the advertisement is a different story. I wanted it to look a bit dark and unsettling and a bit more clean, but still wanted to keep the 'organic' look. IMO, it doesn't really look organic or film like.
I added 2 layers of film convert (to get the contrasty curve) and did lots of color correction and it still came out too video like.

So why is that? What is 'wrong'? Is it the shot composition? Is it 'what I shoot'? (A modern looking guy against a city background) Is it the color correction or the lack of grain and shakyness?
Although I shot all things myself, I don't know what is the 'problem' here :)

I have really thought about this a lot, but I can't find the answers. It would really help me for my future work to know what I do right and what I do wrong... Any help or insight would be really helpful and appreciated.

Thanks!
 
First of all IMO they all look digital.

your short film seems lit somewhat dark. Or at least the grade is dark and desatirated.

The same goes for the wedding. The grade seems film like compared to the advert.

Also i noticed you have or at least tried to do cinematic camera movement in all but your advert. And you have focal lengths which seems to help.

Art direction, color grade, lighting, camera angles & movement and depth of field all come together. Lets not forget the organic film grain.

Digital is very harsh and sharp, film is soft even when its sharp. Lights are soft and so are skin tones.


hope that helps a little since no one has replied.

Ned.
 
Due to limitations in your current camera's dynamic range ability, achieving the look of film is difficult, if not impossible. Though, I would caution that film is a medium, not an aesthetic. The issues at hand are more related to your choices in exposure and lighting than anything else. Please forgo your application of filters in post as a method of achieving an "organic film look." It is just not going to happen. Your current films show strong aptitude toward cinematic movements and framing. I believe that your composition is good, for the most part, but you tend to stick to only a few shots with a similar lens. I would vary lenses, angles, and compositions more. Further, your subjects are under-lit in nearly every shot. Focus more on setting exposure for your subject, rather than relying on your camera's light readings to set exposure. You'll notice your skies are correctly exposed in most of your outdoor scenes. This shouldn't be the case. Expose for subject and blow out the skies if you need to. Also, I think you are shooting with a flat picture profile and not adding a strong enough curve in post. Lastly, quit trying to achieve cinematic scale by cropping to 2.35:1. You don't have the lenses for it, and your content doesn't require it.
 
Last edited:
N3D said:
First of all IMO they all look digital.

your short film seems lit somewhat dark. Or at least the grade is dark and desatirated.

The same goes for the wedding. The grade seems film like compared to the advert.

Also i noticed you have or at least tried to do cinematic camera movement in all but your advert. And you have focal lengths which seems to help.

Art direction, color grade, lighting, camera angles & movement and depth of field all come together. Lets not forget the organic film grain.

Digital is very harsh and sharp, film is soft even when its sharp. Lights are soft and so are skin tones.


hope that helps a little since no one has replied.

Ned.
Click to expand...

Thanks for your reply. Useful tips.
I graded the short film and the advertisement dark on purpose, because IMO that fits to the story.
What do you mean with 'cinematic camera movement'? Can you give an example of which shots are having it and why the advert doesn't have it?
Thanks!
 
Scott Bastedo said:
Due to limitations in your current camera's dynamic range ability, achieving the look of film is difficult, if not impossible. Though, I would caution that film is a medium, not an aesthetic. The issues at hand are more related to your choices in exposure and lighting than anything else. Please forgo your application of filters in post as a method of achieving an "organic film look." It is just not going to happen. Your current films show strong aptitude toward cinematic movements and framing. I believe that your composition is good, for the most part, but you tend to stick to only a few shots with a similar lens. I would vary lenses, angles, and compositions more. Further, your subjects are under-lit in nearly every shot. Focus more on setting exposure for your subject, rather than relying on your camera's light readings to set exposure. You'll notice your skies are correctly exposed in most of your outdoor scenes. This shouldn't be the case. Expose for subject and blow out the skies if you need to. Also, I think you are shooting with a flat picture profile and not adding a strong enough curve in post. Lastly, quit trying to achieve cinematic scale by cropping to 2.35:1. You don't have the lenses for it, and your content doesn't require it.
Click to expand...

Thanks a lot.
Yes, I do tend to use the same lenses and mostly don't use telelenses or go extremely wide. This makes the shots maybe a bit too similar to each other. Good advice.

I do blow-out the sky if necesarry (as can be seen in the wedding film), but mostly I try to avoid it as nothing screams more 'digital low dynamic range' as blown-out highlights. In the advertisement film, the subject is often under exposed with heavy shadows but that was actually according to plan. It has to look dark and 'heavy'. The wedding film however is not underexposed in my opinion. I'm not trying to defend myself, I just wonder if other people think it actually is. Cause otherwise you guys use different monitors, or my perception of correct exposure is off...

I do shot pretty flat (-2 at the GH3 is actually plenty flat) and might try to use stronger curves next time.

I agree that some post work is never going to make GH3 shots 100% 'organic and film like', but I do think you can get pretty close. With decent lighting, good grading and and some grain you can get a long way. But, since I have never shot on film or an Alexa, maybe my perception of 'film like' is way off.

Thanks for commenting. Keep 'em coming.
 
Stab said:
Thanks for your reply. Useful tips.
I graded the short film and the advertisement dark on purpose, because IMO that fits to the story.
What do you mean with 'cinematic camera movement'? Can you give an example of which shots are having it and why the advert doesn't have it?
Thanks!
Click to expand...

When i mean cinematic movement. I mean classic dolly shots, crane shots and such. That and combine everything i suggested should get you close to film. Of course it will never be film.


Clash - 2:24 5:25
also looks a little soft like film.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top