GH2 Holy sweetness... has anybody else tried out FilmConvert?

hana said:
Aren't we tired of wanna be famous people like this Vincent and this guy, Phillip Bloom. self advertisement. When will I see their feature length film?The worst self ego was Phillip Bloom's GH2 camera died of watery death. Try searching for the post.
Click to expand...

I'm pretty sure that you can download a feature length documentary that Bloom shot on iTunes right now. But whats the problem; as working professionals they give their fee advice and review lots of equipment; you're free to not watch it.

But this thread is about FilmConvert, which is unrelated to any of these guys.
 
Gary Huff said:
But that's the deal. It's not like I've always thought this way. I investigated a lot of tools that allow you to add a sheen of film grain to your image, and have thought a lot about it. But it seems the benefit is highly dubious in both personal satisfaction, and especially in any kind of audience appreciation. Most of the benefits are touted in nebulous language that doesn't seem to translate into any real-world plusses.

Take "texture" for instance. What is meant by that exactly? To me, it seems like "texture" is a euphamism for "looks like 35mm film stock" and that's all it means. My point is that, unless you are trying to mix Alexa/Red/Sony/Panasonic/ect. digital footage with film stock, where the grain will help keep the look consistant, I don't understand what the idea of adding grain is unless, for some reason, you feel that without making your footage look like film stock, it's somehow illegitimate. I think as long as it's lit and graded properly, no one is going to turn their nose at it for lack of fake grain, and I also think that we should embrace the look of digital and stop worrying about making it look like this old analog format.

In my opinion, it's like adding the "crackling" noise to music you release on CD so that it sounds like vinyl. It has a use for a specific purpose (I've definately heard songs that make use of that effect), but you would never do it as a general process because vinyl is a more "legitimate" format and you want to convince people that you're legit.
Click to expand...

OK, fair enough. That was well said.

Gary Huff said:
The first looks great, the second not at all in the same league. What's the "before" images?
Click to expand...

Agree; the first image is very cool. Before and after shots would be sweet.
 
Gary Huff said:
The first looks great, the second not at all in the same league. What's the "before" images?
Click to expand...
The first is on controlled lighting. The second is under uncontrolled lighting (neon, halogen, mercury vapor and florescent). The second is shot at 5000 ISO and the first at 320 ISO. The point is that they match "grain wise". That is why you add a grain to pieces, so that there is consistency to the look.
99.99999999% there if you light and grade? Come on man. Those are the 2 first fundamentals.
Tonight I shoot a spoof piece of the move "The Artist". Be damn sure that I will use this program to finish the look.

Gary, have you even tried the program?
 
dustylense said:
Gary, have you even tried the program?
Click to expand...

I have not. I have yet to see any benefit (even in their own promotional benefit) that shows what I can achieve that I cannot get to using AE/Resolve/Colorista.

As for "consistancy", I think that proves my point that it is very nebulous. There is nothing about the second image that tells me it's part of the same project as the first. They look like two entirely separate pieces, one professionally lit and one that is nothing more than event videography. The "grain" aspect does not even feature into the differences.

dustylense said:
Tonight I shoot a spoof piece of the move "The Artist". Be damn sure that I will use this program to finish the look.
Click to expand...

Great! Will you post both one normally graded in usual tools and one with the added pass in FilmConvert and not tell anyone which one is which and let them spot the difference?
 
simonpwood said:
But assuming you have good lighting and good grading; can this add something to the image? It works surprisingly well under certain circumstances.
Click to expand...
The problem with this product is that it combines two transformations that should be done at opposite ends of the grading process. If you want to accurately emulate a particular film stock, you need to work with images straight from a precisely profiled camera sensor, preferably using RAW data. If you alter the image in any way before the film stock conversion, the sensor profile will no longer be accurate.

In order to simulate film grain, you want to add it after all other color correction and grading have been completed. It you grade it after the grain has been added, the texture of the grain will no longer be consistent across the frame.

With the FilmConvert plugin, you cannot add film grain without converting the video to a simulated film stock at the same time. That means that you need to use it before any other color correction, and after it adds the film grain, you can do only a limited amount of grading.
 
Actually you can do the two steps independently. Since its a plugin you can apply the film emulation and turn off grain, render that out. Grade, etc. Then as a final step apply the plugin, eliminate the color and just apply the grain.
 
Just a reminder, it's okay to express disinterest, but after that we should move on and let those interested in the topic continue to move it forward.

Thanks.
 
Chris Adler said:
Then as a final step apply the plugin, eliminate the color and just apply the grain.
Click to expand...
The AfterEffects CS5.5 plugin does not allow me to add film grain without also doing a film stock conversion at the same time. The only way I can add grain is to do it at the same time as the film stock conversion.
 
Yes, but if you turn off the color slider you will not introduce the film stock conversion process again when you add grain.

If you don't like the results, simply don't use it.
 
lpowell said:
The AfterEffects CS5.5 plugin does not allow me to add film grain without also doing a film stock conversion at the same time. The only way I can add grain is to do it at the same time as the film stock conversion.
Click to expand...
The fcpx plug allows you to turn grain off by slider to zero and turn film color off by slider.
@gary. The point is one shot at 5000 iso and one shot at 320 iso are looking like the same film stock on my monitor. I use iso to controll iris for dof. So if one shot is f2.8 at 320 and the next is f8 @ iso 2500, I can make the shots look seamless with this program. I can adjust the amount of grain as well to my liking. What is so hard to understand about that being a useful tool to have? I could shoot another at f16 at 10000 iso, noise reduce it, then add this plug to again match the 320 iso shoot. Hell, I'll try it tonight.
 
Aren't we tired of wanna be famous people like this Vincent and this guy, Phillip Bloom. self advertisement. When will I see their feature length film?
Click to expand...

What a clueless statement.

Have any of you that are debating this negatively even tried the program with a camera that has been profiled?
Click to expand...

One thing I've learned is that if a camera or software is not for you just keep walking. It is that simple. Try it and if you are not satisfied don't even bother with it. Don't even talk about it anymore.
 
dustylense said:
The fcpx plug allows you to turn grain off by slider to zero and turn film color off by slider.
Click to expand...
The AE CS5.5 plugin works that way too, but it's still doing some kind of conversion. The Exposure and Color Temperature sliders still affect the image when both Color and Grain sliders are set to 0%, and the image turns monochrome when I select a B&W film stock emulation.
 
Gary Huff said:
I don't understand what the idea of adding grain is
Click to expand...

Yeah, we get that. But is it really necessary to try and convince everyone else there is no purpose, just because you don't see one?

(By the way, there are still ways to simulate the 'warm sound of tubes' because there are folks who don't like the crispness of digital.)
 
Chris Adler said:
How's this a self advertisement? They don't own the products, nor do they profit from sales of the products. When do we get to see YOUR feature film? How is your point relevant to this conversation?
Click to expand...

you will never see my feature. I'm just waiting to see the two's and maybe yours
 
Tried it and got to be honest, I like it very much and it is really easy to use. It is not the real Color Grading software where you can really isolate a certain parts of the picture and highlight those ones you want. But this software is really easy to use and provide good starting point for someone that want to get a better output in a jiffy.

And as for the Bloom and Vincent credibility on making their own feature films, I have to agree that they are not up to the challenge yet. But dismissing their good points on providing the information based solely on this fact is also unprofessional and utterly irrelevant.

Are you saying that now I am not supposed to "advertise" or suggest this AMAZING TOOL just because I have not proved myself worthy enough?

Anyway, great to know that someone finally make this kinda software!! Kudos to Rubbermonkey if they happen to read this. Really love it.
 
kicap said:
And as for the Bloom and Vincent credibility on making their own feature films, I have to agree that they are not up to the challenge yet. But dismissing their good points on providing the information based solely on this fact is also unprofessional and utterly irrelevant.
Click to expand...


What are you guys talking about? You can get a feature length documentary shot by Bloom on iTunes today (the photography looks beautiful by the way):

http://philipbloom.net/2012/02/07/confluenceitunes/
 
What are you guys talking about? You can get a feature length documentary shot by Bloom on iTunes today (the photography looks beautiful by the way):

http://philipbloom.net/2012/02/07/confluenceitunes/
Click to expand...

It is just amazing like some people can make such nonsense statements. Laforet and Bloom are out there producing stuff for all the world to see! They are proving themselves day after day with their pro work. Beautiful visuals and knowledgeable info about the gear and software they use. FilmConvert is an excellent piece of software at a very reasonable price that will benefit a lot of users. Like it or not that is the bottom line. And if Laforet endorsed and use it and tells the world about it more power to him. Like it or not that is the bottom line. Thanks simonpwood for the link. I would like to see a link to the work of people stating that others can't do a feature. If you are going to make negative assessment of someone else's lack of capabilities lets us see your work. Like it or not that is the bottom line.
 
What does someone creating a narrative feature film have to do with credibility? There are tons of people who have no desire to do that. They work in other aspects of media or film. Sometimes we need to remind ourselves there's a world outside our little reality and we're just a spec in it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top