How do I get the Casino Royale look?

Yours is a bit overexposed and lacking of contrast, but also lacking of color. Notice how many blues and greens are in the clip from Casino Royale to contrast the gold tint. No amount of white balancing or color grading can fix that.
 
Okay so Casino Royale has the budget to afford whatever color vehicles, buidlings, and props they want. Where as mine, I don't have control basically of what's on the street.
 
You also don't have leaves on the trees, and your sky isn't blue. The latter could have to do with overdoing the white balance shift, and the former isn't really a budget issue unless you make it one by shooting in the winter and sending out scenics on cherry pickers to put fake leaves on the trees.
 
Basically, Casino Royale was shot in a way to take advantage of that color looks. They shot at sunsets, with lots of different colors, and a warmer color temperature I also assume they did a color grade, further saturation up the colors and putting them in the right range to get that look.
 
Are you saying they waited till every sunset to shoot that whole chase? That's only like 30 minutes or less a day.
 
They waited til later in the day, and used color correction in post. Along with choosing outfits, and locations to benefit the look, they lit with gelled lights for closeup and interior locations.
 
oh okay. Why color correct in post if you can just change the color of sunlight to 170000 Kelvin during shooting?
 
color correction is different. Adjusting contrast, and colors in the highlights and shadows, instead of just changing the color in adjusting color temp, which changes the overall image.
 
Shooting 35mm film with Cooke S4 lenses in southern latitudes at appropriate times of day (Early in the day and late in the afternoon) with all of the filmmaking resources available to a $100 Million plus blockbuster movie goes a long way to laying the foundation for that look.

In your clip It appears to me that you shoot during the middle of the day when the sun is relatively high in the sky. Try the test in the hour after sunrise and the hour before sunset and see what your results are. Avoid over exposing the image and try a polarizing filter. Shoot establishing shoots and "Master" type shots when the natural light is "Perfect" then use modifiers (Flags, silks, reflectors and supplemental lights) to match your medium shots and CUs. If you look very, very closely to the "Casino Royale sequence, or any extended day exterior sequence in a big budget film, you will see that the lighting is NOT a perfect match shot to shot. That is OK and is an accepted convention of film. The important thing is to make sure that the shots that establish the sequence geography and time of day (Establishing and long shots) match.
 
You don't want to do that because it influences everything in the image. WB correct and play in post or use filters if you like to do it in camera.
 
You mean shoot with the light white? Everytime I try that, the image is unfixable in post. I tried shooting at night with the street lights white, even though they were orange. I shot with them white, then tried to add orange in post, since everyone seems to be shooting white, than changing white balance later. So I added orange in post, but the whole sky came out pink as a result. Too many side effects, at least when I do it.
 
You white balanced the camera so the streetlights were white just because everyone seems to be shooting white? That's not really a good reason to do such a thing, but I'll explain why you had issues. Once you've baked in a look, as you did by white balancing in whatever way you did, reversing that change to "normal" can be exceedingly difficult. But what you originally asked about only involves getting a different look in the first place. If for a daytime exterior which you wanted to have a gold tint, you white balanced the camera so that the light looked white, chances are the image on your monitor wouldn't look too different from what the scene looks like to your eye. Changing that to something else isn't going to be too hard. What you found out is that an image that looks so "wrong" to begin with, like white streetlights, is unfixable in post with simple color correction tools.
 
ironpony - I'm no longer amazed at every aspect of audio and video that you completely misunderstand and the try to justify with faulty physics.

White balance - the clue is in the word white. We're talking about a system started years ago that allows an object that we know is white to look white on the screen.It can take an orangy light from a tungsten lamp run at say 70% and adjust out the extra orange, and make white, white again. It can cope with the outdoor shot where there are no clouds in the sky - and the entire sky is a huge blue softlight. Think about it as a tone control on a cheap stereo. You have treble and bass, and maybe a bass boost button. If you have presets, you can misuse them to tint the picture towards red/orange or blue. If you have cut something in the camera, and recorded less of it, then,just like your endless sound problems, trying to fix it afterwards rarely works well. If there is very little red recorded, because you filtered it out, putting it back increases the noise in whatever red was there.

Street lights are very rarely white - most are nowadays discharge lamps - they have gas inside that is what generates the light, not a filament - and what comes out has a very strange spectrum. Camera adjustments do not work properly. A sodium lamp - the orange ones - are not really orange at all. They are just lots of light at one colour and hardly anything at the wavelength of other colours. Your white balance circuit cannot cope. It tries and usually makes it worse. For sodium lighting picking 3200K is sensible - the camera still responds to the reds and blues in a sensible way. You mention 170000 Kelvin - 170 THOUSAND???? Kelvin is a temperature - 3000 or 6000 degrees in something I can understand - 170,000 Degrees is HOT and certainly not visible light!

The clip you linked to is over-exposed, you have washed out the sky and all the highlights. There is as a consequence no real data in the sky. It looks like there could have been some whispy clouds, but post is not where miracles happen. If it's not recorded, it's not correctable. If you saw that image on your monitor, why did you not sort it on location. With correct exposure you could have perhaps tried proper white balance and then maybe even tweaked to make sure the sky was blue, clouds were white - but small mistakes like that can often be fixed in post with even the basic tools in the editor.

Your system appear to be to record badly, with little or just faulty logic on what's best practice - then pop up here and ask how to fix it. You seem so keen, yet always reject advice given after you have a problem.

I did smile when you queried how CR was shot. Ever heard of the six Ps? A military phrase - proper planning prevents piss poor performance. If the most suitable light is between 6 and 6.30, then that is when you shoot. The sun is your key light. If it's in the wrong place or the wrong colour - fix it!
 
How many times are you guys going to get sucked into Ironponys trolling threads, When he asked why cant he shoot at 17000 kelvin, should have been enough to put on the brakes. I honestly think it's funny that folks still reply to his threads. And just say he's not trolling, and really that clueless, should also be enough to encourage him to look for another hobby. Film making isn't for everyone, and from the posts I read from him, should be enough prove this logic.
 
maranfilms said:
How many times are you guys going to get sucked into Ironponys trolling threads, When he asked why cant he shoot at 17000 kelvin, should have been enough to put on the brakes. I honestly think it's funny that folks still reply to his threads. And just say he's not trolling, and really that clueless, should also be enough to encourage him to look for another hobby. Film making isn't for everyone, and from the posts I read from him, should be enough prove this logic.
Click to expand...

Be nice now :) I don't think Ryan is quite 'like the rest of us'. But I do agree -- He desperately needs another hobby
 
maranfilms said:
How many times are you guys going to get sucked into Ironponys trolling threads, When he asked why cant he shoot at 17000 kelvin, should have been enough to put on the brakes. I honestly think it's funny that folks still reply to his threads. And just say he's not trolling, and really that clueless, should also be enough to encourage him to look for another hobby. Film making isn't for everyone, and from the posts I read from him, should be enough prove this logic.
Click to expand...

But this time they (My Name Is Legion Iron Pony...) gave at least a whole 4 seconds long clip as an example... they seem to be learning... no matter how slight...
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top