Magic Bullet - Useful Tool or Stylistic Crutch?

[Iain]

I notice that a lot of people talk about doing "CC" on their footage and then show examples of work that have taken a few passes through a MisFire filter. As a result, there are a lot of uniquely talented DVX users whose work is becoming indistinguishable from one another.

I know from my own experience that Magic Bullet can take pretty mediocre cinematography and make it interesting by adding fog effects, desaturation, and contrast, but I'm finding it increasingly more common that if there's no time to light a shot correctly, some cinematographers and directors think they can just "fix it in post."

In the past, I've used Magic Bullet to create special effects, but for the most part I feel that people shouldn't rely on what seems to mostly be a novelty application and try to pass it off as cinematography.

 

[Bigmagic]

I use the trapcode effects more than magic bullet. I do like some of the looks but a little color correction can duplicate most of the looks without the long render times.
I will say if it looks good I don't care how they got it that way its good work. There are a lot of ways to get the job done so if your great with a camera or great in post production more power to ya. I enjoy it all!

 

[Norm Sanders]

If you have the editor's version, there's no reason that you have to take a pre-set "as-is" unless you just LOVE that look & don't want to make it your own.

Also, with MB2, they mention something about a DV Deartifacting engine. If it does what I HOPE it does, then it'd be extremely useful.

 

[seejay1031]

Yeah, some use it poorly, like any tool, some use it to great effect. Its a powerful tool which was given free (editors) with the later editions of our precious DVX's. Because of this we, as DVX users, often recognize "looks" right away. While our fragile artist egos might hurt from the sight of a lesser film than our own using a similar effect, that is not what 99.9% of the viewing audience sees. If a MB look (preset or otherwise) is perfect for your film, than more power to it and you. If you just like throwing presets over your crappily shot footage because you "think it makes it look more professional"- then you are doing nothing more than just having fun, are not actually creating *art, and more power to you- nothing wrong with that.

I personally like that a drag and drop CC is widely available like MB. The fact that this question is being asked goes to show that small indie flick makers like myself are questioning their own CC with a much more critical eye. i.e instead of looking for a "Matrix" or "Three Kings" Look, the MB wary look to make their CC their own.

*I realize some may take offence at me saying someone isn't creating art, therfor I offer my personal definition, so you might better understand my above position.

Art- CAREFULLY CONSIDERED and WELL THOUGHT OUT work, created through any medium by a sentient being seeking to illlumlinate a thought, idea, emotion or feeling.

If using MB is simply part of your process, than it is a tool. If you use magic bullet so you don't have to think through the CC process, or to fix lazily shot footage, than it could be considered an artistic crutch, but my guess is the film would have sucked anyways.

 

[Luis Caffesse]

If using MB is simply part of your process, than it is a tool. If you use magic bullet so you don't have to think through the CC process, or to fix lazily shot footage, than it could be considered an artistic crutch, but my guess is the film would have sucked anyways.

Amen!

 

[Filmjunkie677]

If using MB is simply part of your process, than it is a tool. If you use magic bullet so you don't have to think through the CC process, or to fix lazily shot footage, than it could be considered an artistic crutch, but my guess is the film would have sucked anyways.

Amen again!:beer:

 

[Neil Rowe]

..magic bullet is nice to the extent that it can correct "some" poorly shot footage to look a little better with the click of a button or two. it can also be used to really tweak some nicely shot stuffs to pro looking levels.

as with anything else. it all comes down to the actual person using it. i believe that for many.. yes it is a styalistic crutch.. backed by the belief that it really is a "magic bullet" that can make any flavor of dung you fling at it look like oscar winning cinematography. however aside from the variety of presets it offers the perhaps CC challenged or those wanting to get a rough idea of what is to later be their finalized and polished look, it also offers comprehensive tools for the seasoned vet that can make your footage sing.

as far as alot of things looking the same.. i dont think thats going to change anytime soon. unfortunately theres alot of people whos idea of being "creative" is to "creatively" trace the path of an artist or artists they like or idolize. to some extent one could say that it is impossible to work outside of the realm of what you know.. so everything we do would have to have been learned or partially learned from somewhere else. but of course we are always faced with acknowledging and standing reverend to the works that truely have been "created" with originality in form or function. the hope would be that filmmakers ..as artists ..would learn to look beyond what they have seen or heard before, and look ahead far enough to find a place to take us all on a journey which we have never been on before. and of course in doing so .. have us enjoy the experience.

 

[disjecta]

I agree fully with Neil. Magic Bullet can make you really lazy by getting caught up in the instant gratuity of an immediate "pro" look. What should be important is to get the best footage possible from the camera and adding subtle effects so that the "look" is not so much in your face.

If you want your footage to look like 1000 other videographers, then go ahead and saturate it with the MB look but if you are looking to be a cinematographer with your own vision, then spend time learning your craft, not months fiddling with buttons to make mediocre footage look more professional.

 

[Blaine]

Is 24P a tool or a crutch? We want it to look like film but we can't afford to shoot on film so does that mean we're just putting out a lot of video like so many others, not art? I don't think anyone here really really believes THAT. It's the same with MB. It's a tool and as a tool is neither good nor bad in and of itself. It's in the using...any tool can be bad if used improperly. Of course, with art, it's all subjective. One man's are is another man's crap. MB isn't the only filter package out there, but since it came free with the camera, it's going to be the first choice for many DVX users. Myself, I just couldn't deal with some of the render time issues. I've since bought the Nattress filters. They both have their advantages and both get used along with traditional CC methodS to create a whole feel and look. Hopefully, different and interesting.

 

[Luis Caffesse]

I agree fully with Neil. Magic Bullet can make you really lazy by getting caught up in the instant gratuity of an immediate "pro" look.

ANY piece of technology can make the user lazy.
But that doesn't make the tool less useful.

This reminds me of someone recently saying that they didn't like the idea of a tapeless workflow because they felt their editor wouldn't take the time to get to know the footage, the way you are forced to when you have to digitize it all in realtime off tapes. My suggestion was to find a new editor as opposed to worrying about the workflow. Any editor worth his salt would be well versed in the footage before making a cut. By the same token, any colorist worth their salt would know what he's doing before using MB in his/her workflow.

Learning your craft should be a given.
We should blame the user for laziness, not the tool.

Just because something CAN be a stylistic crutch doesn't necessarily make it categorically so.
A hammer can be a weapon, it can also be useful when hanging pictures on the wall.
All in all I think this is a rather silly poll.

 

[Luis Caffesse]

If MB helps to make their shots look better, then use it.

I couldn't agree more.

The next Spielberg isn't hanging out on these forums, but "that guy down the street who shoots nice stuff" does.

At one point Speilberg was "that guy down the street who shoots nice stuff"
I wouldn't assume anything about the future of anyone on here.
:thumbsup:

 

[J.R. Hudson]

Is 24P a tool or a crutch?

:huh:

Anyways....

From what I have seen MB is a crutch. Too many people slap MB on the product and say 'Check out my CC!'. I love the processes in Vegas for grading and color correction and rarely use MB sans a few for minor tweaks (and even then it's a maybe).

We want it to be a tool but it takes no real skill to use it; just CLICK and Viola! Instant Color Correction that usually looks like crap anyway. The real skill comes in maniplulating the PRSTS and tweaking into customage. UNfortunately 95 % using it don't do it.

The majority of PRSTS and LOOKS in MB are so 'Typical' I can't see how people use them; but they do.

At one point Speilberg was "that guy down the street who shoots nice stuff"
I wouldn't assume anything about the future of anyone on here.

:beer: :beer: :beer:

 

[MrBirdBoy]

Crutches are for the weak & tools are used by the strong...

Like Disjects said & I totally agree ... If your footage is average and you filter it in AE or something, what do you have ? Same footage filtered. But if you learn your craft and along the way developed a style then you are getting somewhere. I've read posts where guys will blast "Blown out Highlights" or "Not White balanced" Dare I say you have just described my style to the T ? Oh, and don't forget jerky camera movement & too much headroom. My eye is different that must everyone in Detroit & that's why I get called, I don't have a big problem with getting booked.

... But you must have a style in the first place ... Something to set you apart. “Hey Let’s call Steve for this, he’d be perfect” not “I think he has Magic Bullet or 55mm or a DVX or …

You don't get hired because you have a computer & a filter. Everyone does.

Learn your craft ...

Steve

 

[Luis Caffesse]

We want it to be a tool but it takes no real skill to use it; just CLICK and Viola! Instant Color Correction that usually looks like crap anyway. The real skill comes in maniplulating the PRSTS and tweaking into customage. UNfortunately 95 % using it don't do it.

Then I think we're saying the same thing John.
You say 'it takes no real skill to use it' but then go on to say 'the real skill comes in manipulation of the PRSTS"

So which is it?

I agree, it CAN be a crutch...but like anything else if properly used it is just one of the many tools in the toolbox.

FCP has "automatic" color correction tools included in it's 3 way color corrector.
Yet I don't think anyone would call the 3 way color corrector in FCP a 'crutch.'

I'm with you...the presets are a crutch.
The program itself is as useful as any other 3rd party plugin.
Any tool can be a crutch is the person using it relies on it to make up for talent.

 

[Iain]

Actually, I think you'd find it pretty much impossible to find any film that hasn't been color corrected, so calling Magic Bullet a "novelty application" is unfortunate.

Perhaps you should look deeper into what it actually can do before putting down people who use it to define their shots rather than saying they "try to pass it off as cinematography".

You're missing the point entirely. I'm not putting down people who use it to define their shots. The hypothesis I'm suggesting is that using a MB filter on your footage shouldn't pass for color correction.

There are plenty of talented individuals out there whose job it is to sit in front of a computer for two or three hours and do "by hand" what it takes Magic Bullet two or three minutes to do with the click of a button.

The difference is a trained color timer can use his or her knowledge of color and contrast to skillfully extract the maximum potential of an image. Magic Bullet on the other hand, allows you to slap on filters like "Matrix" or "Berlin" in order to achieve quick and easy looks that emulate the styles of recent popular movies.

I think it's more insulting to the professional color timers out there to call using an MB filter "color correction" than it is to suggest that some casual videographers might be using it as a crutch.

 

[saturnin]

i'm using MB on my extrme sport film, and its amazing... mind u the footage is great to begin with..lol

 

[Curugon]

Is 24P a tool or a crutch?

That's a terrible comparison. CC is a technique, even an art form. Frame rate is a technical choice. That's like saying film stock is a crutch.

Anyway I'm with Disjecta & Hudson - my main beef with MB is that it encourages users not to investigate WHY certain filters do what they do. There are mathmatical and physical reasons why blacks can be crushed, diffusion added, color temp balanced. The more someone knows about these things, the more unique and amazing looks they will come up with.

When does a filter stop becoming a crutch? I think it depends on the level of control it gives you over the raw image data. In my own opinion, MB offers very little comparatively.

edit: Nicely put, Iain!

 

[Luis Caffesse]

using a MB filter on your footage shouldn't pass for color correction.

ABSOLUTELY!
:thumbsup:

I think it's more insulting to the professional color timers out there to call using an MB filter "color correction" than it is to suggest that some casual videographers might be using it as a crutch.

I agree.
Though I don't think that calling it a 'useful tool' is insulting to anyone.

 

[oneinfiniteloop]

It was and is intended for the casual/hobby/wedding/sports/grandma type shooters

MB was developed for these types, but it was also developed for professionals. I don't understand why everyone is getting all worked up. There are individual controls available in the plug in...it's not just presets. I for one, hardly use the presets. I will pull them up and study what parameters were changed to get the desired look, but that was only for me to understand how they affected an image. There is probably a million different combinations you can get from that plug in, just don't use presets.

Also, if you guys haven't read the manual (which is a great source of info) the program was written by Stu Maschwitz and others at the Orphanage. The reason they wrote it was because for their own indy films they wanted their Sony VX1000 to be more "filmlike". So they developed MB in house, then all the local effects houses wanted it for video footage they had. So, really it was born from pro's and the popularity was brought on by the pros. I don't think it's fair to call it an amatuer program. Maybe compared to a Digital Lustre or a daVinci, yes, but that's apples and oranges.

*note: I primarly use the suite for After Effects, so I don't know if the Editors manual contains the same info that my version does.

 

[surf]

If you wanna a good work, you need to do it yourself!