Milky Picture in Hobbit - Battle of the Five Armies

[Dermot]

As for the regrade in my very first post, it is too blue. I did it when my laptop's screen was in the warm setting that I prefer. So, sorry about that. Even so, the contrast there looks better to me. And I'll leave it there just because some people have already replied about it.

i would take this as a lesson about making sure sure and sure again that the screen you are working on is accurate…. i am also betting that the contrast settings on your lappie are also suspect and therefore you are adding contrast beyond reasonable salt and pepper to taste...

The standard illumination for 3-D is 7.5 Footcandles per projector... for 2-D it's 14 these days. I've read that in the past, 16 was the standard...

- Yes 16Fl was the standard, and still is, but no one has a projector running that hot anywhere but a lab, so the smart money is on 11-12Fl in a real theatre, and adjust your CDM on the display device to suit.. this is one area the Dolby 4200 excels at
- As to the 7.5Fl on a stereo show, you must take into account the effect of the pola glasses, what hits your eyes is about 50% of 7.5, or under 4Fl… and that is why some low and mids are lifted as far as possible..

I find raising the blacks slightly and crushing the mids will accomplish a more filmic look than an S-curve.

Once the log image is in gamma corrected linear be it 2.2, 2.4 or 2.6 i also will open up the shadows and highlights as much as possible and add contrast in the mids, i also find this a to be a good starting point, my clients don't know what i am doing for the most part, but they do like what they see on the screen. Adding a S curve on gamma corrected images is not something i would do with out a reason and even then with care not to crush and clip the image details.. but somedays there is a reason to do so, recent trailer for a horror film i did for example… but that's the exception not the rule...



The first still does look like it could be originally meant to be a stereo source, graded to be screened at 4Fl and 2.6 gamma? Maybe try dropping your bightness slider on your laptop screen to simulate 4Fl (on my MBP's retina screen setting the brightness slider to the second step from the bottom is closest to a P3 setting on a Dolby monitor) and then look at it in a dark room, and see what you think of it then?

 

[Batutta]

This is not directly about the latest Hobbit instalment, but I saw Paul Thomas Anderson's "Inherent Vice" projected in 70mm film format this week, and I have to say that the 70mm film format looked soft and grainy compared to all the digital films I've watched over the past 5 years.

Just listened to PTA on a podcast. The film was not shot in 70mm, it was a blow up from 35mm, and was deliberately made to look like a soft, grainy film from the 70's. They even used older, period lenses.

 

[TheDingo]

Just listened to PTA on a podcast. The film was not shot in 70mm, it was a blow up from 35mm, and was deliberately made to look like a soft, grainy film from the 70's. They even used older, period lenses.

I'm sure that some people will think that this was a cool step back into retro film-making, but I hated it. I honestly thought there was something wrong with the copy they were showing, especially the super-grainy night scene footage.

 

[Batutta]

I'm sure that some people will think that this was a cool step back into retro film-making, but I hated it. I honestly thought there was something wrong with the copy they were showing, especially the super-grainy night scene footage.

That's fine, I'm just pointing out it's not at all representative of what the 70mm format is capable of.

 

[TheDingo]

That's fine, I'm just pointing out it's not at all representative of what the 70mm format is capable of.

Yes, I've seen the 70mm version of 2001: A Space Odyssey which was outstanding.

...What bothered me most about "Inherent Vice" was that it was advertised in Toronto as a 70mm film, so I was expecting to see something visually flawless.