The 80s - Jump in Quality or Jump in Production?

[JeganRX]

I'm going to guess that I'm probably too young to really know much about many film stocks, especially older ones, but it was always my perception at least, that film stocks made a massive jump in quality in the 1980s. Either that, or production styles, budgets, etc, took a turn; I realize that the blockbuster style had started with Jaws, Star Wars, etc, in the late 70s, and presumably led to higher budgets, but I can't help but notice this significant leap in quality over just a decade.

Surely some of it is technical? Of minor note, I kind of find it sad that it's the last decade where the majority of films would have been purely cut on their negative, rather than going through poor scanning processes for immature CGI production in the early-mid 90s. Not to say the 90s didn't have old fashioned techniques, but I've seen plenty of stuff that is either: A) soft, B) clipped in the highlights (poor transfer I'm guessing, as this is often times in areas of older CGI), or C) quite grainier than you'd expect.

 

[Batutta]

In the 80's-90's film stocks with higher and higher ASA's, wider dynamic range and finer grain structures were developed which led to the steady increase in quality. That said there was some amazing work done in the past. Lawrence of Arabia in 70mm is a glory to behold. With better transfer technology we're starting to see better representations of these movies on video. I recently watched Goldfinger and From Russia With Love on blu-ray and they are amazingly sharp and detailed. An older cinematographer recently said 'back in the day you really had to work hard to get a decent image on film, nowadays any moron could do it'.

 

[Sad Max]

Right about the time I started undergrad school Kodak released the 7-series and 5-series (16mm and 35mm) fast color negative film stocks. They sure looked like a big advance, at the time.

 

[Scott F]

I'm going to guess that I'm probably too young to really know much about many film stocks, especially older ones, but it was always my perception at least, that film stocks made a massive jump in quality in the 1980s. Either that, or production styles, budgets, etc, took a turn;

This is slightly off-topic and I can't speak on any of the technicalities of film stock...but I often keep VH1 classic on in the background when I work.

In retrospect, a great portion of narrative/concept music vids from the 80's just look fantastic. I'm talking all genres: New Wave, Heavy Metal, Pop. I think the budgets were sky-high and the level of production talent was apparent. Now sometimes the concepts & editing were turds, but "the look" was amazing.

So I'll attribute the 80's look to great film stock, lighting and camerawork.

 

[Gary Huff]

I think the 60s had some awesome quality work going on, but the 70s has this weird "soft" type feeling to a lot of its looks. Colors are also muted. I chalk it up to the style of the time.

 

[Sad Max]

The available optics probably had something to do with it, too. From the 70s to the 80s there were new coatings, new formulas for optical glasses, etc, etc...

 

[Everts]

....... nowadays any moron could do it'.

enter dvxuser.com:dankk2:

 

[Sad Max]

*rimshot*

 

[David G. Smith]

I believe that the 1970's were a watershed decade for cinematography. The perceived differences between movies from the 70's and movie's from the '80's is partly due to changes in technology, especially film stocks and lenses, and changes in styles. There may be a preconceived idea of the quintessential '70's film as the gritty drama characterized by "The French Connection", "Five Easy Pieces", "One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest", "The Last Detail", ect., and in the in the '80's, post Spielberg and Lucas, there was a trend more towards a higher gloss filmmaking, the block buster look. Now, I believe that the "Gritty" '70's look was an aesthetic choice to bring a documentary style, pioneered by Cinema Verite in the '60's, to narrative filmmaking. There was a lot of diversity of looks, and some great cinematography done during the '70's also. I suggest checking out such great '70's films as "Bound for Glory", "Barry Lyndon", "Days of Heaven", "The Godfather", "The Godfather Part II", "Apocalypse Now", "The Conformist", "Deliverance" and "The Day of the Locust" among others from the '70's. I think these films, and many others, can stand up with the best films shot at anytime.

 

[Batutta]

I believe that the 1970's were a watershed decade for cinematography. The perceived differences between movies from the 70's and movie's from the '80's is partly due to changes in technology, especially film stocks and lenses, and changes in styles. There may be a preconceived idea of the quintessential '70's film as the gritty drama characterized by "The French Connection", "Five Easy Pieces", "One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest", "The Last Detail", ect., and in the in the '80's, post Spielberg and Lucas, there was a trend more towards a higher gloss filmmaking, the block buster look. Now, I believe that the "Gritty" '70's look was an aesthetic choice to bring a documentary style, pioneered by Cinema Verite in the '60's, to narrative filmmaking. There was a lot of diversity of looks, and some great cinematography done during the '70's also. I suggest checking out such great '70's films as "Bound for Glory", "Barry Lyndon", "Days of Heaven", "The Godfather", "The Godfather Part II", "Apocalypse Now", "The Conformist", "Deliverance" and "The Day of the Locust" among others from the '70's. I think these films, and many others, can stand up with the best films shot at anytime.

Of that list I think Apocalypse Now is the only one that looks like it could've been shot today, and maybe Days of Heaven. Not to diminish the others as they are great looking films, I'm mainly talking about style.

 

[Sad Max]

I still find that The Conformist feels startlingly modern, whenever I see it...

 

[Batutta]

I still find that The Conformist feels startlingly modern, whenever I see it...

Didn't see that one...but they were both shot by the same Cinematographer so that might explain it.

 

[David G. Smith]

Didn't see that one...but they were both shot by the same Cinematographer so that might explain it.

Vittorio Storaro rocks. Apocalypse Now is my favorite flick of all time, and when they did the theatrical release for Apocalypse Now Redux, I was fortunate to see a dye transfer print of it (a couple of times actually). Wow, what a great visual experience.

 

[Batutta]

Vittorio Storaro rocks. Apocalypse Now is my favorite flick of all time, and when they did the theatrical release for Apocalypse Now Redux, I was fortunate to see a dye transfer print of it (a couple of times actually). Wow, what a great visual experience.

Seeing Apocalypse in 70mm at the Cinerama Dome in LA was one of the greatest moviegoing experinces of my life. Actually several of them took place at the dome.

 

[Sad Max]

A friend's sister dropped acid right before going to see the Redux at the Cinerama Dome.

Big mistake.