GH2 What if I WANT it to look digital?

P

Pop Mechanic

New member
I'm dealing with an interesting challenge in an upcoming shoot. What techniques would you use to produce a GH2 image that looks intentionally digital and lifeless, like a bad 90s soap opera or porn shoot?
 
That's funny. What's the short film about?

Anyway, I'm not sure, but I'd try oversharpening the footage in post and maybe adding some noise. Then make sure to blow out all your highlights in an ugly way (either on set or in post). I'm sure there's more that could be done, and I'd test everything first, of course. But I really am curious to know why the script calls for this!
 
Matching low quality 90's doesn't mean looking digital, but rather looking like analogue tape acquisition.

Make sure highlights are harsh
Raise the black levels to a dark grey
Add post sharpening
Add a bit of post blur to lower resolution
Add interlacing
 
Getting the digital look on the GH2 is easy. Shoot in interlaced FSH 1080i60 video mode using Vibrant Film Mode at +2, +2, +2, +2. If you want it to look a bit fluorescent, adjust the white balance to G+2 and B+2. Shoot at 1/125 shutter speed and be sure to blow out the highlights. In post, I'd use After Effects to bake in the interlaced combing artifacts and add some unsharp masking to give the edges a nice halo.
 
The term the video look is an insult,the film look is all you hear ! i would rather watch good video than poor film and if they are both good quite frankly couldn,t give a damn.
 
flinty said:
The term the video look is an insult,the film look is all you hear ! i would rather watch good video than poor film and if they are both good quite frankly couldn,t give a damn.
Click to expand...

Well story and acting rule the day of course, but I'd still prefer it look aesthetically pleasing than like crap. We are programmed from birth to associate a certain look with "film" and "quality" and another look with "cheap" and "soap opera". That's not going to be undone in my lifetime.
 
i dont think the OP is looking for advice as to whether or not to make the footage look like cheap video. if thats what the piece calls for, then it IS the best idea.

the easiest answer is: shoot 60i
 
wgzn said:
i dont think the OP is looking for advice as to whether or not to make the footage look like cheap video. if thats what the piece calls for, then it IS the best idea.

the easiest answer is: shoot 60i
Click to expand...

I agree. Light it like crap so it looks really flat (one big diffused source) and shoot 60i.
 
all the suggestions are good. Faster frame rate, change the coloring a bit in post. Blow out your highlights (can be done in post too).
Camera movements too will be key to your feeling. really bad transitions between shots too :P
 
These are excellent recommendations. As for avoiding de-interlacing, is there any way to do that with Final Cut X? I don't have an AE license at the moment.
 
gonzo_entertainment said:
Well story and acting rule the day of course, but I'd still prefer it look aesthetically pleasing than like crap. We are programmed from birth to associate a certain look with "film" and "quality" and another look with "cheap" and "soap opera". That's not going to be undone in my lifetime.
Click to expand...

well you talk crap and if you like the super suntan look that film gives fine,and for your information tv programns soaps etc made with digital cameras here in the uk look simply great far better than the grainy poo when they were made with film.

[h=3]GH2 Being Talent & Tech with the GH - Digital Film Making Finally Beats Chemical Film[/h]Started by Blackout, said it all and never being a great celluloid lover i go farther but each to their own.When i look at mine and other super 8 rubbish much that is so called transfered to hd it makes me glad i changed to video many moons ago.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top