Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Register Log in
  • Hey all, just changed over the backend after 15 years I figured time to give it a bit of an update, its probably gonna be a bit weird for most of you and i am sure there is a few bugs to work out but it should kinda work the same as before... hopefully :)

How to get "film look" on Epic for cinema?

I asked this same question 20+ years ago in a suite at the American Film Market to the President of DeLuxe Labs, Bud Stone. He said it was lighting.
 
Alexey Datsenko said:
Could you please advice how to get "film look" picture for shooting cinema.
I see "Pirates of Carribian 4". "Prometeus" and etc and I see a amazing "film look" picture but I have been trying to get with Epic and could not. I was try to make color correction in Redcine-X but it is don't look like "film look".
Could you please tell me how on movies shoot on Epic is getting such amazing "film look" picture?

1. Color correction in Da Vinci?
2. Magic Bullet?

Or maybe something else?

Thank you
Click to expand...

How to get "Superstar look" in real life for celebrity ?

1. Gucci ?
2. Ferrari ?

Or maybe expensive things ?

No sarcasm here.
YOU define your own cinema look. As soon as people go to cinema to watch your movie, you have that "film look".
 
Alexey Datsenko said:
Could you please advice how to get "film look" picture for shooting cinema.
I see "Pirates of Carribian 4". "Prometeus" and etc and I see a amazing "film look" picture but I have been trying to get with Epic and could not. I was try to make color correction in Redcine-X but it is don't look like "film look".
Could you please tell me how on movies shoot on Epic is getting such amazing "film look" picture?

1. Color correction in Da Vinci?
2. Magic Bullet?

Or maybe something else?

Thank you
Click to expand...

cameras arent magic boxes that make everyone a DP..

production design, lighting, makeup, costumes, props.. all these things go into making it have a "look"

but most importantly, since we are talking about the photography... its all about lighting..
 
Just a quick hint:

What I always do in Davinci Resolve is to put a film-out LUT on the first node.
My LUTs are generated with THX Cinespace and mimic a film print on Kodak stock.
I think you can get some free LUTs on http://www.lightillusion.com/
or here: http://www.arri.com/camera/digital_cameras/tools/lut_generator/lut_generator.html
The red footage is always decoded with REDlog film.

Like this you have a good starting point for grading as the process is similar as if you would work with scanned film in LOG space which will be printed on film.
Most feature films are made like this. Even when they are released on DCP the whole grading is set up with a LUT simulating a 35mm release print. For the DCP the look gets baked in.

Cheers
 
Here's something I did which to me gave it a bit of a "filmic" look, in my opinion. Dropped my saturation and boosted contrast, went into the luminance curve and after that played with the red channel. I started off in red log and white balanced off a grey card. Played a bit with the grain look on redcine as well. Started in redcolor3/redlogfilm.
 

Attachments

  • photo.jpg
    photo.jpg
    19.4 KB · Views: 0
The "film look" is often oversimplified. What makes something look cinematic, something that we attribute to those great movies we have seen over the years is a perfect storm of all departments working in perfect harmony to create indelible images that get imbedded deep into our psyche so that when we see something that doesn't quite have that same impact on us, we are well aware of it.
 
Steve Sherrick said:
The "film look" is often oversimplified. What makes something look cinematic, something that we attribute to those great movies we have seen over the years is a perfect storm of all departments working in perfect harmony to create indelible images that get imbedded deep into our psyche so that when we see something that doesn't quite have that same impact on us, we are well aware of it.
Click to expand...

Love this ^^
 
Steve Sherrick said:
The "film look" is often oversimplified. What makes something look cinematic, something that we attribute to those great movies we have seen over the years is a perfect storm of all departments working in perfect harmony to create indelible images that get imbedded deep into our psyche so that when we see something that doesn't quite have that same impact on us, we are well aware of it.
Click to expand...

WELL said.
 
Okay. If 'film look' means 'as opposed to interlaced video,' then the answer is easy and has been available for decades: frame rate. The lower the frame rate, the more the 'film look'.

Sure, there are lots of nuances. But mere particulars such as grain, contrast, DOF (heaven forbid that this cow is not sacred!), frame float, shutter angle, exposure, resolving power, lighting etc. have almost nothing to do with the film look as I've defined it above.

Keep in mind that film has subtle properties such as dynamic resolving power: the lower the contrast, the lower the resolving power (within limits). Just another reason why I love film, despite being more and more pro-digital for pragmatic reasons. Sigh.
 
Steve nailed it...

One of the best skills anyone can develop in life is self-diagnosis, stepping back from yourself (or your creation) and evaluating it for what it is. Many of the variables that go into the final image have been pointed out (lighting, lenses and lens speed, lighting, grading, lighting, production design, lighting, wardrobe, lighting...) and some have been over looked (camera movement, sound).

After learning what little I do know I kind of chuckle when someone asks this question because it marks a beginning of a sort of discovery. Films look so different from each other that I don't see how anyone can say that there is a singular 'film look'. Your variables are well defined on this and other forums and in many varied books on the subject, it's just how you arrange them to achieve what you have in your mind's eye that counts. Compare a still form "On Golden Pond" to a still from "Transformers" to a still from "Citizen Kane" and try to reconsile what the 'Film Look' is... The best part of the Red toolset is that we can create and experiment as much as our lives will allow, without the need of film labs and ultra deep pockets.

One last thing: On sound, your mind can play tricks on you. If you set up a shot that you have seen in a finished Hollywood movie, your impression has likely been tainted by the sonic experience. As one poster put it the stills may look identical, but you play both shots and the Hollywood finished product holds up while the off Hollywood falls apart. Without seeing the actual footage, I'd suspect sound. There is a reason why Hollywood replaces so much sound by way of ADR sessions. Something as simple as a door closing 'thud' being not quite right can spoil a scene.

Bob
 
I agree with everything everyone is saying, and I'd like to add FRAMING to the list (though I know it's been covered). More than anything, I think FRAMING is one of the FIRST THINGS that conveys a sense of CINEMA. You can be shooting DOGME style, with only available light, but as long as your shots are WELL COMPOSED, and are WELL THOUGHT OUT (so they cut together seamlessly)....then you have the organic beginnings of a very filmic "SYNTAX".

Without this syntax, this understanding of how the shots will tell a story from within, and how they will cut together later in edit, I think your sunk.

Whenever I see something that looks a bit "off", not quite there, I usually start here. I've seen WELL LIT and WELL ACTED work that was thrown off by the framing and "grammar".

But that's just me. We all approach these things differently.
 
Lin said:
Usually what people mean is: Contrasty, highlights tending towards warm, yellow tones. In SpeedGrade use a LUT layer and use the CineSpace2383sRGB6Bit.itx LUT - this usually gives you a good starting point and it's usually what people mean. Then use Opacity to fine tune and grade on top. Maybe another tutorial, Jon? (Great work on the other one!).

Cheers,
Lin
Click to expand...

This will definitely alter your file to resemble the same file output to film. It looks very filmlike, but not exactly the same as shooting color negative film in the first place. Using the opacity adjustment is probably a great way to play with this method. If you are outputting to film, you might want to de-activate this LUT from rendering your file for film output.

To apply the Cinespace LUT, you'll need to be working in LOG space, or you'll need to add a LOG conversion grade to use the Cinespace LUT.
 
Last edited:
I think I just dislike the term Film Like. I know what I mean by it so does the next man, but I don't know how he interprets it or which film stock or frame rate its running at or if its 35, 16, 65 or what.
 
Bruce Alan Greene said:
This will definitely alter your file to resemble the same file output to film. It looks very filmlike, but not exactly the same as shooting color negative film in the first place. Using the opacity adjustment is probably a great way to play with this method. If you are outputting to film, you might want to de-activate this LUT from rendering your file for film output.

To apply the Cinespace LUT, you'll need to be working in LOG space, or you'll need to add a LOG conversion grade to use the Cinespace LUT.
Click to expand...

You mean like REDlogFilm? CineSpace LUTs don't come with Speedgrade do they?
 
How do you have access to an Epic and not know the basics of what makes cinematography important? This is probably the most immature and naive question I have ever read. Shooting beautiful films take years and years and years of practice and experimentation. You can't go shoot a major motion picture just because you have an Epic. Learn about production design, special effects, makeup, lighting, grading, visual effects, all the necessary parts of cinema that come together to make a film look the way they do. It's not just a button click, and it's definitely not owning an Epic.
 
Patrick Lawler said:
How do you have access to an Epic and not know the basics of what makes cinematography important? This is probably the most immature and naive question I have ever read. Shooting beautiful films take years and years and years of practice and experimentation. You can't go shoot a major motion picture just because you have an Epic. Learn about production design, special effects, makeup, lighting, grading, visual effects, all the necessary parts of cinema that come together to make a film look the way they do. It's not just a button click, and it's definitely not owning an Epic.
Click to expand...


Great stuff has happened because talented people didn't know that what they did is actually impossible

Sometimes (but not often, I admit) lack of knowledge is what makes new stuff happen...

Cheers!

G
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top