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 :)

10000 B.c.

L

liquidigital

Banned
Joined
Apr 7, 2007
Messages
259
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Saw this tonight. I noticed there were a ton of shots (you'll know when you see them) that looked obscenely pushed in post, ridiculously noisy. First thing I did when I got home was look up the tech specs because I immediately thought this had to be a hi-def cam with the gain pushed all the way up. IMDB says 35mm, so I'm under the assumption these shots/scenes were grossly under-exposed. I'm interested to hear everyone's thoughts when they see this. Have a great weekend all.
 
i haven't seen the film .. the live action was 35mm ...
with so many special effects in a movie like this - i doubt if all fx's were shot on 35mm .. some background plates , elements could be shot on HD/still film/dv/hvx or even a HV20 ( for certain elements)

the DP Uli Steiger lives in LA ... perhaps he'll be speaking about it at a upcoming special screening ? ( sponsored by ASC , camera union ??) ... i know last year he spoke at a event cinegear sponsored .... Uli is very approachable
 
You could have also seen a bad print.
 
I noticed the same thing. Some of the night scenes were full of grain, or noise. Most of the movie looks fine, but there are certain shots that were pretty bad. Even within a single scene there were big inconsistencies in the amount of grain or noise from shot to shot.
 
Most of this was shot on Uli Steiger's personal Moviecams, with a major portion shot in the Southern part of the South Island. I don't recall which glass he used.
 
liquidigital said:
Saw this tonight. I noticed there were a ton of shots (you'll know when you see them) that looked obscenely pushed in post, ridiculously noisy. First thing I did when I got home was look up the tech specs because I immediately thought this had to be a hi-def cam with the gain pushed all the way up. IMDB says 35mm, so I'm under the assumption these shots/scenes were grossly under-exposed. I'm interested to hear everyone's thoughts when they see this. Have a great weekend all.
Click to expand...

agreed, but it looked like digital noise...streaky and blue it was very noticable, even to an untrained eye.
 
  • Thread starter
  • Banned
  • #9
ChrisBurket said:
You could have also seen a bad print.
Click to expand...

You guys are going to laugh, but I actually saw it twice at two different theaters. My brother and I really wanted to see it, so we went to an earlier showing unbeknownst to the rest of our family. We figured we would just see the movie twice. What we didn't figure was that it would be as bad as it was. So that's what we get I guess. Had to sit through it again. lol

Both prints had the same noise.
 
Adrian Correia said:
agreed, but it looked like digital noise...streaky and blue it was very noticable, even to an untrained eye.
Click to expand...

Could be noise from a bad DI. Bad scanner? Bad recorder? A bad LUT or cube in the DI suite? A DI colorist who doesn't know what they are doing?
 
I want to see it just to see what you're talking about.
 
lordtangent said:
Could be noise from a bad DI. Bad scanner? Bad recorder? A bad LUT or cube in the DI suite? A DI colorist who doesn't know what they are doing?
Click to expand...

I don't know LT, the noise was so bad and the blacks so far crushed that it looked like an error of some kind...I've never seen anything like it in a theater, especially for a project with such high production value.
 
actually, i seen the same grain too here in Calgary. It was probably underexposed shots that were pushed. Funny thing is that the grainy shots of one character would be cut with another character that was ok.
 
I ran this movie a couple times at work, when it was three hours long and that pushed shot was in there at that point also. Its when they break into the slaves chambers and try and talk them into a plan to fight back.

There are also some really crapy VFX in there that I was surprised to see for a big movie like that. Some of the effects shots you could tell were slowed down in post, which doesn't make any sense. But some of them look a bit choppy with the movement.
 
Of course that a grain is there.

It was shot on 35mm film.

"Did you shoot on film?
We did. We shot Super 35 and didn’t filter
anything so we’d get the best quality for the DI."

German cinematographer Ueli Steiger>>>
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top