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 :)

Can The Scarlet make footage look like film?

V

Victor P

Member
Joined
Sep 18, 2022
Messages
16
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Hi ,
I really need some feedback …..am quite new to this and my main objective is to shoot footage and make it look like hi level film footage. I keep on color grading to the best of my knowledge using the IPP2 log3g10 space , but some how my footage keeps on looking more like video than film. Is the Scarlet X capable of reproducing a film look and I am not doing something correct ? Maybe my lens? (using a photography 50 mm cannon , not a cine lens ) or maybe I have to invest in a better camera ? I’ve seen incredible results of people using the black magic or the Sony a7iii … please help me understand …thank you !
 
There isn’t a simple answer to this question, except that yes, you can create almost any look with a Scarlet.

There is no one “film” look, so you’re going to have to make your question more specific (what film? What filmed material?) and then practice and experiment with lighting, lens choice, filters, grading, etc. Watch some “behind the scenes” videos, read American Cinematographer, read the thousands of posts on this site where people have already answered questions on specific aspects of film look.
 
You've got to work with it and lighting really plays into it. My first feature was mostly on a RED One MX and we had some nice practical location lighting and well managed VFX lighting for green/blue screen work so the film look came through very well and we've furthered that with post production lighting adjustments. The look doesn't come from just turning the camera on, the RED One MX has been used on various different kinds of movies and projects, including a Japanese parody series of "The Power Rangers" that looked amazing and very much like the old school "Power Rangers" show which is very far from the look of "The Social Network" or "Girl With The Dragon Tattoo" or "The Muppets". The Scarlet MX is in the same boat but smaller frame and it won't make a difference whether you use it or newer cameras like Blackmagic cameras or the Sony A7III as, once again, we used those on the feature to get pickups and VFX plates to match the RED One MX, the Pocket 4K and external 4K from the original Sony A7S, and it thankfully all blends just nicely. Lighting and choreography are constant subjects of study so just keep researching and you'll get to the point that you can make any camera look good!
 
This is the right Question – no one digital camera has a "Movie Soul" in image as default .
This gives the picture a "video look" due to a certain technology.
The film has chemical magic, the CCD has electronic magic...
The result is different....

Try using the Dehancer OFX plugin to get an image from Scarlett that looks like a warm grain film.
 
Thank you so much everybody ! ….. I think my problem is not the color or tone , I think I can get there I think that my problem is when I look at different footage even in log space it already has a film quality to it it’s hard to explain but I see like it has a certain softness and coating , a certain organic feel which I not getting with the Scarlet …I wonder if maybe they are using ND filters , I never use them .
 
Perhaps.. Try using diffusion filters like Schneider's "Hollywood Black Magic" or Tiffen's "Black Pro Mist". It helps a lot in giving the image a softer, blooming effects just like film does.
 
Zack Birlew said:
You've got to work with it and lighting really plays into it. My first feature was mostly on a RED One MX and we had some nice practical location lighting and well managed VFX lighting for green/blue screen work so the film look came through very well and we've furthered that with post production lighting adjustments. The look doesn't come from just turning the camera on, the RED One MX has been used on various different kinds of movies and projects, including a Japanese parody series of "The Power Rangers" that looked amazing and very much like the old school "Power Rangers" show which is very far from the look of "The Social Network" or "Girl With The Dragon Tattoo" or "The Muppets". The Scarlet MX is in the same boat but smaller frame and it won't make a difference whether you use it or newer cameras like Blackmagic cameras or the Sony A7III as, once again, we used those on the feature to get pickups and VFX plates to match the RED One MX, the Pocket 4K and external 4K from the original Sony A7S, and it thankfully all blends just nicely. Lighting and choreography are constant subjects of study so just keep researching and you'll get to the point that you can make any camera look good!
Click to expand...


So the raw image quality should be identical to that of the RED ONE and EPIC X , since all three are using the same Mysterium sensor correct ? I understand these two other cameras have different recording speed capabilities and resolutions but image wise at the same resolution they are the same ?
 
From what I understand, yes, it should be similar, however, I have heard that some think the One MX looks better in some aspects but the features and capabilities of each are really the only things I would see as factors these days. I bought my RED One MX because of the bang for your buck on the deal my brother and I found but had there been a similar deal for an Epic MX or Dragon, I would have jumped at that but even now the used prices are still pretty inflated despite the modern competition. The Scarlet has the crop factor to consider but if that doesn't bother you then for all intents and purposes it should be about the same image unless you need lower compression or frame rates from the other MX models.
 
Victor P said:
Awesome , thanks for the insight ! … What do you think of this one ?

https://www.kentfaith.com/KF01.1815_...-nano-x-series
Click to expand...

Seems like a good optic with reasonable price but I don't know about the look it creates, need further research.. And the downside of a 2 in 1 combo filter is we can't remove the ND (or the diffusion) when we don't need them.

Tiffen have a lot of options of diffusion filter with different strengths and effect (like Pearlescent, Glimmerglass, Satin, Black net, etc.) as seen here: https://vimeo.com/tiffencompany/4kdiffusiontest

My all time favorite is the Schneider's HBM :)
 
Victor P said:
even in log space it already has a film quality to it it’s hard to explain but I see like it has a certain softness and coating , a certain organic feel which I not getting with the Scarlet
Click to expand...

One other tip I'd recommend: when you experiment with any of these suggestions, start by recording at the lowest compression ratio you can. I find that images with greater compression ratios can start to feel harder/sharper and therefore less "organic." If you usually shoot at 12:1, see if you see a difference at 5:1.

If you like a softer image, and perhaps also a lower contrast image, Audy Erel's suggestion to try one of the many diffusion filters is a good one. The other big consideration is lenses-- try shooting with lenses that are lower contrast and/or softer. If you want to buy (or stick with still lenses), there are a lot of fans of Leica R and Contax and Canon FD lenses here, but those have gotten pricey as a result. (The Contax 28-85 and 35-70 zooms are reasonably priced, though, and will give you a good sense of the look.) And you can still get great deals on manual focus Nikon AIS, Helios, and lots of others that have different blends of characteristics that many consider "cinematic."
 
Victor P said:
wonder if maybe they are using ND filters.
Click to expand...

Wanted to respond to this, too.

ND filters shouldn't directly affect the "look" of the image. However, bad ND filters can add softness and/or a color cast. But they're not generally the way people try to achieve the optical quality you're looking for.

However, they do play a part in creating the film look, because they are mostly used to let you achieve correct exposure at a given shutter speed, classically 1/48 second (also known as 180 degree shutter when shooting 24 fps). If you're making your shutter speed faster to get proper exposure in bright light, then this can also be a reason your footage looks too sharp or more video-like. And in that case, ND filters are a good tool to use to achieve a film look.
 
Thank you ! , yes I always shoot at 180 with 24 fps but I’m glad experienced users like yourself emphasize and remind me of this.

Here is an example of what I like … I specially picked this video because it is NOT a big elaborate shoot by someone that spent days grading etc. just some cool guy taking his RED ONE. for a spin….. IF YOU LOOK FROM 0:36 on you will see his footage is very organic it has a very nice contrast roll off very smooth almost like it’s coated with something , kind of printed on FILM celluloid ….. that is what I am after.


ps… and off course I am not saying that the simple fact that this person took this casual footage doesn’t mean he doesn’t know what he is doing , it’s clear to me he does but what I am saying is that this is not an elaborate Hollywood or RED DIGITAL production where you know they have the best colorists 30 K lenses and gazillion years of combined knowledge.


See from 0:36 on specially the nature shots and that green plant quarter spin.
 
Last edited:
I guess the shots from 36s to 1m30 were shot on an old Canon 50mm f/1.2 after seing the lenses he used. It looks similar than my Minolta Rokkor 58mm f/1.2. You should try to find some old SLR lenses that may not be optically perfect but have some kind of organic look even without filters
 
Shot this, two cameras. Half on helium half on scarlet With a little help by postprocessing it can look more film then film lol.

Nothing fancy in terms of post, shot about 30 of these in a day and edit graded and processed and uploaded the edits while shooting the next so all the IWC influencers got liks to their own little NY film festival vinjettes before they even left the stage.


 
Victor P said:
Thank you ! , yes I always shoot at 180 with 24 fps but I’m glad experienced users like yourself emphasize and remind me of this.

Here is an example of what I like … I specially picked this video because it is NOT a big elaborate shoot by someone that spent days grading etc. just some cool guy taking his RED ONE. for a spin….. IF YOU LOOK FROM 0:36 on you will see his footage is very organic it has a very nice contrast roll off very smooth almost like it’s coated with something , kind of printed on FILM celluloid ….. that is what I am after.


ps… and off course I am not saying that the simple fact that this person took this casual footage doesn’t mean he doesn’t know what he is doing , it’s clear to me he does but what I am saying is that this is not an elaborate Hollywood or RED DIGITAL production where you know they have the best colorists 30 K lenses and gazillion years of combined knowledge.


See from 0:36 on specially the nature shots and that green plant quarter spin.
Click to expand...

Looks like he used a helios 58 and also got some ND contamination going.
 
Victor P said:
Here is an example of what I like … I specially picked this video because it is NOT a big elaborate shoot by someone that spent days grading etc. just some cool guy taking his RED ONE. for a spin….. IF YOU LOOK FROM 0:36 on you will see his footage is very organic it has a very nice contrast roll off very smooth almost like it’s coated with something , kind of printed on FILM celluloid ….. that is what I am after.
Click to expand...

As you can see, Victor, a number of us think the effect here is from a vintage lens, most likely a still photo lens. So that you can start to identify for yourself the characteristics you like, I'll spell this out: we're noticing the overall contrast (relatively low) and sharpness (not very sharp) as well as the quality of the bokeh (the appearance of the out of focus areas. Some would call this "dreamy").

The filters already mentioned can also give you some of these characteristics, but the bokeh in particular is coming from the lens.

And while they didn't necessarily do much with "the best colorists" in post, they did probably choose softer contrast and roll-off options.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top