Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

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 :)

Contagion shot on Epic - Poor Quality

Status
Not open for further replies.
Thor Melsted said:
Then I'm guessing you haven't seen the Hugo trailer yet. To me it looks an awful lot like Superman Returns with its artificial, ugly and muddy looking skin tones. I just think it's a very, very ugly looking trailer...
Click to expand...

Actually, the look of superman returns can partially be attributed to a great deal of post processing to fix entire damaged lines of the film due to sony rgb stripe sensor failure possibly due to gamma radiation exposure on a very early batch of sensors...
 
Stephen Pruitt said:
We loved the shooting and sets of COM, but the premise was just inane. How on earth did every human become sterile all at once? And no other animals were affected? And NO baby had been born in over 18 years? Not by artificial insemination? Not by accident? Not by anything? Where were all the scientists? The doctors? That was way too much for us to deal with in 2009. (Remember, the film was made in 2006.) Stephen
Click to expand...

Well, in 1980 if you told someone about the AIDS virus they would probably think that was inane, and COMPLETE AND UTTER SCIENCE FICTION.

Or if you told someone in 1970 that almost everyone would be walking around with a computer in your pocket that would let you connect to the world at large in an instant, they would say "YEAH, RIGHT!"

And... Regarding the doctors and scientists...
I could go on a huge rant now about how almost all average people are brainwashed into thinking contemporary healthcare actually does much other than run up huge bills, and create a new form of indentured servitude (no wonder corporate greed and their brainwashed lackeys despise the notion of Health Insurance Reform - how else are they supposed to keep the middle class in debt?) But - this has already strayed so far off topic its hilarious - I think I just had to say something because people's minds are so jammed by Marketing, Corporate Interest, Greed, and pure deception that its ridiculous!
 
Dan Kanes said:
Actually, the look of superman returns can partially be attributed to a great deal of post processing to fix entire damaged lines of the film due to sony rgb stripe sensor failure possibly due to gamma radiation exposure on a very early batch of sensors...
Click to expand...

Mostly it just had to do with the grading choices. A friend of mine worked on it and said everyone at the facility where he was working at the time were amazed by the color choices because the footage looked fine before grading.

But even if we were to assume the sensor stripe issue was 100% to blame for Superman Returns, what excuse do they have for the way Hugo looks? I think the colors are awful - but again, that's just my opinion.
 
Thor Melsted said:
Then I'm guessing you haven't seen the Hugo trailer yet. To me it looks an awful lot like Superman Returns with its artificial, ugly and muddy looking skin tones. I just think it's a very, very ugly looking trailer...
Click to expand...

I have seen it actually and although I am not a fan of the grade I prefer it color-wise to Contagion. The biggest surprise to me was how bad pirates 4 looked in the theatre. Dreadful color grade! Maybe the art of color grading is fading... I don't know.

What I do know is that my producer and other people I am working with, expressed their preference to the way Alexa imagery looks compared to the RED. I am defending my RED-MX as much as I can ofcourse, trying to explain that it's all in the way that the footage is handled later in post but it is getting a little tiring after a while.

I know that the RED can look spectacular because I have done it many times myself but sometimes it needs a lot of work to get there. The Alexa in comparison makes it look effortlessly simple to get a very film like footage just the way it's shot. I hate that! :)
 
I don't know, Dan. . . I've read a lot about history over the years, especially concerning the Spanish Influenza epidemic from 1917 to 1920. And so I have to say, AIDS didn't surprise me. Nor will the premise of "Contagion." I just hope they fix the colors.

:-)

Stephen
 
Miltos Pilalitos said:
I have seen it actually and although I am not a fan of the grade I prefer it color-wise to Contagion. The biggest surprise to me was how bad pirates 4 looked in the theatre. Dreadful color grade! Maybe the art of color grading is fading... I don't know.
Click to expand...

Interesting. I thought the grading of Pirates was extremely film like and looked fantastic. In fact, it was the only thing I enjoyed about that movie. But I guess that's why they call it taste... everybody's is different :)
 
Thor Melsted said:
Interesting. I thought the grading of Pirates was extremely film like and looked fantastic. In fact, it was the only thing I enjoyed about that movie. But I guess that's why they call it taste... everybody's is different :)
Click to expand...

I guess so...

I even saw it twice because the first time I thought the England scenes looked like shit because of the stereo projection but it looked the same in 2D.
 
Stephen Pruitt said:
Hey there, David. . .

We loved the shooting and sets of COM, but the premise was just inane. How on earth did every human become sterile all at once? And no other animals were affected? And NO baby had been born in over 18 years? Not by artificial insemination? Not by accident? Not by anything? Where were all the scientists? The doctors? That was way too much for us to deal with in 2009. (Remember, the film was made in 2006.) I could believe a slow, almost imperceptible, reduction in fertility over time, but never a sudden total elimination of fertility. We just both said, "huh?" And then, out of nowhere, a new child is born.

Now, I understand the symbolism of all this. (We are symbolic types here in the Pruitt home.) But we just couldn't buy it. Had it not been for the stupendous shooting, we'd have shut the film off and turned on something else. The sets and shooting kept us at it. But just barely.

We primarily just watch foreign films around here. For example, last night, we showed our best friends "The Man Without a Past." It's a fine little film with a wonderful message. But it certainly was poorly lit, although, given the monster motif running throughout the film, I think that was probably intentional.

Stephen
Click to expand...

LOL! Well, Stephen, I was totally on the wrong track here, I was thinking of Children of God, a very different film indeed! I actually have not seen Children of Men, so I'll take you at your word for on that.
 
Oh, my, David. . . sorry for the confusion. I have not seen "Children of God," but it's on my radar.

And I thought that I was the only REDhead that hadn't seen "Children of Men." You definitely need to see it just for the sets and shooting. It's an amazing achievement for sure. I just didn't like the story.

Stephen
 
A couple of decent posts on this thread (not even saying mine were) but it's beginning to seem like this thread would be better off closed. Not much good from it can come for anyone ....
 
Here is one thing I believe as a filmmaker.

-Never complain about budget or make excuses for films based on the budget or the crew or any other factor, it's a way of saying they fall short.

-Audiences actually do not give two squirts about process, they care about the films they pay to watch.

-Everyone looks at your film and AVATAR the same way. Nobody comes out of a theater saying, "that was pretty good considering there was no budget and they ony had a three man crew." They watch small films and hollywood blockbusters the same way and apply the same criteria.

- The only people who can respect what you might have done with limited resources are your peers becuase they understand the business, but even that goes only so far.

-Small films like "Little Miss Sunshine" make it, because they are well acted and well written (this is true for about 95% of the low budget films that become hits).
(sex lies and videotape is also a good example of this)

-focus on tell storie to an audience and don't compare films based on budget, nobody cares.

-If it looks professional, it doesn't make it professional and chances are audiences are not cutting your film a break by saying, "at least it looked professional"

-pretty good is never good enough. the 80% rule does not work for films.

This thread has been all over the place but basically it makes no sense to compare what you think is shitty to your own work which you might think is better.
That is the stuff you allow the audience to determine.

David
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top