FILM NOIR - Trouble Is My Business

[darren scott]

I keep seeing people suggest noir -esque things. Did you guys even read what the director wanted? They clearly weren't going for a straight noir look. Why keep pushing it in that direction? It's about what the director was going for.

 

[Eric M Hurt]

I keep seeing people suggest noir -esque things. Did you guys even read what the director wanted? They clearly weren't going for a straight noir look. Why keep pushing it in that direction? It's about what the director was going for.

Yea dude, we did. He asked for comments and constructive criticism. That's what people gave him...including David Mullen, which one can only assume the OP is very happy and grateful for.
But please enlighten us Darren to what you think it is he's looking for, since your post so far added exactly nothing to the conversation...

 

[darren scott]

Yea dude, we did. He asked for comments and constructive criticism. That's what people gave him...including David Mullen, which one can only assume the OP is very happy and grateful for.
But please enlighten us Darren to what you think it is he's looking for, since your post so far added exactly nothing to the conversation...

Hey Eric, how goes it. I won't answer you back in the type of tone you seem to be leaning towards and If my tone seemed harsh then I apologize However as happy as the OP may have been with the constructive critique i'm not sure how constructive it is to push an idea of what his film should look like (traditional noir) when the director obviously chose to go in the opposite direction to tell his story (for whatever reason). In my opinion I agree with others that that it is "too clean" and bit too sharp at times...and most definitely that the lighting on some of the women are harsh at times for traditional noir. However based on what the director said that's not where they were going with this. So my opinion on how it could have been done traditionally is null and void. I think the director and DP achieved what they were going for. Also, it could be David Mullen (who I have great respect and admiration for) or a noob suggesting or giving advice (which i also have respect for simply because its right), my opinion would be the same. Roger Deakins (who is my favourite DP) could suggest something to me but if its not in line with the vision of my film...then what good is that? Peace.

 

[David Mullen ASC]

My post was partially a response to the posts that said that diffusion was a standard aspect of film noir, which I felt was not entirely accurate. Most film noirs were shot clean except for women's close-ups, sometimes the man's as well to a lesser extent so that it could be intercut with the woman's more heavily diffused close-up. The softness of the wider shots and the movie as a whole can be attributed to other factors than lens diffusion. However, I think the point that most people were making was that old b&w movies were not as sharp and clean as 4K digital photography, so if you aren't going to use old lenses, at least some sort of diffusion may help take the edge off of everything.

It is certainly valid to have a modern take on film noir, like making it widescreen or making it sharper and grainless, that's an aesthetic choice, but don't be surprised if some people don't embrace that choice because of their notions of what b&w photography should look like or what old b&w movies look like. For one person, the absence of grain is a bigger problem than the high level of sharpness, for someone else, it's the opposite.

Anyway, it's just a sign of how many fans there are of film noirs and b&w movies that people felt like jumping in with their comments, the OP should take all of our comments with a grain of salt, take away whatever is useful and ignore the off-base comments.

 

[Gunleik Groven]

I love it when dop's make on-set choices like these

no way a grade could make these imgas sing....

keep it up

as to diff

old lenses diff a lot.
that is partly why i dig them for some uses