Is adding grain necessary to create a 'cinematic' look?

[James B.]

Hi

I understand the necessity or removing grain and digital artifacts, but am a bit skeptical of the need to add 'film like' grain back in to a digital image.
ie
http://cinnafilm.com/dark-energy.html

My question is, to what extent is grain considered to be an essential part of the 'film aesthetic'?
Is this simply a current trend analogous to adding pops and clicks to a digital audio recording to make it sound more like vinyl?

 

[Greg M]

Its a trend or purely aesthetic/artistic decision... or used when matching shots.
The major part of the film look is using the larger sensor and 35mm lenses which have a shallower depth of field and a shooting style.

 

[George Butterfield]

Who cares? If you don't know, why do you care? Use your tools, tell a story. The "Film look" is dead, Film is dead!

 

[mikeburton]

Who cares? If you don't know, why do you care? Use your tools, tell a story. The "Film look" is dead, Film is dead!

Couldn't help yourself could you? This is a ridiculous and obnoxious comment to make which does not help anyone. Please post ONLY if you have something to contribute.

James, if you are shooting digital, ie RED, you will notice an extremely "Clean" appearance to the images if shot appropriately. A lot of the films being shot especially on the newer Kodak Vision 3 stocks are pretty fine grain but it is still present and a part of the images appeal to some. If you want your RED images to have a similar look and feel to film adding grain is one way to achieve that. I recently completed a DI on a RED feature that we applied grain plates over the RED images to give the picture a texture. Very slight and applied with care and using one of the finer grain stocks but I think it made all the difference in the world , albeit I'm sure it was subtle to the viewers in the theatre it gave the picture a life it didn't have otherwise. Check out http://cinegrain.com/
We used the 64D EXP, 250D EXP and 500T EXP stocks from the professional bundle.

 

[Patrick Tresch]

True that Some DCP originated from digital camera like Epic/5D... and even the white typo of the credit can "hurt the eye" (5D mainly because of artefact ;-) ) but as it is shoking today, it was shoking to see HD on a 24 inch HD Sony BVM monitor back in 2004. At that time we even blurred the picture to please the customer.

The question could be : why should the sensuality and the texture of a picture be restrained to merely the technical aspect of its origination?

Pat

 

[Graeme Nattress]

Grain is an image texture choice to be used appropriately, or not at all, depending upon taste.

Graeme

 

[Hrvoje Simic]

My question is, to what extent is grain considered to be an essential part of the 'film aesthetic'?

To a subjective extent, it's not quantifiable.

Is this simply a current trend analogous to adding pops and clicks to a digital audio recording to make it sound more like vinyl?

Depends for who. For some it is, for some it isn't.

Besides adding an organic looking texture to a clean digital image, if used properly it also subliminally differentiates individual frames from one another, making moving images seem more "alive". Some are more sensible and affectionate to that effect, some less.

 

[Patrick Tresch]

By extension in a few years we could say MysteriumX, Dragon, Arri, 5D, C300, Aaton... have different renditions we could work with. Hope the manufacturers will developp them with an eastetical point of view. We saw it happen with Fuji VS Kodak VS Agfa Vs Orwo...


Pat

 

[David Rasberry]

Hi

My question is, to what extent is grain considered to be an essential part of the 'film aesthetic'?
Is this simply a current trend analogous to adding pops and clicks to a digital audio recording to make it sound more like vinyl?

I would say a better audio analogy would be adding a little bit of random noise to give the recording "air". A subtle change in texture that digital recordings sometimes lack.

It is a purely aesthetic choice. Sometimes appropriate, sometimes not. Obviously if you are trying to match footage shot on film as closely as possible it can be a valuable tool, but it can also be a creative aesthetic choice to achieve a look too.

 

[Steve Das]

Its a trend or purely aesthetic/artistic decision... or used when matching shots...

Curious to know of the bigger budget Red shot features...or also the smaller budgeted ones...if grain is often added as an
aesthetic decision only....totally apart from the issue of matching shots to 35mm footage and different weather/atmosphere conditions.

 

[Adrian Correia]

I do add it...I often shoot Red at least at 800 ASA to 1600 ASA.....texturally I love it, but I often add Cinegrain as a tool to hide the seams of digital imaging.

 

[Jake Bastian]

A cinematic look is simply an aesthetic that reinforces the story you're trying to tell in a meaningful way. Anything else, including grain, is superfluous.

 

[Joe D'Arcy]

Couldn't help yourself could you? This is a ridiculous and obnoxious comment to make which does not help anyone. Please post ONLY if you have something to contribute.

James, if you are shooting digital, ie RED, you will notice an extremely "Clean" appearance to the images if shot appropriately. A lot of the films being shot especially on the newer Kodak Vision 3 stocks are pretty fine grain but it is still present and a part of the images appeal to some. If you want your RED images to have a similar look and feel to film adding grain is one way to achieve that. I recently completed a DI on a RED feature that we applied grain plates over the RED images to give the picture a texture. Very slight and applied with care and using one of the finer grain stocks but I think it made all the difference in the world , albeit I'm sure it was subtle to the viewers in the theatre it gave the picture a life it didn't have otherwise. Check out http://cinegrain.com/
We used the 64D EXP, 250D EXP and 500T EXP stocks from the professional bundle.

Great post Mike!

 

[Joel Devereux]

Some people are moving away from trying to emulate film and embracing the clean digital image and color space. Michael Bay in the Transformers movies definitely created a look away from regular film using the Sony F-35, and noticing alot more people are doing that now also. I agree with alot of people who have posted, agreeing that telling the story is most important. Also delivering the film cropped in 2.35:1 if filmed in 16:9 is also a simple way of achieving a film like feel.

Love Reduser btw

 

[Russ Fill]

I think with the new Alchemy and Film look in REDCine X pro we will start to see a lot of creative post work that will look very similar to a "film look". And the best part is you can add or subtract what you like or dislike.
Ive also used Film Convert http://www.filmconvert.com and really enjoy their product and the look of what you can do with your RD3s.

 

[amber smith]

I love CineGrain, I got it about 6 months ago and seem to use it subtly on almost everything, as do most colorists that own it. it's becoming industry standard.