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 :)

Old school look

Ulf Krentz said:
Sure, I´d start at the front end though as it will have more soul (vintage glass / filters).

Cheers,

Ulf
Click to expand...

Thanks Ulf. I think the majority of reproducing this look would be in post though, right? Most of the work I've done for clients is a more modern look so I haven't needed to recreate this particular look before.
 
You could export the edit onto analogue tape or something like that, then reimport it back into your computer afterwards for an older feel!
 
The aspects of this look that have to do with color and contrast are easy enough to replicate with lighting and grading. But a huge amount of the look here is about small format. Deep depth of field, lots of "small camera" movement and vibration.

Maybe get some S16 glass and shoot at 2K, and handhold your camera with no support. You may also need to apply some post effects to replicate the stuff that looks like it was telecined and then rephotographed off of a monitor (or just rephotograph it off of a CRT).
 
Keith Putnam said:
The aspects of this look that have to do with color and contrast are easy enough to replicate with lighting and grading. But a huge amount of the look here is about small format. Deep depth of field, lots of "small camera" movement and vibration.

Maybe get some S16 glass and shoot at 2K, and handhold your camera with no support. You may also need to apply some post effects to replicate the stuff that looks like it was telecined and then rephotographed off of a monitor (or just rephotograph it off of a CRT).
Click to expand...

Yes, this. Thank you! There's a quality couldn't describe where it just feels like a completely different format (ignoring color/contrast) - basically what you said about small format and rephotographing. Great tips, thanks!
 
Another interesting approach. The creator took footage of a projector against a blank wall then did layering with existing footage in AE:

 
Misty/bloomy optical filters + washed out look in grade will do the trick. Turn that "sharpening" knob down to -3 or so, if you're after soft image.
 
this look is impossible to get with digital.. maybe with double fogs or very strong fog filters, but the bokeh and the flare is only with cheap super 8 or 16 lenses

im pretty sure that this video was shot with diffusion on the Canon Scoopic Ultra 16 camera,
 
Stephen_G said:
this look is impossible to get with digital.. maybe with double fogs or very strong fog filters, but the bokeh and the flare is only with cheap super 8 or 16 lenses

im pretty sure that this video was shot with diffusion on the Canon Scoopic Ultra 16 camera,
Click to expand...

Thanks. My thoughts were similar. As w/ the other post I was thinking if I could do this on digital I would just because I have the cameras and wouldn't have to spend extra on film/camera/etc.
 
If you're already looking into other cameras, the Digital Bolex might be relevant.
 
Couple of reasons why I would shoot it on super 8.

Inexpensive.
Easy.
Still available (probably for a limited time).
You can use it out of the can with little post work.
Ability to choose various grain structures.

The only caveat would be the batteries that run the cameras can be dead. I have a not too old Bolex that runs on double As. I also have a digital Bolex which shot at 400 and 1080 may produce enough grain to compare to the imagery you posted.
 
Used to shoot a lot on S16 and before that on N16. Also shot quite a few S8. Found it too unpredictable for projects which have clients involved. Better was to underexpose S-16mm a 1-½ stop and to use 7296 which was grainy as hell.

Ok. Recently found out that the Dragon Sensor has a 2.5K mode. This mode is pretty close to S16mm gate size. I own a Canon 8-64, the classic S.16 production zoom. It has tons pof issues good 35mm lenses don't have. With this zoom in 2.5k mode the Dragon is very close to S-16. To make things perfekt use a film LUT in the grading process. Adding grain ist not really required, shooting at ISO 640 will give you plenty of texture that is jaw-dripping close to the old shit from yesterday.

Hans
 
Hans von Sonntag said:
Used to shoot a lot on S16 and before that on N16. Also shot quite a few S8. Found it too unpredictable for projects which have clients involved. Better was to underexpose S-16mm a 1-½ stop and to use 7296 which was grainy as hell.

Ok. Recently found out that the Dragon Sensor has a 2.5K mode. This mode is pretty close to S16mm gate size. I own a Canon 8-64, the classic S.16 production zoom. It has tons pof issues good 35mm lenses don't have. With this zoom in 2.5k mode the Dragon is very close to S-16. To make things perfekt use a film LUT in the grading process. Adding grain ist not really required, shooting at ISO 640 will give you plenty of texture that is jaw-dripping close to the old shit from yesterday.

Hans
Click to expand...

Wow sounds like this could be the trick. Yeah I'm just not thrilled about testing the S8 and paying for film and developing it/transferring it. I'll look into an S16 lens
 
I'm late to this party but I have a few opinions. Firstly, Hans' suggestion sounds pretty good. I'd love to see the result. Secondly, you could shoot on Dragon and print to 16mm, then scan a second or third-generation internegative. Thirdly, how about a stack of uncoated UV filters?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top