PDA

View Full Version : Film Post-processing


WinterXL
01-22-2005, 11:48 AM
Quick question from a superultranewbie.

Let's say I've got a video shot on a prosumer video camera.

What's the normal method used during post-production to get the standard movie "look"?

Load it up in a video editing package and click the "Make It Look Like a Standard Movie" button?

p.hoehsl
02-12-2005, 10:23 PM
There are numerous tools, mostly plugins for programs like AfterEffects, to simulate a film look on video footage.

I don't think any of those work. Reasons are many. There is the different greater dynamic range of film. There is a different color characteristic to film - usually colours are more natural and better sepperated. Due to the negative being bigger than a ccd there is different aestetical look - there is a much more selective field of view.

The differences are mainly visible in shadow areas and in the highlights of your picture. Where video would render black or white, ie. clip the signal, film would still shoe detail.

The problem when trying to make video look like film is that there is to little picture information to start out with. Having proper lighting and exposure is most important to get a good video image. After that do as little as possible post processing - you'll just loose quality.

So, if you want a film look shoot film.

Regards, Peter

curious_69_george
02-13-2005, 05:25 AM
First of all you have to shoot progressive, with native progressive CCD's.
Frame rate is also a big one. If you have a camera that shoots 24p then you are on the right track. Good lighting, is another step in the right direction. Watch a lot of behind the scenes stuff and pay attention to the lights if they show them. A popular way to light right now is very diffused and soft.

If you don't have a 24p camera, you can use a plugin called "retimer", that can change the frame rate from 29.97 to 24 (23.976). If you are just making something to go straight to television playback, the colour range difference doesn't matter. Sure it's nice to have, but %99.99 of people will not tell the difference.

All movies attain their look through heavy post colour manipulation. Untouched negative looks horrible. Check out the deleted scenes on the "Training Day" DVD. To also see how movies are coloured check out the Digital Grading featurette on the "Fellowship of the Ring" DVD. Watch what Peter Doyle does with a program called lustre. All those controls and features are available in AE and Combustion for use on video to achieve any look you wish.

Collateral was %95 shot on HD and the Viper, which is classed as a video camera.

Most movies now go through a digital grading process that changes the colour range anyway, and most of the big budget movies have a very high contrast look to them throwing away all of that precious colour range anyway.

The lines between video and film are getting very fine, and soon the cost differential for achieving an end product will thin those lines even more.

Ryan

chal7ds
02-13-2005, 07:44 PM
I wish such a button existed!

p.hoehsl
02-15-2005, 07:37 AM
%99.99 of people will not tell the difference.


If this were the case film would have been dead by now.

I showed a novice some HD footage on our 2k colour grading system some time ago - not telling him what he was looking at. He imediately claimed that this was video. When asked how he knew, he replied that the general look - colours, contrast, highlights - gave it away.

Peter

Nudnik
02-15-2005, 10:18 AM
I was really impressed with Collateral.

I could tell it was video when i saw it, but it was still aesthetically pleasing - I usually don't like the look of video, but it worked well with the gritty style of the film. It brought you closer to the action, I think. It added a more realistic quality.

curious_69_george
02-16-2005, 05:13 AM
If this were the case film would have been dead by now.

I showed a novice some HD footage on our 2k colour grading system some time ago - not telling him what he was looking at. He imediately claimed that this was video. When asked how he knew, he replied that the general look - colours, contrast, highlights - gave it away.

Peter

I think video has only just started coming close to film, but still isnt there. from a quality stand point. I am simply stating that the end result can be achieved on film or video and still make the same dollars. Because most people don't care what it was shot on, the just care whether it was good or not.

That is also watching it on a 2k grading system, 99.9% of people will never watch anything on a grading system. I agree that film is better.

CGTalk Moderation
02-16-2006, 06:00 AM
This thread has been automatically closed as it remained inactive for 12 months. If you wish to continue the discussion, please create a new thread in the appropriate forum.