How to get that "film look"

Discussion in 'Professional Video Production' started by Rufus T. Firefly, May 2, 2005.

  1. Using PD150 DV and Adobe Premiere Pro 1.5

    What settings can I apply in post, to achieve that "softer" film look?
    DV has too much of a "live" or "crisp" look.

    Thanks for any suggestions


    Mike in Tucson
     
    Rufus T. Firefly, May 2, 2005
    #1
    1. Advertisements

  2. Well, if you got Premiere Pro 1.5 you should register it and get the Magic
    Bullet Movie Looks plug-in.

    I have not used it yet but, from the name, I think it helps give that movie
    look. :)

    Tom P.
    BTW, if you do try it let me know what you think of it. I'm looking for a
    couple of minutes free-time to try it on a couple of clips myself.
     
    Henry Padilla, May 2, 2005
    #2
    1. Advertisements

  3. Hey, I was going to say...
    "Use over-priced, no-talent, hacks and hire a artsy-fartsy writer how
    complains that the producer is raping his work. While making sure you get a
    producer that thinks the writer is a no-talent with a good idea that just
    needs some punch."

    Oh, and an overbearing diva for good measure.

    ....but I didn't.
    Tom P.
     
    Henry Padilla, May 2, 2005
    #3
  4. Rufus T. Firefly

    none Guest

    Actually that's how to achieve the "production ulcer" effect and if
    you're realy lucky the " production migraine" effect as well.
     
    none, May 2, 2005
    #4
  5. Rufus T. Firefly

    Seattle Eric Guest

    Post is problematical: what if you can NEVER achieve that look?

    Try to get it IN THE CAMERA. Learn to light. Take the fucking TIME to
    light. Learn to use filters, then actually use them. Learn to move the
    camera, and how to use it to direct the flow of attention before the
    edit. Learn composition (there's a radical thought).
     
    Seattle Eric, May 2, 2005
    #5
  6. Rufus T. Firefly

    Hobbit #37 Guest

    For extra realsim, overlay a silhoette of two fat chicks eating popcorn in
    post ;-)
     
    Hobbit #37, May 2, 2005
    #6
  7. Rufus T. Firefly

    C.J.Patten Guest

    One note for the OP: limit your depth of field. Use as wide an iris as you
    can, even if it means using ND filters. I've been paying close attention to
    a lot of material lately and limiting that depth of focus goes a long way to
    *helping* achieve a film look.

    You've got a great camera to work with and can produce some spectacular
    results but...

    ....per the other reply you received: eliminate the words "fix it in post"
    from your vocabulary.
    Get the absolute BEST footage you can on site, in camera. You can do minor
    *tweaks* in post but they don't make up for not doing your chores on set.

    C.
     
    C.J.Patten, May 2, 2005
    #7
  8. Rufus T. Firefly

    Mike Kujbida Guest


    Spoken like someone who's "been there, done that" - and is 100% correct in
    everything he said
    :)

    Mike
     
    Mike Kujbida, May 2, 2005
    #8
  9. I don't think Orson Welles was interested in a small DoF when he shot
    Citizen Kane ;-)

    DoF is only half the story. This is so difficult to get with
    especially the 1/3" and smaller DV-cams, more things actually need to
    be done, like using lighting and colours to draw the audiences
    attention to a certain point.

    cheers

    -martin-
     
    Martin Heffels, May 2, 2005
    #9
  10. Rufus T. Firefly

    Seattle Eric Guest

    That'd be just as valid if you said "two fat guys", except you'd
    have to add "talking loudly and chewing with their mouths open."
     
    Seattle Eric, May 3, 2005
    #10
  11. Maybe I didn't describe exactly what I mean by "film look"
    I watched "Open Water" the other night. In the 'making of'
    section of the DVD, there is an obvious difference between the raw
    video shots and what you see in the final edited version. I'm not
    referring to lighting, composition, DoF, or any of those other things
    being mentioned. The raw DV video has a very clear and sharp
    quality to it, like what you'd see on a CCTV shot, or how soaps
    look on afternoon TV. I'm sure you guys know what I'm talking about-
    maybe I just don't know how to describe it ...

    Mike in Tucson
     
    Rufus T. Firefly, May 3, 2005
    #11
  12. Rufus T. Firefly

    C.J.Patten Guest

    You can adjust the gamma of a piece of DV footage to more closely resemble
    film and also colour correct to give it a more "filmic" look. I'm no expert
    on that.

    I understand Premiere Pro 1.5 comes with the Magic Bullet filter that has
    presets built in for various "film looks." Could be wrong but I THINK you
    could the same thing manually in Premiere using various colour correction
    filters - it would just take longer to create a preset than use the ones
    they've already saved for you in the Magic Bullet filter. That all has
    nothing to do with motion blur though, just intraframe tinting.

    Is there a colourist in the house? If so, would they know what we're talking
    about?

    I've got Open Water around here... should I be looking at a particular
    section of the DVD for an example of what you mean?

    I bet a note to the couple who produced and directed Open Water would have
    an answer from them on what was involved in post-production of their footage
    to give it the look you're talking about.

    C.
     
    C.J.Patten, May 3, 2005
    #12
  13. Rufus T. Firefly

    none Guest

    Then it's a simple matter of applying diffusion filters during post to
    soften it up a bit.
    Might be easier to do it on camera though.
    Try various soft focus filters in front of the lens.(I'd think you'd
    want it to be very slight something in a grade 1 or 2 should take the
    hard edge off. Any fine tweeks could be done in the NLE stage.)
     
    none, May 3, 2005
    #13
  14. Ahhhh, add a Black Pro-Mist or some other softening filtration to your
    camera, to make it look a little softener. You can tweak the colours
    on your edit-machine.

    cheers

    -martin-
     
    Martin Heffels, May 3, 2005
    #14
  15. I knew what you meant Mike, I've been looking to try the "film look" for a
    while (just as soon as I find time to play).

    And, despite what some around here believe, some things really are done in
    post. Sorry, but there's nothing for it. It annoys me to see people
    discount perfectly good processes just because they are done post-prod.
    It's like the "analog music is better." argument. It's completely
    fictitious, a lot of these differences only exist in the mind of the viewer.

    Tom Padilla
     
    Henry Padilla, May 3, 2005
    #15
  16. Rufus T. Firefly

    C.J.Patten Guest

    Just a thought: turn down edge sharpening in camera.

    I'm SURE this is possible with the PD150 class cameras. With my consumer D8,
    you have to "trick" the camera by switch to "soft portrait" mode so that it
    disables edge sharpening. To my untrained eye, this goes a long way to
    helping smooth the image.

    BTW: didn't mean to suggest post wasn't good for anything, just that good
    source material is critical. ;)

    C.j
     
    C.J.Patten, May 3, 2005
    #16
  17. Rufus T. Firefly

    Tim Mitchell Guest

    One of the major factors, which I don't think anyone has mentioned yet,
    is to remove every other picture field, giving 25 frames per second
    rather than 50 fields (or 30 for you NTSC people). This is done a lot on
    UK television shows which are trying to look expensive, we call it
    "flickovision".

    Old premiere used to have a filter called "Posterise time" which would
    do it, I am not sure about premiere pro.
     
    Tim Mitchell, May 3, 2005
    #17
  18. I know the effect from watching US-programs on commercial stations.
    They have no time to do a proper conversion.
    But this is not really what this thread is all about. The 24P camera's
    only record 24 frames per second, and with some wizardry they try to
    make 30 frames per second out of it, and it looks crappy. On a
    computer-monitor it should look good. But I reckong you need to set
    the frame-rate of your computer-monitor to a multiple of 24 as well
    (72Hz).
    Psoterize is something else. It makes the picture look very funny
    coloured (an effect from photography with overexposure of print).
    Don't you mean the flickering-effect?

    cheers

    -martin-
     
    Martin Heffels, May 3, 2005
    #18
  19. Rufus T. Firefly

    David McCall Guest

    I love your sig :)

    We normally think of Posterization as quantized colors.
    Typically the hardware or software breaks down the
    image into less colors (similar in effect to converting
    a fill color image to a 4 gif image in a paint program.
    Some software/hardware will then take those limited
    colors and convert them to other seemingly arbitrary
    colors. That isn't what "Posterize Time" is in Premiere
    does to the video.

    Posterize time is more like the strobe function in a TBC
    or in some other software. It breaks up time instead of
    breaking down color. At any rate, I don't think it is a solution
    to this issue.

    David
     
    David McCall, May 3, 2005
    #19
  20. If you compare the "deleted scenes" footage in the special features section
    of the
    Open Water DVD, against the finalized version, you can tell an obvious and
    dramatic
    difference in the way the video "looks".

    This tells me that the effect I'm seeing had to have been applied in post.


    Mike in Tucson
     
    Rufus T. Firefly, May 4, 2005
    #20
    1. Advertisements

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.