Thread: Just wrapped a no-budget shoot. Here's some stills.

Reply to Thread
Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 11 to 13 of 13
  1. #11  
    Senior Member Grzegorz Gill's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Los Angeles, CA
    Quote Originally Posted by Šabović Adis View Post
    Them sticks and stones kick me out of the flow, it's ruining my Zen.

    Any chance of reshooting this, Aaron?
    Modest Helium Kit + Pro Primes
    Reply With Quote  

  2. #12  
    Senior Member Aaron Lochert's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Tucson, AZ
    Quote Originally Posted by John David Pope View Post
    It is interesting that rand's eye wanted the images brighter. And wanted them that much brighter. Whereas the result of his brightening the images made them look less "cinematic" to my eye, as much as "cinematic" is a thing that can be defined and not just a visually-prompted emotion.
    The fact that the word "cinematic" is used in any proximity to my work makes me giddy. Thanks for that :)

    Quote Originally Posted by Brian Timmons View Post
    I agree about the observation concerning the brightest part of an image being placed well below 100 IRE. I think this look is associated with cinema particularly from the 70's, 80's, and 90's (or perhaps before film grading went digital).

    From what I understand, deliberately placing the whites up to 100 came more from the Broadcast TV world.
    I remember part of this supposedly being aesthetic as there is a preference for brighter and higher contrast images. I heard the other reason being more technical particularly during the analog days as an image up to 100 IRE made for a stronger (perhaps more QC friendly) broadcast signal. I remember reading about this but don't know entirely how true either statement is.

    It's interesting that there now seems to be less distinction between a "broadcast TV" look and a "cinema" look.
    Many films seem to now place the brightest point up to 100 IRE or equivalent.

    I also think the rise of streaming video (particularly Youtube and Netflix) has given us another aesthetic
    where the color seems to be much more saturated than what is normally associated with the "classic" color cinema look.

    Be interesting to hear from colorist like Wielage, Most, and Blackstone regarding this.

    Anyway, the images look nice.
    Thanks for the kind words. I think you're right about your observations, lots of different styles of media merging together, changing minds of what "right" should be. I'm personally not a fan of slamming whites up to 100 IRE because then that leaves little room for anything above white. Perhaps that's why the shift toward HDR is happening, we need headroom again for brighter-than-white highlights.

    Quote Originally Posted by Šabović Adis View Post
    Any chance of reshooting this, Aaron?
    No chance - no budget for reshoots nor the travel to get there. I also deliberately put that foreground rock there for some parallax when we dolly in on this shot. I can see what you mean about wanting it totally clean, but I think a different location entirely would have been needed for that. Maybe a lake-bed or something like that.

    Quote Originally Posted by Michael Tiemann View Post
    Who's the actor playing Phil Holland?
    Haha I didn't even see that connection until just now. That would be Thomas Jernigan, the director of this film as well.
    Reply With Quote  

  3. #13  
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Quote Originally Posted by Aaron Lochert View Post
    (...)dolly in (...)
    Oh, I see.

    Maybe a lake-bed or something like that.
    Yeah, 100%.
    Last edited by Šabović Adis; 10-26-2018 at 02:35 PM.
    Reply With Quote  

Posting Permissions
  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts