Isn't this thread the very definition of beer goggles?
Pawel, pawel, pawel... ;-)
This thread reminds me of the comment, "Beauty is only skin deep, but ugly goes clear to the bone."
"So long and thanks for all the fish!"
The real world is sometimes very ugly
thats why we all use framing, dof, cuts, colorgradig and more;)
Well there's a lot of discussion around this and a lot of people say that the reason in their opinion Alexa is the winner - is because it's "easier" on the eye. Here's an article about the hobbit worth reading - http://movies.ign.com/articles/122/1223523p1.html
UGLY is good: i think of Leone and his spaghetti westerns---LOVELY stuff! to see every line and detail of "ugliness" guess it all depends what you are trying to create.
I personally find 5k so much easier to get a "pretty" look with than any smaller format. I've never found any format to be a "nightmare", you just have to work within the limitations of the format and use lighting, filtration and post processing to get the look that you want. It's called cinematography.
So before 5k, you found it easier to make actresses look good? Just curious.
You call it workarounds, I call it cinematography. As cinematographers, it's our job to be aware of all of the "tricks of the trade" and that includes post processing.
|« Previous Thread | Next Thread »|