Magnets vs Exposures

[somedeadguy]

Sorry to make a new topic about an old discussion, but I couldn't find my old post. I have experimented with Adobe's "Film look" filter/effect, and all it really seems to do is raise the gamma a little. I guess that I'm getting what I pay for, but it seems to me if I am using a DVC that's capable of putting out footage at 24fps, and capture it de-interlaced, and do all of the gamma adjusting, and whatnot, that I should be able to have a "film" that's quality is "almost" comparable to 28 Days Later, or Open Water. However, even after all of that, I have printed to VHS and DVD, and it still seems like I'm watching a home movie. I definitely could tell that 28 Days Later was filmed on DV, but I have to admit, it looked pretty damn good! What is it that I'm missing? Is it money? Do I need to sell my car and buy a Canon XL2? I don't even think my car would pay for that... Is it post production fine tuning that I'm not good at? Maybe it's the fact that God hates me? I don't know, does anybody else have this problem, or am I just crazy? Sorry again to beat a dead horse, but then again, I don't think I have the heart to beat a living one... Thanks

[X o Zelig o X]

What are you filming on? And, yes, god does hate you. [img]wink.gif[/img]

[Tasty Fish Lips]

I could recommend how shooting with a cheap super 8 or even bolex or bell and howell 16mm camera will get that "film look", which, call me crazy, is because it actually is film, but you probably don't want to hear all that.

So how about this:

http://www.xl1solutions.com/

<font color="#a62a2a" size="1">[ February 27, 2005 04:40 PM: Message edited by: Tasty Fish Lips ]</font>

[Chance1234]

one thing about 28 days later, is the lenses they used , watch the making of .... 1 ?150'000 lens compared to what you get with the camera does make a difference,

Also, again when filming with video , one thing you can do to take some of the harshness out is to place 1/8 ND over the lens.

[silverzero]

while it's true that digital in colour is very different than colour film, digital B&W is pretty good compared to film B&W.

[Brooks Productions]

also another really good post production program i have found is magic bullet. Its basically a colour correction program and does an excellent job at making video look like film.

[jbridges]

If you are doing all of this tweaking and still looks that bad here's an idea. Look at the resolution that you are capturing at. Is it 15:1, 5:1, 1:1....? That will make a big difference in the "quality" look. It sounds like you are going for the true DV look rather than the film look, which I think is cool. You want to get as close to 1:1 ratio when capturing as you can. I'm not sure what limitations you have with Adobe software, but with my Avid it has a lot to do with your hardware. Good luck dude!!! [img]graemlins/thumbs_up.gif[/img]

[Bnew]

MiniDV is compressed 5:1 on the tape isnt it? So is there any point capturing at 1:1?

[jbridges]

Sure there's a point. If you were to capture at say 15:1 vs 1:1 you will lose resolution no matter what the raw resolution is. You always want the best resolution possible, even if you are limited. That's my opinion anyway.

[Bnew]

I think we're misunderstanding each other (or i'm misunderstanding you) [img]smile.gif[/img]

What do you mean by capturing 1:1 - do you mean maintaining the 5:1 native DV25 compression - capturing with no loss, or converting to an uncompressed format (which will incur a very slight, probably unnoticable loss)?