OT: "Film-look" follow-up & a BIG thanks

Jessariah67 wrote on 3/30/2005, 2:27 PM
On the eve of the first day of shooting my first feature. Just as scared as I am excited. Thanks to everyone who has answered Qs along the way, and a special tip of the hat to Spot & Mannie at VASST for letting our wayward Waiter wear the VASST logo. It'll be a cute "wink" for those in the know...

I also wanted to extend a BIG thanks to Jay Gladwell who was generous enough to take the time and steer me around a big potential iceberg.

Along that line, there was a thread a few months ago about getting "the film look" by use of camera modes, filters, lighting, etc. Because there is a chance this project will actually be transfered to film, we have to take a different route than previously thought. Originally, we were going to shoot in FRAME mode and use a Tiffen Soft/FX 1 and Black Pro Mist 1/2. After doing a lot of testing, I've found that there really isn't much you can put on the lens that you can't do to the image in post - especially if you have tools like Magic Bullet Editors, Ultimate S and DVFilm Maker, which is available (along with a TON of resources) at www.dvfilm.com. The down side is that you're on the set looking at "really video-looking" picture (is this a movie or One Life To Live?"). The big upside is that you're capturing clean picture and are not "stuck" with anything - like recording clean, dry vocals as opposed to putting the verb on as you record...and what if it ends up being too much?

There is also simple math that makes 60i much better than 30p if transfer to film is ever part of the project's life.

So, the gadget freak is now a purist convert. Again, thanks to Jay for that. And be sure to check out DVFilm's website. I purchased their book and filled in a number of potholes before pulling out of the garage.

Kevin

Comments

Spot|DSE wrote on 3/30/2005, 2:41 PM
SO GLAD you found out that 60i transfers to film better than 30p. Looking forward to seeing what you come up with! Congrats to you on a successful start to the project!
farss wrote on 3/30/2005, 2:46 PM
Oddly enough I've read a few posts saying that 50i is better now that the labs are coming to grips with HDV to film out, things are moving quickly in that area.
Bob.
Gonzoman wrote on 3/30/2005, 2:51 PM
What can DVFilm Maker software do that can't be done with Celluloid? It's only a 24p converter right? Is their conversion better than the Celluoid conversion? It's much more expensive that's for sure.
Spot|DSE wrote on 3/30/2005, 3:04 PM
Celluloid is only a 24p conversion tool. The DV Film tool adds information to the header. Oddly enough, we've gotten several mails saying that the Celluloid looks and process is better looking, but we can't add the headers. Otherwise, we'd probably do more with it.
Jessariah67 wrote on 3/30/2005, 5:01 PM
We just ran trials with DVFilm Maker's demo. Celluloid is on the list, but I haven't played with that yet. Maker claims to only deinterlace movment and leave sharpness in non-moving areas. Personally, I like a less-sharp picture. It just has to "look like a movie." We got that with Maker and general deinterlacing, so that was enough to choose to shoot 60i. We'll still make the final decision on which way to go in post.
FuTz wrote on 4/19/2005, 6:19 AM
Is starting with 29,97 NTSC DV footage a loss of time trying to get that "24fps" flicker look ? What would be the best way to achieve that?
Jay Gladwell wrote on 4/19/2005, 8:30 AM

Kevin, you're making me blush. Actually, all I did was offer a little advice and some links to a few resources.

I am very anxious to see your finished picture!