film image - any post process?

LENS · 23rd January 2008

Hi guys,

I notice that those feature film (film show in cinema) shows very nice contrast and tones on screen. and I notice from watching some 'behind the scene' video, that takes exactly the same scene but the video quality looks so inferior.. maybe usually the 'behind the scene' is taken by a less professional camera?

so my question is, is the contrast and tones on those feature film are post-processed? are they supposed to look originally like those 'behind-the-scene' or 'documentary' video?

sometimes i feel like those contrast and tones are almost like 'cross process' effect.

DXNMedia · 23rd January 2008

Generally, a film set is lit with the best possible attention to the lighting and contrast ratio in mind for filming, whether the recording medium is on 35mm film or on HD cameras.

Some of these high end Arri or Panavision digital 4K cameras have top end imagers, lenses and possess one of the best visual reproduction quality that resembles the contrast latitude of traditional film.

Additional post processes (ie. Color Grading) are also performed to correct any poorly lit scenes or to accentuate certain parts of a scene so that the whole film can be given a certain look.

In Behind-the-scene footage acquisition, most productions go with 'lower end' cameras like Digital Betacam, or probably even the entry level HDCAM Cine Alta cameras & coupled with typical ENG lenses, footage from these cameras don't hold up to the high end ones. Lets not even talk about our little Sony HDV Z1, EX1, XDCAMs or Panasonic HVX202s.

Then we talk about post production process that may degenerate the color quality....
In actual movie scenes, footage are processed in native resolution, uncompressed 4K 4:4:4 color space, but in 'behind-the-scene' stuff, footage are probably edited in the standard definition or 10-bit uncompressed 4:2:2 video quality. HDCAM itself is a compressed video format at 1920x1080, so how far can that hold up to true 4k uncompressed resolution?

Ultimately, you can argue that at the end of the day, i'm watching these on a home DVD player at MPEG2 compression, and why am i still seeing the difference......hmmmm...... wanna know more? join the Society of Motion Picture & Television Engineers (SMPTE)
I was a member there and can probably make referrals for people who are in the industry to join.

There are lots to argue/debate about in film or HD video production workflow, just like how audiophile are being anal about the whole sound system they have, down to component level....

Talk about being anal with video technology from acquisition to post to delivery.......let's start some high end video geek talk and move away from consumer miniDV & HDV productions......hard to get this kinda topics started in local forums.

LENS · 24th January 2008

ok..thanks for reply..

I am just wondering how the video looks like when it is raw..like when i see a picture show after x-pro process, the impression is always wow.. but if the raw image is showed then i realise process do change the image a lot.

so when everytime i observe a vivid scene in cinema video, i wonder is it looking just that nice in raw video or standard process have to be added everytime for every film or digital format.

my only experience is home video with mini dv.. ha. I notice that professional video has very deep DOF too. guess i am just wondering what make a video looks 'professional'..so i start to throw some questions..

jaegersing · 25th January 2008

To emphasise what Dixon said, professional setups use controlled lighting to make sure that the range between the brightest and darkest parts is within what the camera and medium (film or video) can handle. If you are looking for some kind of post-processing filter that makes video which was shot in normal ambient light look like film quality, you will probably be disappointed (but if you do find it please let me know

).

If you are just looking for some effects you can apply to get more of a film-like feel to the footage, there are plugins such as Magic Bullet which can help. If you are on low budget, then filters like Vegas' colour curves can emulate a film-type contrast. There's also a cheapo script-based plugin for Vegas available from the VAST website that tries to emulate film look. Whether these give you the effect you want only you can say. You would need to try them out for yourself. (But it can be fun trying.)

LENS · 25th January 2008

oic.. as i know most feature film have carefully set up lighting.

in video imaging, any process similar to x-pro in photography?

ceecookie · 27th January 2008

Anyway,i think people can forget about owning a Panavision - its only available on rental basis.

DXNMedia · 27th January 2008

I think the closest to 4K resolution that we can ever dream of is probably the Red camera.

23rd January 2008	#1
LENS Member Join Date: Apr 2005 Posts: 758	film image - any post process? Hi guys, I notice that those feature film (film show in cinema) shows very nice contrast and tones on screen. and I notice from watching some 'behind the scene' video, that takes exactly the same scene but the video quality looks so inferior.. maybe usually the 'behind the scene' is taken by a less professional camera? so my question is, is the contrast and tones on those feature film are post-processed? are they supposed to look originally like those 'behind-the-scene' or 'documentary' video? sometimes i feel like those contrast and tones are almost like 'cross process' effect.

23rd January 2008	#2
DXNMedia Moderator Join Date: Dec 2006 Location: Singapore Posts: 669	Re: film image - any post process? Generally, a film set is lit with the best possible attention to the lighting and contrast ratio in mind for filming, whether the recording medium is on 35mm film or on HD cameras. Some of these high end Arri or Panavision digital 4K cameras have top end imagers, lenses and possess one of the best visual reproduction quality that resembles the contrast latitude of traditional film. Additional post processes (ie. Color Grading) are also performed to correct any poorly lit scenes or to accentuate certain parts of a scene so that the whole film can be given a certain look. In Behind-the-scene footage acquisition, most productions go with 'lower end' cameras like Digital Betacam, or probably even the entry level HDCAM Cine Alta cameras & coupled with typical ENG lenses, footage from these cameras don't hold up to the high end ones. Lets not even talk about our little Sony HDV Z1, EX1, XDCAMs or Panasonic HVX202s. Then we talk about post production process that may degenerate the color quality.... In actual movie scenes, footage are processed in native resolution, uncompressed 4K 4:4:4 color space, but in 'behind-the-scene' stuff, footage are probably edited in the standard definition or 10-bit uncompressed 4:2:2 video quality. HDCAM itself is a compressed video format at 1920x1080, so how far can that hold up to true 4k uncompressed resolution? Ultimately, you can argue that at the end of the day, i'm watching these on a home DVD player at MPEG2 compression, and why am i still seeing the difference......hmmmm...... wanna know more? join the Society of Motion Picture & Television Engineers (SMPTE) I was a member there and can probably make referrals for people who are in the industry to join. There are lots to argue/debate about in film or HD video production workflow, just like how audiophile are being anal about the whole sound system they have, down to component level.... Talk about being anal with video technology from acquisition to post to delivery.......let's start some high end video geek talk and move away from consumer miniDV & HDV productions......hard to get this kinda topics started in local forums. __________________ DXNMedia.net Post Production \| Video Acquisition \| Tape Transfers \| Microwave RF Camera Services Last edited by DXNMedia; 23rd January 2008 at 10:18 PM.

24th January 2008	#3
LENS Member Join Date: Apr 2005 Posts: 758	Re: film image - any post process? ok..thanks for reply.. I am just wondering how the video looks like when it is raw..like when i see a picture show after x-pro process, the impression is always wow.. but if the raw image is showed then i realise process do change the image a lot. so when everytime i observe a vivid scene in cinema video, i wonder is it looking just that nice in raw video or standard process have to be added everytime for every film or digital format. my only experience is home video with mini dv.. ha. I notice that professional video has very deep DOF too. guess i am just wondering what make a video looks 'professional'..so i start to throw some questions..

25th January 2008	#4
jaegersing Member Join Date: Jan 2007 Posts: 1,141	Re: film image - any post process? To emphasise what Dixon said, professional setups use controlled lighting to make sure that the range between the brightest and darkest parts is within what the camera and medium (film or video) can handle. If you are looking for some kind of post-processing filter that makes video which was shot in normal ambient light look like film quality, you will probably be disappointed (but if you do find it please let me know ). If you are just looking for some effects you can apply to get more of a film-like feel to the footage, there are plugins such as Magic Bullet which can help. If you are on low budget, then filters like Vegas' colour curves can emulate a film-type contrast. There's also a cheapo script-based plugin for Vegas available from the VAST website that tries to emulate film look. Whether these give you the effect you want only you can say. You would need to try them out for yourself. (But it can be fun trying.)

25th January 2008	#5
LENS Member Join Date: Apr 2005 Posts: 758	Re: film image - any post process? oic.. as i know most feature film have carefully set up lighting. in video imaging, any process similar to x-pro in photography?

27th January 2008	#6
ceecookie Deregistered Join Date: May 2007 Posts: 366	Re: film image - any post process? Anyway,i think people can forget about owning a Panavision - its only available on rental basis.