[a / b / c / d / e / f / g / gif / h / hr / k / m / o / p / r / s / t / u / v / vg / vm / vmg / vr / vrpg / vst / w / wg] [i / ic] [r9k / s4s / vip / qa] [cm / hm / lgbt / y] [3 / aco / adv / an / bant / biz / cgl / ck / co / diy / fa / fit / gd / hc / his / int / jp / lit / mlp / mu / n / news / out / po / pol / pw / qst / sci / soc / sp / tg / toy / trv / tv / vp / vt / wsg / wsr / x / xs] [Settings] [Search] [Mobile] [Home]
Board
Settings Mobile Home
/p/ - Photography

Name
Options
Comment
Verification
4chan Pass users can bypass this verification. [Learn More] [Login]
File
  • Please read the Rules and FAQ before posting.

08/21/20New boards added: /vrpg/, /vmg/, /vst/ and /vm/
05/04/17New trial board added: /bant/ - International/Random
10/04/16New board for 4chan Pass users: /vip/ - Very Important Posts
[Hide] [Show All]


[Advertise on 4chan]


File: lovewitch.webm (2.9 MB, 1000x540)
2.9 MB
2.9 MB WEBM
Any video cameras that emulate film yet? I haven't researched since like 2017 but back then there wasn't shit except for some expensive digital bolex
>>
EOS M with magiclantern shooting cineDNG plus vintage 16mm lenses.
>>
>>4380429
I don't think anything digital really looks like film but other than the digital bolex you mentioned, the BMPCC can be graded in a very classic looking way. Maybe because it shoots RAW. Maybe >>4380429 the Canon's that can be hacked also do. But it might also be the colorists who use the BMPCC know what they are doing because I've seen footage from that camera that looks really digital as well.
>>
>>4380472
1dc was the closet digital ever got to having a film like look for video
>>
File: 98pmho.jpg (95 KB, 500x739)
95 KB
95 KB JPG
Why do you people make me do this shit?
>>
>>4380500
Because it costs a hundred bucks to get 3 minutes of 8mm footage?
>>
>>4380524
I know, but you should just accept that if it's too expensive to shoot film, your videos won't look like film and move on with your life instead of cooking up elaborate copes online about how "[x] sensor is so filmic/organic/vintage" If you don't shoot film, it won't look like film. It really is that simple. Find a digital camera you like and stop worrying about it or fork out the dough.

Either way you should shut up, I'm tired of this retarded shit.
>>
>>4380525
I don't know if OP is one of those "filmic/organic/vintage" types or someone who just wants something that gets reasonably close but if you are so tired of these posts, just hide the thread.
>>
>>4380533
>but if you are so tired of these posts, just hide the thread.
Not the thread in particular, just this sentiment in general. People deciding that the film look is the gold standard (it is), but then being unwilling to put in the effort required to shoot film.
>>
>>4380525
If we put man on the moon we can make digital look like film
>>
digital is just a data capture. Any of these mirrorless cameras that shoot high quality 10-bit or RAW can be made to look like film, assuming the lens used suits the look.
>>
>>4380534
I'll grant you that for photographers since you can get a film body and develop and scan a ton of rolls for the price of one of these overhyped "filmic" digitals. Getting into movie filming is crazy expensive that I get it. Although now that I think more about it, I agree with you. There are way too many tutorials for getting filmic video by people who want instant gratification and hipster cred or whatever and don't want to learn the art.
>>
>>4380541
Never seen it done before. Maybe theoretically possible but no one has come close
>>
>>4380543
what lol?
https://www.imdb.com/title/tt13560574/technical/?ref_=tt_spec_sm

many such cases.... any pro hollywood colorist could give you an excellent film look because they treat this stuff as a technical practice and as a science and not as some kind of magical alchemy like you weirdos.
>>
>>4380543
https://www.yedlin.net/DisplayPrepDemo/
maybe take a look at this to help understand that every single thing film does to an image is observable and easily replicable in software. you think we can model complex physics but we cant recreate pixels that are the right color in the right order?
>>
>>4380544
You just don't have the eye for film.. Adding some grain to digital film isn't enough. Enough to fool Tumblr A24 fan sure but there is an artificial look to digital that I've never seen removed. I watched a video of a guy doing an analysis of film and what is going on automatically is too difficult to capture let alone emulate.
>>
>>4380546
I hate this guy. Yeah it looks the same when you have a guy sitting in a dark room with no motion but it doesn't look like that when you actually make a real movie. Hence the movies he was hired to direct to emulate film don't look anything like film. Doesn't help that the type of film you use and the process are just as important.
>>
>>4380544
looks horrible
>add real grainy grain
>change wb to green tint
>>
>>4380547
>>4380549
you sound like an audiophile trying to tell me that you can tell the difference between a class A and class D amplifier. You just want magic to be real.
>>
>>4380546
there you go OP, Arri Alexa and hire this colorist.
>>
>>4380553
You're like my retarded uncle who leaves frame interpolation on his TV and can't see the difference even when I turn it on and off.
>>
>>4380554
His movies that he actually worked on look nothing like film. It's easy to do trickery when you shoot a guy standing still in a dark room. Not so easy when you actually have to make a film.
>>
>>4380558
it was a joke. As in you can 100% get the film look by shooting film and it might even be cheaper compared to that anon's suggestion of going with a $10,000 Arri and doing all that crap in that video that probably took years to learn and, from what you are saying, isn't even successful.

But to OP, the Magic Lantern and BMPCC are cheap enough to be worth a punt.
>>
>>4380561
I didn't suggest getting an Arri.
I suggested that, as the guy in the video says, any decent modern camera that can get a clean enough capture can provide source material to apply a film look to. Are you guys like allergic to understanding technology on this site?
>>
>>4380564
Are you allergic to understanding his advice is garbage because his movies look like garbage?
>>
>>4380564
If you watch that video, to get the film look, he used a film camera, scanned it on an ARRI machine, developed a 3D LUT, developed a halation algorithm, still messed with lift gamma and gain. And his advice to people to people who don't want to do all that? "you can push vendors or software people whether your post house partners to investigate this stuff further"

OR you can just shoot film. When I think of all the slop out there about achieving filmic or cinematic looks and how trash nearly all of it is, yeah I'm thinking just shoot film.
>>
>>4380568
>yeah I'm thinking just shoot film.
It does come down to keep it that simple. That Yedlin guy is talented and had to write some code or something to get a very close image, but at the end of the day, you gotta choose between what's feasible, and in today's world, it's unfortunately not film unless you're working on a project that wants and has the budget for it. Do the best with what's given to you.
>>
File: 1607447455080.jpg (86 KB, 575x620)
86 KB
86 KB JPG
>>4380429
>>
>>4380429
Ikonoskop A-Cam DII is similar to digial bolex - it had film-like (i.e. simple) controls, and global shutter cDNG raw.

To a lesser extent, the Blackmagic Production Camera 4K (and its differently housed siblings the Ursa/Ursa Mini 4K) have some aspects going for them - while they are global shutter cameras with cDNG raw, they also have problems such as inadequate IR blocking filter and almost entirely touchscreen interface on a screen that is basically invisible outdoors. Saying that, I have yet to miss focus with my P4K because the green dot focus peaking is just about visible even when the rest of the image is not.
>>
>>4382057
Even more expensive than the Bolex.. why these things always get abandoned. We need an established company to make something similar
>>
>>4380429
There is some dude from Germany claiming he developed some hardware addons that let you achieve Technicolor style colors on most digital cameras.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WL1CFb0b0bI
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7bNrFBo81mE
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NHAMvfZUxI0
>>
>>4382071
Seems a bit snake-oily to me. He isn't giving any details that I can find.
>>
>>4382077
Probably because patent pending
>>
>>4382077
All I know he is making that claim for quite a few years now and he had a horror movie made using his method of filming.
>>
>>4382071
>>4382137
>>4382087
>>4382077
Man this is the best emulation I've seen by far. Someone has to figure this out
>>
the og bmpcc was pretty good
>>
I really don't fathom why zoomies are so obsessed with le analog, le film and le lofi lately
>>
>>4382456
>lately
It's been almost a decade now
>>
File: Pacifiction (2022).webm (1.31 MB, 1920x804)
1.31 MB
1.31 MB WEBM
what do we think about Pacifiction?
>>
>>4382472
Sorry i only watch good movies
>>
>>4382162
i still use mine as a webcam and occassional sneaky cam
>>
File: 962420.jpg (34 KB, 960x720)
34 KB
34 KB JPG
What do we think about Pedro Costa's cinematography style? It's all digital.
>>
>>4382476
Like what?
>>
>>4382456
Because film objectivity has nicer colors.
>zoomers
Nah, even boomers say that film is better.
>>
Thoughts on CCD cinematography cameras?
>>
>>4382516
Objectively worse colors
>>
>>4382523
Post some digitally shot films which you think are superior to film
>>
>>4382526
The vast majority of movies out today.
>>
>>4382533
Name them
>>
>>4382472
I'm interested in watching it just from that webm. It looks beautiful. A little heavy on the diffusion filters, but beautiful
>>
>>4382536
>name all of the movies!
lol
>>
>>4382565
kys
>>
Use old lenses, it's that simple really
>>
>>4380429
unironically FPBP in this case
as sumbody thats been looking into it for some years it's either
bmpcc og
or canon cameras running magic lantern crop mood
best option probably 5d mark iii to account for raw capture crop, ud get about 1.5x "super35" field of view
smaller sensor canons you would have to crop in more and gives u mft field of view, if you are okay with that get a t5i cus of the flip screen or a sl1 for how small it is and you can probs rig it into a small setup for cheap
>>
>>4386778
by far the camera that most looks like film when shooting digital files has been these two options
>>
Thompson viper but nothing prior and nothing since and working with one is like putting your balls in a vice
>>
>>4386863
>Thompson viper
lol no



[Advertise on 4chan]

Delete Post: [File Only] Style:
[Disable Mobile View / Use Desktop Site]

[Enable Mobile View / Use Mobile Site]

All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective parties. Images uploaded are the responsibility of the Poster. Comments are owned by the Poster.