I personally subscribe to the theory that Hollywood straight up forgot how to make anything look good or have appealing lighting. It’s a lost art. They couldn’t do it anymore even if they wanted to.
>>218982407I personally subscribe to the theory that (You) are low-IQ.
>>218982407Project Hail Mary just came out, so you're clearly wrong.
>>218982407They made everything darker in this version, even Snape
Movies just fundamentally cost more per minute. They will always look better than a TV show.
>>218982517is that why it's so dark? didn't pay the electricity bill?
>>218982407It's to better hide and blend the cheap CGI and special effects
>>218982595>is that why it's so dark?Lighting is expensive
>>218982407No it's because digital filmmaking created a "fix it in post" culture. Also fx artists don't have the same union power as lighting directors. No one forgot how to do lighting. Everyone knows it looks like shit. It's just easier and cheaper to worry about lighting in post.
>>218982407I think they're just hiding how brown the Hermione girl looks compared to the others
>>218982701its this. flat lighting to allow for cgi later is the industry standard now no matter the scene
Death of color and lighting
I'm kind of amazed at the lack of magic in the trailer. I get that it's a year away and a lot of post production needs to be done but if you judge just by the trailer alone, the only bit of magic is Snape with a lit up wand and a story that could take place in any castle with nothing magical involved.Whereas the first Sorcerer's Stone trailer from 20 years ago throws goblins, moving staircases, floating candles, people casting magic, etc... to sell the audience that this is going to be magical and fairy-tale like.
>>218982407Bottom looks better in this case
>>218982407this post is a really good example of why you should always ignore negative opinions about everything on this website.the reason that there is less light is because the wather is shit, do you see how it is all gray and foggy outside? that is because they are in england, and that's what it looks like there 90% of the time. did you know that?I just watched the trailer for the first time, and as someone who actively avoids trailers because I think they can ruin the actual media, and as an adult who didn't really have any interest in watching another piece of harry potter media, it actually made me want to watch. not that I care that much about lighting, but every shot seems to be lit very well. all the characters are cast very well, even my nigga snape be lookin cool af. he is also only in it for half a second. it looked great and it genuinely piqued my interest even though I already know the story.and who knows, maybe it will be shit. this is not an endorsement of anything. my point, to anyone reading this, is that you should never ever let someone on this board tell you that something is bad without actually checking it out for yourself. you will miss out on things.also, op is a massive faggot.
>>218982684this is the same company who were spending $10m per episode on GoT. HP is one of like three franchises with even more brand recognition than GoT. if they were ever going to swing for the fences, it would be for this show
>>218983394and to add to this, everyone replying "lol bad lighting lmao" did not watch the trailer, and is also a faggot.
>>218982407Hbo style saturation with british casting.it aint fuckin rocket science bro
>>218983394You are a disingenuous faggot.
Hollywood makes good moviesdisney and british film are pozzed by a royal case of turbo cancer and mega aids
god can you guys believe this lighting? it's so dark, why doesn't it look like he's on an operating table in his dark little shithole bedroom under the stairs
>>218983394Maybe they should’ve waited for good weather before shooting hmm?
>>218983170Yeah everything is filmed as flat as possible so CGI can be added. Then lighting is the added last.
>>218983569Soulless
>>218982460It has gosling, he is incapable of being in a bad movie.
>>218983558>disingenuousWhy are chuds so obsessed with this word? Is it because its the only 5 syllable word they know?
>>218983394prepare to have your mind blown, lil zoom zoomboth those shots were filmed inside on a soundstagethe exterior out the window is added laterthey have complete control over what the weather is in those scenesyou fucking moron
>>218982407Anon the entire production pipeline for a TV show and a movie is different. You're comparing apples to pinecones.
>>218982407Bottom looks like most Potter movies. I assume OP never watched a Potter movie.
>>218983685What about dishonest and obfuscating?
>>218982407
>>218983770The top frame is actually from one of those movies. It is actually the same scene from the film compared with the television version.You are a joke, lmao.
>>218983569
>>2189837763 and 4 syllables respectively
>>218982407>topFlat lighting, looks like a low-budget TV show.>bottomAtmospheric lighting and depth of field, looks like a high-budget movie.
>>218983867Turn your backlight up
>>218982407I still can't understand what you people are watching this shit on to get these screenshots. It isn't nearly as dark on my TV.
>>218983868Very funny, gayboy. The longpost pretending that the trailer won him over was a lie. He backs this garbage because he likes that it is a deconstruction of something beloved by the west. He likes that it is playing loosely with the demographics of the actors.
>>218982407>straight up forgotNo, faggot. Nobody "forgot". They just don't have time to spend half the day setting up lighting when they have 10x the amount of stuff to film. HBO also wants their shows to "look" like an HBO show so they have an established visual language to adhere to. Apple does this also.
>>218983874>Flat lightingwhat does that mean?
>>218984125You're just making shit up
>>218983394Okay, why is the weather bad? Why is there no attempt at making this fictional world look beautiful, whimsical or immersive? Where’s the charm? Where’s the consideration for appealing art direction at all? Enjoy your ugly dark teal and orange lighting under murky weather you stupid shill faggot
>>218983696I love that your interpretation of that post was that he thought it started raining the day they were filming and they had to run with it.
>>218984291>You're presenting information that destroys my kneejerk consensus informed reactionWhy bother making this thread in the first place then faggot? Enjoy the (You)'s
>>218984591OP presented a theory. You were making assertions. You are gay!
>>218982407It's just a different style. DP's are making things look more fantastical nowdays and less realistic, because they have the tools to do it easily.You idiots seem to want every single movie to look like a documentary.
>>218983647The Fall Guy was god-awful.
>>218983278>oh no my modern film doesn't look like a documentary woe is me, this is the death of cinemalol
>>218983647I didn't like The Gray Man
>>218984125I think euphoria is shot and lit pretty well, and distinct from most other hbo stuff. Not talking about the subject matter but the actual shot composition, set and mood lighting, direction and cinematography is good. They get to cheat a lot because it's a ton of surreal scenes and dream sequences, hallucinations and abstractions, etc. so they don't have to worry as much about realistic lighting, but neither should a kids fantasy show for the most part.
>>218984680Not really it was a pretty good normal family comedy movie, solid 3.5/5
>>218984420>he
>>218984631>pretending you're not the OP, hunched over at his desk refreshing this thread for (you)'sYour "theory" was proven wrong by basic rationale. Stay mad though, termite faggot
>>218984161Lighting that doesn't add shadows or highlight any where, so CGI objects are easier to add.
>>218982407Bottom looks fucking depressing.
>>218983394>my nigga snape be lookin cool af
>>218984773Whatever, queer. OP said things look worse now and he's right. You wanted to pretend like you have inside information but you're just making excuses because you are ideologically attached to the deconstruction of this property.
>>218982407Lighting guys usually go right through like la-di-da-di-da when the scene's going. It's fucking distracting for the actors
The first two potter movies are pure kino, it's hard to compare anything to them.
>>218983569Notice how no one was complaining about that shot until you decided to use it for a strawman.
>>218985511Chamber of Secrets was awesome, the only film that I would say is almost as good as the book, even if it is the weakest book in the series.
Does it have something to do with modern TV technology or how TVs are shipped these days in terms of settings? I haven't touched a TV in over a decade.
>>218985361YOU'RE REAL FUCKING AMETURE MAN
>>218982407The talent pool is just spread way, way thinner. Once upon a time, there were basically only two sources of entertainment - movies and network television. Network tv worked as a sort of farm league for the big studios where the cream rose to the top. Then came the first dilution - cable stations. Once more and more of them started producing original shows, the talent pool started losing depth. And then came the streaming platforms to stretch that talent ever thinner. There simply aren’t enough talented people behind the scenes to support quality content across all these platforms, or even if there are, there aren’t enough people working in a quality control capacity that have the eye or the passion to discern or care.
>>218982407It's to make CG blend much more seamlessly.And 90% of this shit is going to be made in front of a greenscreen, so that matters a lot.
>>218986881It's just this. It's for CGI. Lighting is not some lost art. Every scene has CGI now. Can we end this thread now?
>>218982473To better hide the viewership numbers and blend with the SLOP more seamlessly?
>>218983416>if they were ever going to swing for the fences, it would be for this showHave you been paying attention to WB the last couple years? The executives have been pruning and underfunding high budget dramas. It’s not the same company that made GoT, it has different leadership and priorities.
>>218983299i love how hairy starts talking randomly to a fat homeless man on the bus
>I use incandescent as much as possible for key light to keep the richness of the color spectrum, because LEDs restrict the widest color spectrum. For this film, the [simulated] sunlight was always tungsten lights, with the exception of >For my work, it was really a matter of matching the exterior moors and the stage sets and doing so by finding a language where the stage looked as real as possible and the real exteriors looked as if they were shot on stage, somewhat.
>>218984715I enjoyed it a lot since I live in Prague and it is always funny to see movies taking place here.
>>218983278thats the ridley special
>>218983299>Sorcerer's StoneKEK, look at this goy
CGI and special effects ruined cinema long term and there are retards that think AI won't make the decline even worse.
>>218989023Now we're talking. Kino lighting. HBO could never.
>>218982407I think it has to do with how films and shows are made to be watched on phones and tablets now.
>>218984930Looks realistic to me.Look outside, it's rainy as fuck, there wouldn't be a lot of bright sunlight on a day like that.
>>218982407It's due to HDTV and OLED. Directors are used to seeing dark scenes on modern high end High Def TVs and think there's no need to light up a scene for contrast any more.
Digital was a mistake.
>>218982407Idk why you are being attacked. Movies look way worse than they used to and most people agree
>>218982407it's much simpler than that.TV shows and movies are no longer about art.They're a means for producers to siphon money from.The sets are low-quality, so they have to hide them with darkness.
>>218982407Like, it is so overwhelmingly bad, that it is hard to believe it isn't intentionally done to demoralize. Yet, I think they legitimately are just that incompetent. They have no idea what they are doing.
>>218993652Brvtal
>>218993652I can already tell the interior scenes of the large hall with the dinner are going to have that dark and gloomy blue filter grade, because everything has to apparently. Every movie and show is allergic to warm or natural colors now.
>>218999986>Uh so this movie is made by slants ... better remind people by putting on a yellow fever filter
>>218999986>piss filterwtf
The first fucking thing you learn (which people with eyes shouldn't need to learn) is light goes behind the camera pointed at the subject. So right away having the center of the screen be distractingly bright is fucking retarded. It could be salvaged with a lot of lighting but bottom doesn't give a single fuck.Games fuck this up too with idiocy like glowing lava and HDR changing brightness constantly which absolutely fucks with eyesight and causes physical pain.
>>218982407I personally subscribe to the theory that you're a fucking retardBritain looks like the bottom picture for most of the year
>>219000702And is ABQ orange most of the year?
>>219000770yes
>>218983278>it's in the desert so everything is yellow lol
>>218982407yawwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwn
>>218982407>muh heckin diagetic lightingthose people are a plague
Jews hate beauty and art so we're stuck with this soulless shit
>>218983394>even my nigga snapeThis bait post failed in its second act
>>218982407the new potter looks like a banker
It's almost like a whole bunch of filmmakers watched Sicario and realized that realistic lighting looks really good sometimes.
>>219001434More like new potter looks like a wanker
>>218982407Yeah, damn, thats been the poison of all movies over the last 15 years, at least. I just saw a goofy 2012 The Rock in a jungle film, just a family adventure thing, but it had the colors from the 00s/90s. It's refreshing to see actual colors and light in movies and TV. If they were to make Lost nowadays, it'd be grey and brown as fuck, even though it's on a tropical island.
>>218982407The trend to mostly switch from warm to cool tones in filming European settings, and going overly warm in desert settings has got to stop. Who started it? Ridley Scott with Gladiator or Kingdom of Heaven? Maybe 300? Scott's still going at it in recent years with Napoleon and Gladiator II.
>>218983394>my nigga snape be lookin cool afhaha, 5/10 bait
>>218983647Most of his movies aren't good lol. You really got into the reddit larp muh gosling huh?
>>218982407>so they did this remake, miscast the everloving shit out of it first of all>couldn’t even properly light a scene, it was an egregious downgrade >and naturally this is so monumentally important to me that I had no choice but to take it personally-[every fag who was never going to watch it in the first place because let’s face it, nobody is going to watch this]
>visual medium>but you can't see shit
>>219001741It’s called prestige filmmaking in the twents sweaty, you wouldn’t get it. Being able to see what’s happening onscreen and being able to hear dialogue that hasn’t been pushed to the very back of the audio mix is for boomers.
>>218982407Can someone explain one thing about Harry Potter..what time period is it set in? The 2000s movies gave a feeling like the first 1 or 2 are in the 60s, 70s, then suddenly looked modern.Now this HP show? Gonna be weird seeing iPhones and iPads in Hogwarts and whatever
>>218983645How I sleep after a long night smoking meth under the stairs
Top is shot on film and they actually had to light it, it took time and cost moneyBottom is shot on digital and then fucked with later in the editing process
>>218983278Looks like the surface of Mars or something.
>>219001934The 1st book, movie, and season of the show take place in 1991. It doesn't come across in the movies because there's very little time spent outside of Hogwarts.
>>219001938With the last ripe peach to use for your smoothie?
>>219002092Interesting, a nigger wizard in the UK in 1991. Very realistic
>>218983278*add digital filter desert*There we go, wrap it up folks
>>218982517They’re spending $15 million per episode. 8 episodes. It’s going to cost what the production budget did for the original. But there are several things we have now that we didn’t have then like much better CGI, cheaper lighting (LED instead of the old rigs), much better processing power so you can get nearly instant dailies with the much better digital vs old expensive film, and building these sets for future seasons they can do loopholes to spread the cost over future seasons. I think even with inflation, the same amount of money spent in 2001 would stretch just as far. And maybe some practical effects that would have cost $4 million in 2001 would look better in CGI, saving that money. With all that being said, there’s no way they’re cutting corners by being cheap with the lighting. You can tell by the composition that this was a deliberate choice. All modern shows look like that.
>>218982407I agree. Competency crisis, complex systems and whatnot.
>>219001934The story takes place from 1991-1998. The first book was published in 1997 and the first movie filmed in 2000. So there was probably no concern with time periods then because it was so recent.
>>218983394BasedAlso people put way too much emphasis on the coloring but all the action in the show looks cozy and full of childhood innocence. Maybe they just make it darker to make it more British, spookier and gloomier with a "drink tea while watching this". Dark isn't always bad.
What if it's just cheaper to produce (less make up and you can hide other blemishes) that way? Similar to today's architecture looks dystopian because all the sovl is removed to make it cheaper and energy efficient
>>218993652Too bad they went retard after the 2nd
>>218983299Youre not supposed to release a trailer using unfinished visualsThat's braindead from a marketing standpoint, especially if it looks worse than what the final product will be
>Hollywood straight up forgot how to make anything look good or have appealing lightingThat comes with the death-of-creativity territory.
>>218982517go watch the sopranos then get back to me
>>218983569under what new york street is this?
>>218999986Its completely inexplicable. Why do they do this?
>>218983394>>218983457Least obvious shill.
>>218982701But they didn't actually fix anything in post though. The scene in the train is so dark and gloomy you'd think they were headed for bloody Azkaban.
>>218982460That movie is absolute shit
>>219008417Demoralization.
>>218984632>shit colors and shit lighting>fantasticalpick one, shiteyes
>>218987390>Every scene has CGI now.Then stop doing that
>>219008367kek
>>219008417>>218999986It's often the directors doing it themselves, because they're in the Hollywood bubble, and think this is how films are supposed to look. They see their old works as out-dated, and they're insecure and want to impress their peers. It's a bit like architects hwere they're off in their own world, and want to produce monstrosities that please other architects but no one else likes.Wong Kar-Wai and James Cameron both supervised their re-releases of their works, and both added tints. All movies need tints for some unfathomable reason, even old films.It always takes me out of the movie as NOTHING looks like this in reality. You need some kind of grounding, and tinting everything with some color just takes me out of the story.
6 years ago. People have been noticing. I hate tints so god damn much.
They don't light shots, they just let the digital cameras roll, then it outputs a grey hazy image. Then they just add a tint and call it a day. They don't care how weird and unnatural it looks. they spin some shit about the color adding to the scene, but it's really just speed and expediency.All films will either be grey and low contrast, or tinted, and nothing inbetween.
>>218983394>the reason that there is less light is because the wather is shit, do you see how it is all gray and foggy outside?Oh hey. Is this an actual HBO shill? They took a shot from The Deer Hunter in a bright sunny day and then added the grey overcast filter to it in one of the releases.
>>219008850
>>218983278Since when is the sphinx in mexico?
>>218982407It is indeed becoming a lost art.Lighting is a craft that every cinematographer had to learn to get it right the first time. Now, with editing tools, it's becoming more and more of an option to get it right on set.I'm reading Roger Deakins's new book (pretty good), and even on a smut film like Justine, he had to light it properly to get a candlelight effect.
>>219008764I was noticing when I got a Netflix subscription in 2013.
>>219008984Every part of movie making is a lost art at this point
>>219008417
>ITT: People that don't know and can't appreciate what artistic value looks like
>>219009061xhe's right. we must respect.
>>219009061>artistic value>A shallow cash grab reboot for a series that finished less than 20 years ago
>>218983867aint no way
>>219003235>They’re spending $15 million per episode. 8 episodesWhich means that they're spending $15 million per hour* while the original film spent almost $50 million per hour**. So >>218982517 is 100% right.* assuming that each episode is 60 minutes**not adjusted for inflation
>>219008744the reason for this is top looks like a tv show bottom looks like a movie
>>218982684>LEDs make cheapest light source ever invented>light is expensive
>>218987894yes, and this on the freaking director to design the lighting of each scene, not just slop camera records together mindlessly.
>>219003235>cheaper lighting (LED instead of the old rigs)Maybe this is part of the problem? Bulbs produce a much warmer and softer light than LEDs, I think they might also contribute to deeper shadows and brighter highlights, whereas LEDs create a more uniform lighting.I'm not a lighting expert but I assume if you want to emulate natural light (i.e. from the sun), bulbs would be better because LED lighting is very harsh,direct and unnatural which to me suggests it cannot replicate the atmospheric impact on sunlight.
>>219009704LEDs suck at actually lighting things and should have never been used for anything outside of monitors.My city has replaced all the city streetlights with LED ones and it is noticeably darker and harder to see shit at night.
>>218982407More location filming. No, thats not because of the weather, its just because a built film set uses things like brick cladding stuck onto wood, rather than a real wall, or has freshly painted walls. In real life the bricks or paint fade in colour after being exposed to the elements or even just oxygen inside a room and oxidise or develop a patina. This makes the brand new fake set have a much more vibrant colour than the real location would have. Lighting plays a part too as it is easy to light a movie set, but more difficult with location filming.This also means when something is filmed in ultra HD fake sets can be really obvious, which means you have to pay a lot more money for a really good set than you used to.In order to make things on a budget you have 2 real alternatives:>1) Film with green screen and use a CGI setThis is what most Marvel and Disney films do, the downsides are big though if you want people to come back to your films again years later for repeat viewings. In 10 years time the viewers will be used to better CG and tech improves and they'll notice how shite your old filmlokks in comparison. Look at the first Toy Story film; ground breaking in its time, ugly as shite now.>2) Film on locationThe colours might not pop as much, but it looks real because it is, tends to be less expensive and if you go to Wales, New Zealand, or Cornwall you'll get something far more kino than a built set anyway.The other thing that can go on is filters, which I will explain what is happening in my next post as this one is too long already.
>>218982407Potter is relatively modern and very beloved by its fanbase. I am guessing this will be a twofold effort>destroy the legacy and erase it from the zeitgeist (I have never seen the movies but even I know Rickman is Snape and that Voldemort is le bad guy) because of the wrongthink committed by the author JK Loling. >shekel grabThe first one is most important though, the second one is not really needed. They will make their money through hollywood accounting and insider trading as they do.
>>219009918Right, so filters.There is a right way to use a filter and an underhanded way.>Right wayIf a films colours and lighting is widely inconsistent WITHOUT meaning to be then a digital filter might be used to correct this, subtly. The whole idea is that things like lighting or colour should never pull you out of a film, because that can make you suspend your sense of belief in the film, its world and its characters. That means bad reviews and people won't see your film. The key is not to overdo it, just use a light touch and it works well.>Underhanded wayRight, now for some science. As we get older our own eyes lenses get a bit discoloured We start off with a blue filter of our own, but this gradually gets more yellow as we get older. It is so slight year on year you won't notice it. But think back to summer time when you were a kid, didn't everything seem much brighter in your memories? Actually no, that is just the filter on your eyes.Now, here's the tricky part. In family films or ones you are meant to enjoy when you are young or bring a kid of your own to, they really pump up that blue filter or blue lighting, because they want to psychologically manipulate you. They want you reminded of your memories as a kid, remember what it was like to be the real target age of this film? Now you are thinking about your own nostalgia when you watch this film. Good isn't it? Like a warm hug from your mum, a cup of hot coco and marshma from back when you weren't to diabetic to be able to have such things, playing fetch with your childhood dog... Ah, what nice feelings this film brings out, I wonder why... Blue fucking filter messing with your head, thats why! Still many will fall for it and give the film a more positive review. Red or yellowish filters on horror films and thrillers do similar tricks as well, but remind you of your own mortality and make you more susceptible to the scares.
>>219009847LEDs are very efficient at lighting things, in fact they provide more lumens as the bottleneck is heat.
>>218982407Shitty dark blue contemporary film lighting helps hide the Indian cgi and lazy set design, plus it helps hide how awful digital looks compared to film.
>>219009820This was the case back when LEDs were first becoming a thing but now, like digital cameras vs film cameras, there isnt much of a difference between LED and tungsten unless you are a giga professional that knows how to bring out the subtle differences. Like a lot of modern slop movies are shot on film as a marketing gimmick (like nu Star Wars slop) but it looks indistinguishable from any generic digital CGIfest because they arent actively working to bring out filmic qualities like grain or the unique color timings that can come out of developing a film stock. You can go on ebay and buy a tungsten light fixture and set up a shot with it and it wont look any different from a shot with a modern LED light unless you know all the little tricks and secrets that a tungsten pro would, and even then it can be imitated with LED just as a digital camera can imitate film if you want it to.
>>219009957OK but in practice it is noticeably darker.
>>218982407The Love Witch (2016) is probably the last movie ever made that had proper movie lighting.And yes, it's apparently lost art, read the director's blog where she explains why, it's pretty interesting stuff.http://annabillersblog.blogspot.com/2016/01/the-death-of-film.html
>>218983394this nigga thinks all the movie sets are real
>>219010018it's less orange, lumens is how we measure brightness. shove a 5000 led lamp in your room and tell me how "dark" it is.
>>219009918Nigga its a traincar its not that complicated. You think the real life traincar is that dark? No. They painstakingly created the dark unlit look on purpose, not because its a real location and they couldnt figure out how to put a light over the shot.
>>218982407Bottom works better if Hogwarts explodes into color and comfiness. But it won't, so yeah.
>>218983685dis-in-genu-ous
>>218983299>Sorcerer's StoneFill - oss - oh - fer
>>219010044OK, but in reality, when I use my eyes, it is darker.The only case I will concede LED lights are brighter is in car headlights because they are so bright they blind oncoming drivers even without the high beam.
>>218982407they're both bad in different ways.
>>219010077Not really, going through the wall and King's Cross is Harry crossing the threshold, everything after then should be brighter and more colorful.
>>219010094it's less warm, or less lively or whatever arbritrary measuring unit you want to use, but it is not less bright.
>>219010094Then your city just bought weak leds
>>219010057I know man, its like dude, how comes they never found a cure for all cancers yet? I mean, I ain't no scientist with fancy degrees, an book-lernin', an all that gubbins... But how hard can it be? If I was a boffin I'd just roll up my big boy pants and just discover a cure for cancer. Why has nobody ever thought of doing that yet? Stupid lazy scientists.
>>218983394interesting you posted a picture which applies to you
>>219010094>when I use my eyesThen use mine instead. They're not garbage like yours.
>>219010128True. Some retard probably gushed about how much brighter they are so they decided to cheap out.>>219010354I have 20/20 vision.
>>219010239You are comparing a Hollywood production lighting an indoor location to curing cancer
>>219010023She's released nothing since? The blu for Robert Altman's '80s comedy OC & Stiggs has colors for days
Reminder that Hollywood would build an entire Truman show umbrella dome around an outdoor location to mimic the sky and control the light just to make it slightly easier for production to not have to deal with timing and clouds, and shills are in this thread saying the reason the shot is pitch black and looks like shit is because its unreasonable to think a multi million dollar production should light a traincar because its too hard
>>219010385Well done for spotting how the joke worked, I hope it amused you.
>>219010539>>219010239>>219009918NTA but I have followed this interaction and confirmed that you are a faggot
everything looks like shit because you keep watching it. stop. there are thousands of hours of quality film and televesion produced before 2001. watch that instead
>>219001553>The trend to mostly switch from warm to cool tones in filming European settings, and going overly warm in desert settings has got to stopMovies have done this since the beginning of color film. It's an effective (and harmless) technique to indicate a location change while creating an atmosphere. Nobody had a problem with it until reddit types, in their neverending search for imaginary "eurocentrism," decided it was offensive for some reason. If every location was shot with the same filters , movies would be soulless.
>>218982407This isn't the train to Hogwarts, Ron.
>>219010615NTA but so is your mom, yet here we are.
>>218982407They hired criterion editors
>>219010871Aren't these two different movies
>>219010648>Movies have done this since the beginning of color filmActually theyve been doing it since the beginning of film, period. Lots of silent movies would color tint the image blue/yellow/green/magenta for different locations or emotions. Honestly the biggest problem with how its done now is that its not stylized enough, not that its too stylized.
>>218982517seems to me that tv shows are much higher quality than movies these days
>>219011031They did that because lighting was extremely expensive, camera lenses and film weren’t that great at exposure so it wasn’t a complicated choice to make things look less ass
>>219009847because your municipals are scammers who bought the cheapest lights and filled their pockets with the rest.
>>219011115No the lighting and lenses were fine, it was a stylistic choice.
>>219008744>>219009659Bottom is AI "enhanced" shit
>>218983278Excuse me, mate, were you there? No? Well, shut the fuck up then.
>>219009659Tv shows look better than movies these days. But they look like dogshit compared to old stuff
>>219011412>lightning and lenses were fine>deadass posts some duplo looking brick shots
>>219008829Are any films made on reel anymore? Do some directors prefer to use them as a retro thing?
>>218984715The Gray Man is fine. Not a good movie, but certainly not a bad one
>harry potter fanbase currently fractured over rowling not liking trannies>hbo knows they need to avoid a boycott>the easiest way to do this is to frame their production as being opposed to the old production, to get the rabid fanbase on their side>they will put prominent tranny side characters in their showremember this post
>>219010023Thank you for this interesting blog.
>>219013020>>219012667Never going to happen because Rowling has full creative control and is still owner of the IP rights.If anything, the show is going to be full of her retcons because over the years she grew to regret some stuff she put in the books.
>>219002065This can not be real. Why would anyone do this?
>>218989023whoops I cut the quote>with the exception of the larger sets where we used a 100K SoftSun Linear, which is a plasma fixture with a richer color spectrum than HMI or LEDLEDs always have worse color rendition than tunsgten, even when they are brighter
>>219014464>>219002065afaik photochemical color timing was done in the interpositive, and 4K remasters are made from the original negativessince they have to redo the whole grading, modern digital colorists like to give it a modern lookC I N E M A T I CINEMATIC
>>218982460It's just as dark, ugly, and digitally color graded as every other Hollywood slop entry that comes out in theaters. Just because it's a "le heckin hopeful chungus optimism" movie doesn't mean it's not an ugly washed out piece of shit.
Artistic fields, and subsets of artistic fields, all continuously go through this boom/bust cycle. Look at historical sculptures and paintings. We can clearly see local "highs" where they are creating some absolutely top notch high quality stuff, and then "lows" where it seems to regress back down to basic elementary shit.The paintings of European monarchs are most interesting to me because you can clearly see where painters are at the top of their craft and it's basically photorealistic and then 100 years later someone is drawing it flat and ugly like a 17 year old that just picked up the practice 2 years before.Hollywood seems to be going through the same transition. The 90's were simply a local peak. All of the subsets of filmmaking: lighting, sound, music, were firing on all cylinders, at the peak of decades of progressive continuous incremental improvement, highly competitive. I was talking to my gf about how music itself was so massively instrumental back then, the composers knew exactly how to make you feel anything they wanted at any given time and if you took the music away the movie lost 50% of its impression. They don't do that anymore, it's ambient background noise. Lighting I'd imagine is similar, they were looking to do it in such a way that psychologically it made you feel things, see things, create sensations that enhance the experience and the story, and now they don't do that, they just... turn a light on and hope for the best.Art is easily corruptible as it's subjective. Intuitively we "know" what good art is, but it's hard to describe/quantify/qualify, and so pretenders are able to invade and corrupt it over and over again a chain of knowledge is broken and lost.
>>219014743And yes DEI is a big part of it. In the 2010's when they were trying to reduce the count of white men in Hollywood, the lesser roles were prime targets for quota filler hires. They were replacing guys who legitimately loved what they did and considered it their identity with people who are only there because of another identity, their race or gender, with no care for the thing that pays the bills, just a job. We "just a jobbed" 80% of filmmaking and it shows.
>>2190119972026 Best Cinematography oscars:>Sinners - 65mm film>Frankenstein - digital Arri Alexa 65>Marty Supreme - 35mm film>One Battle After Another - 35mm vistavision >Train Dreams - digital Arri Alexa 35
>>219010023David Mullen (the DOP) is still working he did Westworld, Marvelous Mrs. Maisel and Etoile
>>218982407>Hollywood straight up forgotThey didn't forget. They fired everyone with the knowledge and experience, because they were old white guys, and they needed to make room to hire young black queer tyrannies. They did this to themselves by allowing women and crybullies into positions of power
>>219010018see >>219014609cheap LEDs dont illuminate the whole spectrum
>>219015018when buying LEDs, look for CRI >90 at least
>>219010646>everything looks like shit because you keep watching it. stop. there are thousands of hours of quality film and televesion produced before 2001. watch that insteadthis
>>219011031>we were always at war with eastasia
>>219010450she has an upcoming film in limbo, The Faces of Horrorit was supposed to be released last year
>>219014820Film vs digital theory debunked, they straight up do not know how to place lights anymore
>>219010450>>219015160She's rich and her movies are elaborate passion projects she makes as a hobby while doing lots of stuff for them by herself, so it will probably take few more years before she finishes next movie. Love Witch took her like 10 years.
>>219010023>>And yes, it's apparently lost artTo retarded lying jew nepo babies yeah. Still thousands of normal working class White men who don't get hired. Does the bitch want to give me proper money to do it? Didn't think so. Back to flipping burgers it is.
>>219015017Did the girl call the guy big before the webm started
>>218982407bottom is accurate to the british weather.
>>219010077They'd have to have a shred of creativity for that kind of thinking.
>>218982407No it’s just a desperate need that millennials feel they need to be taken seriously at all times
>>218989023>artificial soul
>>218984680>>218984759Fall guy was actually OK
>>218983394Quintessentially sub 90 IQ post.
It's /tv/'s fault for hating the films of Wes Anderson. This slop is what you deserve.
>>219018227fixed
Darker lighting hides flaws. It leaves more to the audience imagination to fill in detail gaps. That's why all new media does this shit, pure laziness.
The is a scientifically proven relationship between depression and the world around you looking grey and dim.Hollywood is either full of depressive fucks or they want you to become depressive. Pick your poison.
>use modern camera that can see in the dark>"we can fix it in post">doesn't fix it in post
Why is everything so cold, dark, oversaturated and devoided of any color or soul?
>>218984714>heh, we made a documentary about the piss world, again>if you dont like it thats YOUR problem
>>218989023too many center shots
>>218989023This looks like shit though. Overly manufactured but in an unstylized way, just lifeless “cool” imagery designed to be featured exactly like this
Modern Hollywood is a cesspool of nepotism and DEI hires so all of the competent white men have disappeared.
>>219001237>>219001297>>219001327>>219001452This look like shit and unrealistic as fuck. If that was real light and not some garbage CGI then entire street would be illuminated with red light.
>>219022400the trails are not real light, it's literally computer code. that's why it doesnt emit light in the game either. do you even know what tron is?
>>219022963It doesn't emit the light in the game because that was supposed to be atari-level graphics in the early 80's - computer graphics had no concept of light back then. Tron Ares scenes in real world had those trails glow bright orange-red, but they didn't illuminate the surroundings at all which looks fake as fuck but is obviously a consequence of them being added in post.
>>219023181retard alert. just take the L loser
Fucking piss filter ruining everything
>>219023268Oh, so the real world is video game now? Stop justifying shitty CGI and garbage cinematography, you fucking pajeet. Tron Ares real world scenes looked like absolute SHIT, just like your skin color.
>>219023345she lost her smile illusion in the left one
>>219023468yeah they're a video game that's the whole point of the movie
>>218982407Hollywood switched from sodium to LED lightbulbs and film to digital cameras. It’s very difficult to capture warmth or color saturation with modern equipment. DPs are also increasingly lazy and settle with fixing everything in the editing room.
