why do stills from modern movies look shit?
is it the digital cameras, the cgi, or the penis women?
 CRIME Shirt $21.68 |
 |
CRIME Shirt $21.68 |
why do stills from modern movies look shit? is it the digital cameras, the cgi, or the penis women?
Lack of film grain in most cases
You just watch shit movies like FOTM Hollywood blockbusters.
What are some good movies that are recent and have GOOD cinematography?
I honestly cant think of any
How recent?
I think in the last 10 years is a good number. Everything has been CGI since then, and it's also around the time penis women started being everywhere.
But if you cant think of any, something since digital cameras became the norm would be alright too in my opinion
>I think in the last 10 years is a good number.
Off the top of my head Tar, La La Land, The Revenant, Silence, Mad Max: Fury Road, Banshees of inisherin, Blade Runner 2049, Once Upon a Time in Hollywood
Good list but I don't like the sparseness of BR2049, especially for a Blade Runner movie.
Feel like it's more faithful to the book, so I can't be mad
Ida was shot on digital. Is that the point you were trying to make?
digital is a pale imitation of film, LED/flourescent are a cheap imitation of tungsten
>why do stills from modern movies look shit?
everything was more intentional back in the day with more pre-production. they didn't have the luxury have not having good lighting, and you can't frick around with film. The filmed on location more.
>digital is a pale imitation of film
wrong.
>t. doesn't know shit about cinematography
https://www.dpreview.com/interviews/4663212665/interview-with-three-time-oscar-winning-cinematographer-emmanuel-lubezki?comment=1178198477
https://medium.com/@julianmaiz/the-creator-deakins-and-digital-filmmaking-9f90c97c06e4
A genuine, legitimate, spiritual lack of sovl.
Unfortunately it seems like a lot of modern cinematographers and colorists lack taste. A more neutral approach would look better 90% of the time but they just can't help themselves and frick with things.
Also digital is a little worse at color depth.
This is a conclusion I've come to.
Both for music industry and Movies, think about the dedication you had to put when there's was no computers, sound engenier had to cut tape with razor stich the shit together, same for movies, they needed more than passion to do it.
Now fast forward to 2024, your fricking iPhone record in 4K and you can record guitars and multitracks from your tablet.
So naturally this two industry are flooded with people that doesn't have the talent, doesn't have the passion, the result is clear, lack of quality at every stage because of delusional people that think they want to do what they are doing because everything is now very easy to "get started".
you are correct but still dumb ESL.
you watch garbage, that's why
Because modern audiences reward mediocrity. How many people in this board watched Northman in theatres?
that movie looked like absolute shit kek
No wonder, it was shot on 35 mm film.
Everyone ITT should watch more movies.
I try to be open minded, but I'm not watching a movie about a grown ass man who makes dresses. everything about that trailer said gay
Don't shut yourself out to kino just because it's occasionally gay kino.
>gay hood homie but with classical music instrument soundtrack
It's worth a watch but it's overrated.
ohhh its artsy homosexualry now its worth watching
its not
If I wanted to watch gay porn, I'd watch gay porn.
stick to capeshit then
it's like looking at a pile of maggots
you do you, but don't expect me to watch homosexualry
watch more movies
this is terrible color grading, it's so washed out it looks like there's no color at all
>literally a black and white film
>why is there no color????????????????????????????????????????????????????
i-it's a joke
yeah thats the joke moron
Moonlight doesn't actually have any gay sex scenes thoughbeit. It's mostly from the main characters perspective as a lonely kid/teenager.
gay intimacy is much grosser than gay sex
i can handle a dude just getting a nut, but catching feelings is homosexual af
You must be over 18 to post here.
>tine to grow up and start appreciating black homosexualry chuddie
nobody's buying it, you shouldn't be selling it
it's the opposite, closet chuddie
Looks great, but I'm not a fan of the choice to make the blacks low-contrast and lean purple.
Phantom Thread was filmed on 35mm film so you're really just proving OPs point for him
It's not just about film, digital can also look good.
This looks really bad. The building is doing all the work.
Are the trees doing all the work here?
Yes. That looks like it was taken from a modern streaming series.
NTA. Post a shot from a modern tv series that looks as good.
The costumes do look too new next to the building.
phantom thread looked so good
BR2049 looked good
No, it really didn't. It looked like any typical modern Hollywood sci-fi blockbuster.
It looked like generic hi-gloss shit
Not really, Deakins lights and shoots a scene in a very specific way.
>DUDE LET'S HAVE ONE COLOUR DOMINATE THE ENTIRE FRAME
The desert sequence is one of the many sequences that looked like shit. It just looks so fricking stupid and lazy. This entire movie is extremely unimaginative with sets that look like complete sterile dogshit
I disagree
JOI? thats an edit right?
nope
Why would it be an edit?
Underage moron
underaged? no
cumbrained? yes
Posting Roger Deakins is cheating. The man is a genius
Yeah he puts up warm lighting and makes a silhouette, calls it a day.
digital coloring
Are light readings still a thing on film sets now or do they just approach everything with a "we'll fix it in post with filters" mentality?
Oh no, most of cinematography hasn't changed at all since we were shooting on film. You still have to light the scene appropriately for the ISO you're using, which means getting out the light meters, and you still have to make sure everything's in focus which means getting out the tape measures. This is one reason movies take so long to make, particularly compared to TV. Movie sets tend to move really slowly because everything is usually done meticulously.
>lack of film grain
>diffused lighting
>grading the color instead of shooting it
>greenscreen sets that are too clean and empty
>props and costumes that are too clean and artificial looking
>general absence of natural materials and elements
>movies are being shot more like sitcoms and commercials
>grading the color instead of shooting it
We used to call it color timing, and it was as important then as the DI process is now. It's just that now we have better tools so we can do more and cooler stuff.
I'm not talking about color timing, I'm talking about finalizing the color palette. Color timing's purpose was to maintain consistency, not change the entire look of the film in post like what is done with contemporary digital grading. People used to bother to coordinate the colors of sets/props/costumes and employ lens filters and stage light color filters so all the color was shot, not decided or changed in post.
Lol at the year 2 film student camping out ITT
same, it's kind of cute tho, so I'll let it slide
because I'm cool
Texture, and the camera eye trying to mimic the human eye and senses instead of superhuman fantasy ideas of them.
Not enough Turkish gay love like in this movie.
gay sex is implied, never shown, as is depicted as horrible torture the likes of which no man should ever have to experience. as it should be.
Lawrence clearly enjoyed it though
This will answer your question
?si=5m-qdThKhjtaU92h
For me it's how every Netflix movie has the exact same clean bland photography doesn't matter who directs the movie. How? Do they force the same director of photography in every movie? Even movies they just distribute looks the same.
That is every movie nowadays, not just Netflix production. Every movie nowadays just looks the same, there is very little unique artistic expression.
Movies as products, art as content.
duncbros… why won’t they stop mocking us?
Something something cinematography something something media literacy...
laziness and lack of love
expect to see the effect in everything and everywhere as you age
most movies have shitty cgi backgrounds while a lot of modern movies had well crafted sets or in some cases they filmed on location
What happened?
I legitimately think BR2049 does look good but the original blows it out of the water in the aesthetics department.
it fits with the theme because the future is soulless
Sounds like a lame excuse
denis is obsessed with minimalism and futurism. The original set design was dense and textured while 2049 is minimalist and sparse because denis thinks it makes good mis an scene or some gay shit. muh loneliness etc. There are a few scenes that resemble the old blade runner. K walking up to his apartment comes to mind.
yeah it worked for BR2049, dunc sucks ass though
DUNC is better than 2049.
DUNC 2 > BR2049 > DUNC
BR2049 > DUNC 2 > DUNC
I like all of those movies
>more shit filling the frame = good
its more cyberpunk.
Different approach to cinematography. Back then, movies were shot like photos. Now they only care about lE rEaLiSm