Frage von JANP:
Hello
I turn with the Dvx100a and that the video would not look as
whether it is 50 years old. I would like to have an effect, of the video
look as if it will be with a 35mm camera were filmed
is. (Occasionally, black hair and small damages on the video)
And is not the picture flicker.
But I would not buy plug-ins.
Ps I (Final Cut Pro HD 4.5, Motion and After Effects 5.5)
Can be done so what??
Gruß Jan P [/ b]
Antwort von Roma:
Since I did not look all the way through?
You DO NOT want that picture looks old, but want the same hair, dust and damage? As for the film said to have come to, if not by years of tension on the projector, put it in the box and back on the projector and put back in the box ....? I'm in my last admissions at least any dust or damage can be seen in the film.
Do not you think rather that you wish for a film look? Feeling the way from the classic video of the pictures look? A little grain, greater contrast, depth and 16:9?
Roger
Antwort von MiXMaster:
Well, if there was 16:9 for the film look really heard about it would probably splendid arguments;)
As I understand this is more likely to 4:3 (at 35mm) ...
Antwort von Blackeagle123:
Hello, I usually do not exactly know the Programs (except of course after Effetcs)
In Premiere, follow these steps, however, go very fast and easy! (Sometimes even without the plug-in) The plug-ins for Premiere rarely work so synonymous in After Effects.
I do not know exactly what you want, whether or not more Sepia or black and white describes your look.
Not only increase the contrast, possibly with an affordable plug-in work, movie Colors you can buy you, Program is administered one of apropos in this forum, right? It plays the saturation, gain, brightness and contrast a role.
Then your movie looks even more for "film" out and just not digital!
Search times in the forum for "film look".
Of course, black bars a film can contribute more professional, s.Television intuitively through the habituation of movies! 16:9 But whether one can describe as a film look, it's a moot point;)
I hope I could help you!
Love Greetings
Constantin
Antwort von JANP:
I mean:
If you look at your views a DVD. Then one can always find
a few hairs and lint on the video. I do not want that the
Video we at "Miss Marple" or "Dick and Doof" looks like.
I only grit and fluff.
gruß Jan P
Antwort von Roma:
Well, if there was 16:9 for the film look really heard about it would probably splendid arguments;)
As I understand this is more likely to 4:3 (at 35mm) ... Since I agree with you entirely, but is in most cases, a sooooo big wish. Well, are not s.mir sols.
Booze can be easily generated in a synonymous Bildbearbeitungsprog as a mask. In the grain, I do not know exactly FinalCut offers the other Progs I really do not remember me. Gabs then a plug-in for Premiere (forgot the name), in which the various parameters could be adjusted (as synonymous fibers and hairs). But such times synonymous for "Magic Bullet", which offer plug-ins, which affect the color style, perhaps as synonymous for "film look" (the color adjustments are certainly lonely bit ... of course only my opinion)
Roger
Antwort von PowerMac:
I turn the camera and cut synonymous with synonymous with AppleScript. Depends what you're up. When you make a good dramatic film, a funky and sophisticated color correction to make much of the material. Sets advance of course a slightly better story. Abrupt color effects are bad.
Otherwise, open Aperture, a full tele, good attitudes, rides, good lighting ... Sorry, but no other way. These 55 mm plug-ins are relatively good. A google search for film look and final cut has been helping but ...
Standard rates an "à la click to 35mm does not look there."
By conscious interference, I would tend to ignore. Intuitively I feel unwanted interference in a clearly recognizable video source as inappropriate. I do not know how you're handling the experience with the camera. But I would experiment a lot with the light. The camera offers much to gamma curves, black stretch and knee, focus (always -5 min). On a good monitor s.Wochenende considered illuminate a restaurant. And play around with this beautiful menu.
Patrick
Antwort von prem:
I agree with Patrick in particular. For a good look you've been times an important condition: progressive images. Create The presets in Final Cut Pro, go to the preset sequence, a copy of the "DV Pal 48 kHz", select the checkbox
field dominance "No" and save the preset as a progressive "DV Pal, otherwise it was with progressive !
16:9
is now 35mm film, no preference whether (on TV or in movies where even more 17:9), so I disagree with the outposts, but as long as you make good pictures, is the aspect ratio ****** no preference !
Listen to Patrick and add no additional disturbances, such as lint, tread, color casts, etc. grit! Make a good color correction, not only s.Computerdisplay but synonymous s.einem external CRT monitor.
Keep the low depth of field!
First, the WAS, then the HOW. When the subject is worthwhile, get in the recording is already the most out through composition and lighting. Avoid over-exposed parts. If what you see with the naked eye, already
packed, is the role of the cameraman only the genuine recording. This is of course a science in itself.
Antwort von djoesch:
I still synonymous an idea which in my view, however, adds that the aspect ratio plays a major role in the visual language.
I even think that the 16x9 trim is still too low.
I think one can make his settings more beautiful, or better said, the eye perceives it as very pleasant, if the picture is wider.
TIP:
If you have a TFT display during the shoot s.der camera, then stick it on top and bottom with strips Gaffertape nem ordinary video recording s.and switch to ordinary 4:3. (The least-DV cams have a 16x9 wide-chip, it involves only the loss of image information of a 4:3-image.) AND I can not satisfied with the pruning to just go ahead to 4:3, in which case from a local recording medium shot-one could test recording, you mus stop what one pleases ...
My 'Gaffertape image format' behind rather resembled the ratio 8:3 or 16x6, but test it's worth it!
Now, whenever you try to film you now s.The gaffer tape from the specified image spaces hold.
You will then automatically choose a slightly larger distance from the object and now concentrate on the center of the image and the center line.
If you are cutting it into Premiere, then choose among the video effects, transform, and prune from the top and bottom, as desired (with the same value each NaTrue) so that the black bars to be incurred in accordance with the width of the taped off. Alternatively, you can in Photoshop is a 720x576px Create Picture with black bars above and below, export as a transparent PNG and put on the Supreme Video track. But with the function in Premiere it is clever, because you can try different Beschnittstärken, or directly change the black bars can.
I Anglegemacht this way Steadicam shots with a 0.7 x Wide and had to realize, to my delight, it looks much more like a film production and the picture looks more deeply and next, even though I've dropped a few theoretically by Picture. But never mind, because I've taken during the shoot had its own picture-format as a basis and therefore totzdem all that is in the picture that goes into the Picture.
You already see, i talk of the results. Will you have to forget to try again! ;-)
Antwort von AndyZZ:
I mean:
If you look at your views a DVD. Then one can always find
a few hairs and lint on the video. The DVD, I'd exchange s.deiner place!
Antwort von djoesch:
I mean:
If you look at your views a DVD. Then one can always find
a few hairs and lint on the video.
The DVD, I'd exchange s.deiner place! LOL, or the screen clean. * g *
But seriously,
if it is a digital film, it has mostly fluff and hair, but a slight flickering synonymous when you look closer.
I finally have time and again by chance seen Pippi Longstocking, 4:3, Film and lint, hair and flickering were there.
Antwort von AndyZZ:
I mean:
If you look at your views a DVD. Then one can always find
a few hairs and lint on the video.
The DVD, I'd exchange s.deiner place!
LOL, or the screen clean. * g *
But seriously,
if it is a digital film, it has mostly fluff and hair, but a slight flickering synonymous when you look closer.
I finally have time and again by chance seen Pippi Longstocking, 4:3, Film and lint, hair and flickering were there. Well, Pippi Longstocking is indeed synonymous nu already 35 years old. And if it is then digitized synonymous still sloppy and cheap, then one has in fact such errors on it. But with a new production from the past 10 years sowas may not appear.
Antwort von Axel:
Fussel, flicker, motion blur, and possibly even grain and limited gamma and saturation values, which is certainly not a 35mm look, this is more or Super 8 - older - 16mm. This is easy to simulate the above post), plus "splices" (short cut mark on each image offset, and de-interlace. For music videos and commercials for a while, this style was hip.
Good movies are usually synonymous similar projects, but their positive characteristics, which can be achieved with video:
- 16:9
- Small depth of field
If the camera can record full frames, it is done, otherwise one remains in interlaced. That's all of the
technical differences. Disorders should not be.
There is a
scale difference: the ability
to learn, the light of a motive to manipulate according to his wishes by brightening / shading / aperture setting and Filters. In a motion picture cameraman responsible treatment of each setting, as if it were a picture for eternity (which it indeed tends to be synonymous). For amateur films can be seen, however a lot of snap shots and flashy showmanship.
Better a well-photographed video as a sloppy "35mm look".
Antwort von djoesch:
Correct!
That makes sense.
If one eh a camera without a true 16x9 - Chip does, then it makes sense to the display with gaffer tape and abzukleben on 4:3 film them. Then one can theoretically synonymous taste stronger than widescreen 16x9. I was so convinced that I am even almost go down to 16x6 (8:3), because I found that the imagery works even better.
:-)
