No Film School: I've been watching a lot of old movies lately, and one thing that's struck me is just how beautiful they are to look at. Sure, before digital cameras, it was crazy expensive to shoot a movie, but the colors, the angles, and the darkness are really something.
And because it was so expensive, shots had to be meticulously planned so that money was not wasted.
3 comments:
This idea of high dynamic range ruining movies is something I’ve been thinking about a lot lately, especially since I am taking a class about creative visual storytelling in film production. This class isn’t about having really nice cameras and equipment, but instead about learning the basics and how to effectively tell a story in film with whatever device you have. There was something about older movies that make them so magical to watch, and I think part of this is the slight scrappiness and grainy quality that they have without it lessening the impact of the piece. I think this is due to our love and yearning for nostalgia as human beings, and seeing things that feel more like memories (a haziness, and color graded softer) version of media makes us appreciate it more. I do wish that movies and tv shows did the classic technique of using blue light for night time instead of having everything incredibly dark though because I would love to be able to watch my shows with a light on sometimes!
Design choices in our modern day I feel like are way more criticized when compared to media from the previous century. While different from the previous century of movies, I still think that the way modern films are shot is a vast improvement over old films in most areas, the movies of the modern area represent the tastes that people have currently, which isn't a bad thing in my opinion. I cant say ive noticed anything wrong with the way that modern movies are shot as a whole, and looking back on my experiences watching films i've always thought that most of the movies i've seen are visually pleasing enough for me to not have any complaints. The movies that i've watched from the 1980’s have good lighting but i wouldn't say that it's better than what movies do currently, that's not to say its bad compared to now, it's just a different style that i think doesn't need to be put on a pedestal
High dynamic range impacting visual style isn’t something I had really thought about specifically in relation to how different film looks nowadays to say 60 years ago, but it makes a lot of sense. Now that filming is cheaper, and its easier to access more breadth when filming, it is easier to be lazier with it! In a way its almost unfortunate that this greater accessibility “enables” less attention to detail, but that 100% just a symptom of working being easier. If you’re not forced to think about your exact color profile in order to make sure you can pay for the right washes and depth, why would you put hours and hours of though into exactly what shades are portrayed on screen?
Post a Comment