/p/ - Photography » Thread #3668066

[30 / 13 / ?]

198KiB, 1000x630, cindy.jpg

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO

Film Stills

Anonymous Tue 09 Jun 2020 00:49:19 No.3668066 View View Reply Original Report

Quoted By: >>3668082 >>3668340 >>3668378 >>3668630

How do you make images look like film stills directly captured from a scene?

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO 1584564718460.jpg, 21KiB, 680x383

Anonymous Tue 09 Jun 2020 01:04:04 No.3668082 Report

Quoted By: >>3668114

>>3668066
just change the colors, contrast and luminescence to match the film you want bro

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO maxresdefault.jpg, 76KiB, 1280x720

Anonymous Tue 09 Jun 2020 01:43:33 No.3668114 Report

Quoted By:

>>3668082
Are you sure it's even possible?
Look at pic related for example, or take any film still from movies of around 60s-80s era, you think you can get a digital modern camera to look like any of them?

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 09 Jun 2020 01:53:22 No.3668128 Report

Quoted By: >>3668135

>shoot film
>shallow to medium dof
>change aspect ratio

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO 17 (170).jpg, 157KiB, 1012x568

Anonymous Tue 09 Jun 2020 02:00:50 No.3668135 Report

Quoted By: >>3668144 >>3668740

>>3668128
I only have a digital camera, but I believe I should with today's technology somehow be able to make an image look like it was from a 60s-70s movie

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 09 Jun 2020 02:11:43 No.3668144 Report

Quoted By: >>3668592

>>3668135
If that’s really the goal you’re going for, you’re going to have to put in more work than just having technology. You’re also going to have to supply models with outfits/hair/makeup from that era too or you’re never going to fully get that look

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO CovertoCredits_The_Night_of_the_ (...).jpg, 29KiB, 600x375

Anonymous Tue 09 Jun 2020 05:52:19 No.3668273 Report

Quoted By: >>3668280 >>3668592

Lighting is the biggest difference. You have to artificially mimic light sources for consistency between takes and shots instead of just being able to find lighting like in stills. ~70s and earlier had lots of fresnels. A couple of well angled fresnels and make-up to keep reflections down really creates an old Hollywood look. More modern films use more bounced/soft light because film stocks started getting faster

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 09 Jun 2020 06:18:15 No.3668280 Report

Quoted By: >>3668592

>>3668273
This.
If you want to look it like a film then you need to light it like a film. Means many kilowatts of tungsten fresnels, pars and brutes

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 09 Jun 2020 10:48:30 No.3668333 Report

Quoted By: >>3668592

The imperfections is what makes the filmlook.
As well as what gives the cinematic look.

A digital sensor with no noise, anamorphic lens with no barreldistortion, no flares, no chromabs, no haze. That's not kino.

So, adding these sort of imperfections makes it "film".

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 09 Jun 2020 11:04:54 No.3668340 Report

Quoted By: >>3668343 >>3668592

>>3668066
There are millions of photoshop actions and luts that'll approximate that or better

search: (vintage) film photoshop actions
or: luts

They are often torrentable too

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 09 Jun 2020 11:07:22 No.3668343 Report

Quoted By:

>>3668340
also add 'black and white' to search if needed

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO car rolla.png, 180KiB, 555x422

Anonymous Tue 09 Jun 2020 12:19:35 No.3668354 Report

Quoted By: >>3668592

heres a still from a short film i did. I wanted a mid 70s look and got it. It used period correct tube video equipment which shot at the correct aspect ratio, the correct colouring, era correct props. Its possible, but requires knowledge of period equipment and processes.

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO rockstar.png, 29KiB, 150x150

Anonymous Tue 09 Jun 2020 12:40:01 No.3668363 Report

Quoted By: >>3668592

shoot beautiful people dressed in expensive clothes, with expensive haircuts, and makeup

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 09 Jun 2020 13:34:50 No.3668378 Report

Quoted By: >>3668592

>>3668066
Buy my LUT pack and Lightroom presets, don't forget to like and subscribe

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO faye-dunaway-bonnie-and-cly.jpg, 192KiB, 1000x666

Anonymous Tue 09 Jun 2020 21:14:39 No.3668592 Report

Quoted By: >>3668606 >>3668609 >>3668647 >>3668738

>>3668144
What? What difference does it make if pic related had modern clothing or not? It would still be the same aesthetic/quality
>>3668273
>>3668280
Look up Cindy Sherman "Untitled Film Stills", light is definitely NOT the biggest difference she literally took pictures at home or outside alone.
>>3668340
I searched for them and laughed pretty hard honestly. NONE, absolutely ZERO FUCKING NONE of these presets of the image closely resembles ANYTHING from the 60s-70s era. They are not even comparable in any way, I don't see how a human can evolve for millions of years only to end up saying a lou&marks preset or any photoshop looks like something out of a Stanley Kubrick Movie
>>3668354
That looks like 20s, 30s, not 70s. Pic related is 70s
>>3668363
I said 60s-70s, not victorian age
>>3668378
k

>>3668333
The only sane person in this thread. You are right thanks

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 09 Jun 2020 21:38:02 No.3668606 Report

Quoted By: >>3668619

>>3668592
>laughed pretty hard honestly
Really? I found one in half minute that only needed noise, which you can add.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 09 Jun 2020 21:44:44 No.3668609 Report

Quoted By: >>3668619

>>3668592
>I searched for them and laughed pretty hard honestly. NONE, absolutely ZERO FUCKING NONE of these presets of the image closely resembles ANYTHING from the 60s-70s era. They are not even comparable in any way, I don't see how a human can evolve for millions of years only to end up saying a lou&marks preset or any photoshop looks like something out of a Stanley Kubrick Movie

They do look like that. Catch is that all film sims are fake. You can take same scene with a film, another with digital and then equalize colours so the look the same. And it will work well for that case. When you take that lut to another scene it'll be completely out of synch.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 09 Jun 2020 21:47:17 No.3668611 Report

Quoted By: >>3668619

I don’t think my guy knows what he’s looking for if he’s going to refer to both Stanley Kubrick and this Cindy Sherman stuff in the same thread.

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO cindyvskubrick.png, 3MiB, 2854x1070

Anonymous Tue 09 Jun 2020 22:09:20 No.3668619 Report

Quoted By: >>3668621

>>3668606
I would like proof of concept to that, lots of people here talk but never show anything
>>3668609
That is a pretty fair statement, although I doubt anyone movie from the 70s use those "cinematic" blue/purple fuckedup color filters and giant lens flares and warmth set to infinity
>>3668611
I'm looking for a way to turn my photos into looking like they're stills from a 70s film, how is that
>"not knowing what he's looking for"
?
And check pic related, sure Cindy's image (right) has no focus so DoF, and is a bit sharper, but both look like they're actuall stills from a movie and NOT a photograph

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 09 Jun 2020 22:13:49 No.3668621 Report

Quoted By: >>3668644

>>3668619
I would give you proof of concept but you're a dickhead unfortunately.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 09 Jun 2020 22:21:18 No.3668630 Report

Quoted By: >>3668644

>>3668066
assuming you found a film stock you liked, you would need to understand the color tendency of the film, by this i mean what colors you actually shoot vs what colors end in the final result. in addition, the color result in film changes depending on the amount of exposure, so you'd have to be familiar with that as well. to go further you would need to consider the types of diffusion filtering on the camera used in the shot you want to emulate. once all that is covered you would then have to find a way to emulate the lighting style of the movie you are emulating. you can't just hit a preset and get the true look.

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO Untitled2.png, 708KiB, 1000x650

Anonymous Tue 09 Jun 2020 22:40:17 No.3668644 Report

Quoted By: >>3668646 >>3668649 >>3668689

>>3668621
Tragic
>>3668630
I'm not looking for a particular film, just a typical film look that ACTUALLY looks like a still from a film in the 60s-70s and not some ultra 4k high res crispy clear clean quality shit that most people tend to post and say "hehe look this is hipster uwu vsco <3"
I mean, an actual, look, from, 70s, it doesn't have to be perfect, but a general look. All movies from 60s and 70s look generally the same studying a single movie and going for a single look seems absolutely huge waste of time. It has nothing to do with the light either just read Cindy Sherman's book or watch her interviews and see she just takes pictures alone in different locations (mainly her hotel rooms or something) without a huge set.
For her newer works, she does put a lot more effort, but her best and oldest she does not.

Also the fact that I have found zero examples of it, besides Cindy Sherman's Untitled Film Stills, kinda makes me think it's impossible, no one but one person has ever done it hmm...

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 09 Jun 2020 22:45:50 No.3668646 Report

Quoted By: >>3669811

>>3668644
you need to start using things like black pro mist diffusion, older lenses. also, one thing i've noticed in films is that white is nearly clean white and the lowest black is nearly clean black, meaning no color tint. color saturation falls off at each end of the histogram. if you want to see a modern example of color film done in an old way, look at The Love Witch. you'll also notice that the lighting is quite hard lighting

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 09 Jun 2020 22:47:04 No.3668647 Report

Quoted By: >>3669811

>>3668592
have you ever watched a black and white TV show from the 60s or 70s, that was exactly how they were shot you retard, theres a substantial difference between Films and Videos during that time, one of which was that 480 resolution soft focus. You can fuck off

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 09 Jun 2020 22:48:13 No.3668649 Report

Quoted By: >>3669811

>>3668644
What exactly are you looking for?

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO grpt.jpg, 320KiB, 1800x1080

Anonymous Wed 10 Jun 2020 00:45:32 No.3668689 Report

Quoted By:

>>3668644
Oh, you mean developing process? Her shots aren't scanned or processed like most modern film shots that you see. They are developed film, only then digitised. And it's poor, grainy film.

Study noise on this image. What catches your eyes?

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 10 Jun 2020 03:11:03 No.3668738 Report

Quoted By: >>3669811

>>3668592
>Cindy Sherman "Untitled Film Stills",
as a filmfag most of these don't look very much like film stills at all

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO cinematography.jpg, 1MiB, 3096x2286

Anonymous Wed 10 Jun 2020 03:28:55 No.3668740 Report

Quoted By: >>3668741 >>3669811

>>3668135
You're also trying to compete against giant cameras. They can get a deeper sharp DoF than small personal cameras can because of their size. So you need to look into cinematography cameras first to replicate their settings.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 10 Jun 2020 03:37:57 No.3668741 Report

Quoted By:

>>3668740
The only thing that's relevant is the sensor size and the motion picture standard of Super 35 is almost the same size as APS-C.

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO Solaris-1972-130.jpg, 195KiB, 1912x806

Anonymous Thu 11 Jun 2020 23:46:48 No.3669811 Report

Quoted By:

>>3668647
Retard
I literally provided Cindy Sherman who did it on a non-movie camera, what is your point? Sure that's how the movies were shot, but not her images which look almost identical to them, she used an average 1970s camera
>>3668646
Damn a good reply finally.
The Love witch is a good example, nice! The Lighthouse would also fit in the spectrum, although it's a bit unfair because they are using movie cameras, not a normal digital camera from canon or some shit
>>3668649
God I can't believe I have to say the same thing 1000 times, what's so hard to get about a 70s movie-like quality on a photo?
Can you see a film still and be like "Oh that's from around 60s-70s"? Or do you seriously believe pic related is from 2019-2020?
>>3668738
They do look more like film still than any other photograph I've ever seen, no one is able to provide any counter-examples and it's sad
>>3668740
True, but Cindy did it on regular photo camera alone without all the light and other bullshit people are talking about in here that's irrelevant
she literally went outside or in her room and took pictures and it looks more like film stills than anything I've ever seen online

Capcode	All Only User Posts Only Verified Posts Only Moderator Posts Only Manager Posts Only Admin Posts Only Developer Posts Only Founder Posts
Show Posts	All Only With Images Only Without Images Only Spoiler Images Only Non-Spoiler Images
Deleted Posts	All Only Deleted Posts Only Non-Deleted Posts
Ghost Posts	All Only Ghost Posts Only Non-Ghost Posts
Post Type	All Only Sticky Threads Only Opening Posts Only Reply Posts
Results	All Grouped By Threads
Order	Latest Posts First Oldest Posts First

On these archives

Your latest searches

Film Stills