cinematography Image Quality and Look: Beginner ??

[HowTheyDoThat]

Here's a really basic question.

If you want to get a "film" look (or maybe polished, is a better word) how important is the camera?

I have looked at a lot of the short films in the narrative section of the screening room here and some have really beautiful looks.

There are other films where the acting, movement, angels, etc... all look great, but there is simply something missing.

One short I watched was cut together really well, the acting was o.k., the angles looked fine...but the image simply made it look like an amateur production. And there was probably a large crew (there was a big cast involved onscreen). If the image looked better I would not be suprised to see it on cable as a tv show.




Here is an example of a look i really like. I didn't watch the whole thing because Vimeo keeps freezing up, so I'm only commenting on the visuals. This is something I would expect to see in a cinema..

http://www.indietalk.com/showthread.php?t=54903



I've seen people comment on the fact that its not the camera, its the lighting, color grading, etc....

Is that really true?

Could you take a base model (canon 1100d for example) and make something that had a sophisticated and polished look? With the right lighting, director, DP, acting, set design, etc....could a entry model camera produce something like the visuals of Collateral or Miami Vice?

 

[Gonzo_Entertainment]

As others noted you can choose how and where you frame to make available (or only slightly enhanced) light look good, even great, but that is probably as much effort as just lighting the scene would have been. Just "using available light" without spending a fair bit of time carefully thinking about framing, blocking, etc... is going to look flat and uninteresting. It needs to be a conscious aesthetic choice that you expend effort to make work.

 

[HowTheyDoThat]

Rather than start a new thread, I'm going to add this here.

I was watching Spring Breakers with Harmony Korines commentary. He used the D.P from Calvarie and Irreversible....Benoit Debie.

His commentary focused alot on the visuals...what he communicated he wanted. Candy like colors, dreamy/druggy, magic hour, pastels/colors that pop.

He didn't mention cameras, lighting aside from saying that he (not Benoit) used a "powershovel" to get some shots during one of the "party" crowd scenes...pool or beach. When I looked up the powershovel, it looks like a low end consumer camera, so these might have been for the flash insert stuff.

He mentioned Benoit lighting the final scene...neon purples, pinks, etc.... and the piano scene where it was magic hour.

Anyway

The outside shots looked bright/pop/candy, what have you. They filmed this on 35mm. How are they getting this look? Not that its so unusual . Is this color correction? The colors seem richer and deeper than real life. In fact, on the special features, there are some behind the scenes footage of the outdoors stuff and it looks flat.

Beach Scene (1:2 Sort of NSFW

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hjyxzb9DS9g

here's a behind the scenes(not the DVD behind the stuff I mentioned, just something I found online) showing the camera on a crane during the pool party scene. It looks unlit. How would they improve on the finished shot once they took it? Color correction?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g8G4USWHMd8

 

[ItDonnedOnMe]

The color is definitely the result of color correction. I believe the party scene was lit by one of the industry's most famous gaffers, Jesús. He's got the best gear in town, and his rates are very reasonable, but he can be temperamental so you often have to work with whatever he decides to throw up that day.

Beach Scene (1:2 Sort of NSFW

Rented Spring Breakers on my iPad for a long flight - that opening scene comes on and I glance to my right, ~14 yo girl sitting there staring at the screen with a puzzled/disgusted look on her face. Made for a very awkward rest of the journey...

 

[jax_rox]

The color is definitely the result of color correction. I believe the party scene was lit by one of the industry's most famous gaffers, Jesús. He's got the best gear in town, and his rates are very reasonable, but he can be temperamental so you often have to work with whatever he decides to throw up that day.

I'd also add that you'd be surprised how 35mm comes up when you expose it correctly. This has definitely been pushed in the grade, but it also would've looked beautiful to begin with, and I can't imagine it would need to have been pushed all too much.

Also, stock choices can change the way colours react. I was always a fan of a couple of the newer Fuji stocks because I like that the colours just 'popped' more, as opposed to the current Kodak stocks which have (IMO) more of a natural look about them.