Has anyone seen "28 days Later" directed by Danny Boyle - Page 9 at DVinfo.net

Go Back   DV Info Net > And Now, For Something Completely Different... > Awake In The Dark

Awake In The Dark
What you're watching these days on the Big Screen and the Small Screen.


Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old March 24th, 2004, 11:07 AM   #121
Inner Circle
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Albany, NY 12210
Posts: 2,650
Was the DVD of "28 Days Later" actually created from the film print? What a bizarre thing to do. Reminds of "Chuck and Buck." Great movie, but it looked abysmal in the theater, and just really God-awful terrible on video.
Marco Leavitt is offline   Reply With Quote
Old March 24th, 2004, 11:34 AM   #122
Regular Crew
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Posts: 173
1: afaik, it was actually shot on (8) Canon XL1, not XL1S

2: the final look, for me, was actually pretty far from "film look." While there is grain, and a 1.85:1 aspect, in many scenes there is limited or no visible color correction. especially the scene where he first leaves the hospital and walks up to a billboard with tons of letters and photographs on it.. that scene just screams "video" to me.

3: a lot of the shiftiness in the film i believe is due not to 24p film jutter, but actually to a bad PAL to NTSC transfer. there was a lot of ghosting and shifting that is rather distracting.. the effect mimics what happens when you set the shutter less than the frame rate (i.e. 1/20th shutter on a 30fps camera).

4: this film wasnt even shot on top of the line gear.. if i recall, it was shot with standard pal XL1, and optex B4 converters. not a bad setup, but hardly mini35 with top of the line prime lenses either. for me, this is a pretty well done horror film, and a good example of using one's resources to their fullest. i loved the film.. $14 well spent.

5: i think people miss that being transferred to film, or even being 24/30p isn't the most signifigant factor of "film look." the latitude of color exposed onto film (the "s" curve) is what makes film look like it does, and the flatness of video color makes it look like video. film with good color correction looks like film because a proper stock is carefully chosen, and then a good colorist works his or her magic. simple running an XL1 onto a film print isn't going to produce the same results.. unless you really think it out.
Adam Burtle is offline   Reply With Quote
Old March 24th, 2004, 02:42 PM   #123
Trustee
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 1,483
Don't know if video-to-film gives a film look.
But film-to-video does not give a video look
-- it still looks like film.
Dave Largent is offline   Reply With Quote
Old March 24th, 2004, 03:24 PM   #124
Major Player
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Colorado
Posts: 316
the image was acquired digitally, therefore dv. it just so happens they telecined to film because of the theatre.
28 days rocks and i think a great triumph for dv.
i also would like to know if the dvd was straight like rodriguez does?????
__________________
I understand everything about nothing.
J. Clayton Stansberry is offline   Reply With Quote
Old March 24th, 2004, 06:05 PM   #125
Major Player
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: New York City, NY
Posts: 316
<<<-- Originally posted by Adam Burtle : 5: i think people miss that being transferred to film, or even being 24/30p isn't the most signifigant factor of "film look." the latitude of color exposed onto film (the "s" curve) is what makes film look like it does, and the flatness of video color makes it look like video. -->>>

I'd have to disagree withh this point a bit. To me the single most important factor in filmlook is framerate. 24p looks like film; 60i does not. There's no going around it. If you tape the same shot using the exact same lighting, makeup, composition, and color correction, but one version is in 24p and another is in regular 60i interlaced video, you're going to end up with one looking like film and one looking like video. Someone in a previous thread said that "if you give a film camera to a 3-year-old,regardless of how poorly shot, it's footage would still look like film" (paraphrasing). I agree completely with that. The only way to fool an audience into thinking video is film is by altering the frame rate to 24p.

That said, professionally lit, composed, and color-corrected video footage will absolutely look decidedly superior to poor cinematography, no matter what the medium (film or video). I have yet to see 28 Days Later, but I'm sure it's image quality is the result of the Hollywood machine, which is very difficult to replicate on a home computer. They used professional lighting and post techniques to achieve a very specific look.

28 Days Later IS a "film shot on MiniDV with an XL1", regardless of how much post-production work, or which lenses were used. As stated above, it is a triumph for the medium of DV. Does it look as good as, say, Braveheart? Nope. But it's better than Blair Witch... ;)
Jaime Valles is offline   Reply With Quote
Old March 24th, 2004, 06:20 PM   #126
Wrangler
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Mays Landing, NJ
Posts: 11,543
Actually a lot of this ground has already been covered in several threads:

http://www.dvinfo.net/conf/showthrea...&threadid=6445
http://www.dvinfo.net/conf/showthrea...threadid=11394
http://www.dvinfo.net/conf/showthrea...threadid=11898
http://www.dvinfo.net/conf/showthrea...threadid=12507
http://www.dvinfo.net/conf/showthrea...threadid=16303
Boyd Ostroff is offline   Reply With Quote
Old March 24th, 2004, 08:34 PM   #127
Regular Crew
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Belém - Pa - Brazil
Posts: 130
Piņero

Have you seen "Piņero"?

Shot on XL-1, I guess. I didnīt see the entire film, only some minutes, but it seemed much better in "film-look" than 28 Days Later.
__________________
lml
Gustavo Godinho is offline   Reply With Quote
Old March 24th, 2004, 10:05 PM   #128
Major Player
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Northridge Ca
Posts: 734
"Don't know if video-to-film gives a film look."

Many years ago, before people worried about "film look," there was a documentary made entitled, "The Mayor of Castro Street: The Life and Times of Harvey Milk," which was about the openly gay San Francisco Supervisor who was shot to death, along with Mayor Mascone, by a nut who was out of his mind on "Twinkies."

First of all, it is an absolutely riveting and highly entertaining documentary, but visually the thing that struck me was how it looked. Although the footage included virtually every acquisition format, including 16mm and 8mm film, along with videotape from early portable video cameras (think TK76) and 3/4" field recorders, along with 1" studio footage, everything blended seamlessly in the final film. This was the first time I was aware of the possibilities for video to film. (Earlier experiments with tape to film were pretty uninspired.) These filmmakers faced a monumenetal task of melding all this various footage and creating a film that visually flowed smoothly, and they did a remarkable job of color timing. I guess I would have to say the whole film looks like it was shot with a 16mm camera.

So, yes, video to film does create a film look. When handled properly.

Oh, and don't forget: sixty frame film is pretty much a dead issue. One reason being, it looks too much like video.

Wayne Orr
Wayne Orr is offline   Reply With Quote
Old March 25th, 2004, 12:40 AM   #129
Major Player
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Australia
Posts: 328
lokoing at 28 days later on dvd (pal btw) its pretty damned obvious its off the neg, and why wouldnt you? your gaining 24p which exaplains why the whole thing moves like film.


anyway my original beef is with CANON really, they have Steven Soderberg doing these adds about the XL1 that i belive are false advertising,

If you watch the making of 28 days later you can see some footage that is edited but is straight has not been transferred to film, and it makes a big difference.
Ben Gurvich is offline   Reply With Quote
Old March 25th, 2004, 01:08 AM   #130
Air China Pilot
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Vancouver, B.C.
Posts: 2,389
And those cars they have in the car commercials have been souped up and have professional drivers on a closed track. If you truly buy that car thinking you are going to be driving like in the car commercials without doing a thing to the car then the problem is with you as a buyer not with the marketing. Everything is marketed. It is your job as a buyer to sort out what is hype and what is not. Steve Soderberg did make a movie with the XL1. It was captured on an XL1. Every movie that ends up screened in the theatres is worked over in post. EVERY movie. To what extent and how much is up to the individual production. You have the same potential when you capture something on an XL1.
__________________
--
Visit http://www.KeithLoh.com | stuff about living in Vancouver | My Flickr photo gallery
Keith Loh is offline   Reply With Quote
Old March 25th, 2004, 01:11 AM   #131
Major Player
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Australia
Posts: 328
<<<-- You have the same potential when you capture something on an XL1. -->>>

Not when i dont have 35k for a transfer to film
Ben Gurvich is offline   Reply With Quote
Old March 25th, 2004, 01:49 AM   #132
Air China Pilot
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Vancouver, B.C.
Posts: 2,389
You seriously thought Danny Boyle and Steven Soderbergh weren't going to spend at least that much money on post?

This whole thread sounds very naive.
__________________
--
Visit http://www.KeithLoh.com | stuff about living in Vancouver | My Flickr photo gallery
Keith Loh is offline   Reply With Quote
Old March 25th, 2004, 02:38 AM   #133
Regular Crew
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Sacramento CA
Posts: 66
xl1 pal right? was it 50i or 25p? if it was proscan, the "24p" wouldnt add too much motion-wise, right? i dont know pal...

sidenote- i havent watched the dvd yet, werent some of the actions scenes shot with a gl1?


Wait, Hollywood over-hyping something only subjectively true?
Stop the presses! <sarcasm-meter off the chart>
can i start a thread about jarjar binks?
__________________
Remember, Tuesdays are Soylent Green days!
Patrick MCMurray is offline   Reply With Quote
Old March 25th, 2004, 02:43 AM   #134
Major Player
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Australia
Posts: 328
<<<-- Originally posted by Keith Loh : You seriously thought Danny Boyle and Steven Soderbergh weren't going to spend at least that much money on post?
-->>>

The point is the average person isnt gonna spend that much money, and wouldnt think they had too from the advertisment.
Ben Gurvich is offline   Reply With Quote
Old March 25th, 2004, 11:47 AM   #135
Air China Pilot
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Vancouver, B.C.
Posts: 2,389
Does the average person really spend $4000US on a MiniDV camera?

I sweated bullets when I finally plunked down my $7000 Cdn for my Canon XL1S. And this is after reading every article and review I could get my hands on.

It's advertising. Advertising never tells the whole of the story. Caveat emptor. I bought my XL1S before Danny Boyle, before Soderburg. If I did see 28 Days Later and thought it was a big ad for Canon (I didn't know at the time that it was Canon) there's no way I'd run out to buy one just from seeing that film. However, I might read what Anthony Dodd Mantle had to say in American Cinematographer (paraphrased: "I hate DV") and also learn that he had millions of dollars worth of lighting, lenses, gels and other equipment at his disposal just so they could make it look like it did. And then maybe I would inhabit DVInfo for a long time and see other clips made with it.

The XL1S is priced (new) the same as a used car. I wouldn't buy a used car sight unseen.
__________________
--
Visit http://www.KeithLoh.com | stuff about living in Vancouver | My Flickr photo gallery
Keith Loh is offline   Reply
Reply

DV Info Net refers all where-to-buy and where-to-rent questions exclusively to these trusted full line dealers and rental houses...

Professional Video
(800) 833-4801
Portland, OR

B&H Photo Video
(866) 521-7381
New York, NY

Z.G.C.
(973) 335-4460
Mountain Lakes, NJ

Abel Cine Tech
(888) 700-4416
N.Y. NY & L.A. CA

Precision Camera
(800) 677-1023
Austin, TX

DV Info Net also encourages you to support local businesses and buy from an authorized dealer in your neighborhood.
  You are here: DV Info Net > And Now, For Something Completely Different... > Awake In The Dark

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

 



Google
 

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 04:47 AM.


DV Info Net -- Real Names, Real People, Real Info!
1998-2017 The Digital Video Information Network