Jump to content


Processing effects vs. Editing effects


  • Please log in to reply
3 replies to this topic

#1 FilmmakerJack

FilmmakerJack
  • Guests

Posted 30 May 2005 - 04:50 PM

Hey, I've been reading around to see what kind of effect I'd want to use for a few short films I'm planning on filming this summer. I am still very new to 16mm and I was wondering if it would be better if instead of using any effects done in processing such as skip bleach, or push-pull, if I did everything in post, since I would be able to do it myself and see the results on hand on FCP. Any word of advice?
  • 0

#2 David Mullen ASC

David Mullen ASC
  • Sustaining Members
  • 19769 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Los Angeles

Posted 30 May 2005 - 05:13 PM

It might be better if you were specific as to the type of look you wanted; some are easier or better if done in-camera, or in processing, or in digital post. For other looks, all approaches may be about the same in terms of ease or effectiveness.

A simple test would be to take a piece of film transferred to video, or video footage, and see what you can do with it in FCP and still get technically acceptable results, plus discover what the rendering times are like, etc. Take that one shot and try everything on it and see what happens.
  • 0

#3 Raffinator

Raffinator
  • Basic Members
  • PipPip
  • 60 posts
  • Other

Posted 30 May 2005 - 11:51 PM

If you are finishing on film, then you would want those effects to take place in camera or at the lab. Sounds like you are going straight to telecine, though, in which case it might be more cost effective to do processing like effects (skip bleach look, for example) in FCP.

A company called Digital Film Tools offers a suite of plug ins for FCP that mimic a lot of camera filters and lab processing effects. I haven't worked with them before but I think you can download a demo version (with watermark, of course). Their website:

http://www.digitalfi...s.com/index.htm

The 55mm series of filters is the one that includes the camera filters (pro-mist, etc) and trendy processing effects (skip bleach). If anyone has worked with them before, I'd love to know whether they liked the results.

Raffi
  • 0

#4 John Pytlak RIP

John Pytlak RIP

    (deceased)

  • Sustaining Members
  • 3499 posts
  • Industry Rep
  • Rochester, NY 14650-1922

Posted 31 May 2005 - 09:17 PM

I agree that if your release format is video, the many tools available in the digital realm can usually mimic the "look" of special photochemical processes. But if your release format is 35mm prints, it may be more cost effective to manipulate the image photographically, than making a digital intermediate.
  • 0


rebotnix Technologies

Metropolis Post

Opal

Tai Audio

Rig Wheels Passport

Paralinx LLC

Media Blackout - Custom Cables and AKS

Technodolly

Glidecam

Visual Products

Ritter Battery

Abel Cine

Broadcast Solutions Inc

Wooden Camera

CineTape

FJS International, LLC

Willys Widgets

The Slider

CineLab

Gamma Ray Digital Inc

Aerial Filmworks

CineLab

Abel Cine

CineTape

Tai Audio

Rig Wheels Passport

Gamma Ray Digital Inc

Aerial Filmworks

Media Blackout - Custom Cables and AKS

The Slider

Paralinx LLC

Ritter Battery

Willys Widgets

Wooden Camera

FJS International, LLC

Glidecam

Broadcast Solutions Inc

rebotnix Technologies

Metropolis Post

Visual Products

Technodolly

Opal