Jump to content


Photo

tiffensoftf/x3 filter,or add effectsin post prod


  • Please log in to reply
4 replies to this topic

#1 Paul peabody

Paul peabody
  • Basic Members
  • PipPip
  • 23 posts
  • Producer

Posted 08 June 2005 - 07:56 PM

I am doing alot of research on filters,and have found some that I really like,.I am also quite proficient with FCP and have Joes Filters as well as the final cut battery of effects.Essentially one can accomplish the effects in post production that the filters affect in the field.My personal feeling is that the time rendering makes it a huge use of time.However I would like some experts views,,like Drew,or Jay!,etc
  • 0

#2 Jay Gladwell

Jay Gladwell
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 144 posts
  • Miami, FL

Posted 09 June 2005 - 06:23 AM

However I would like some experts views,,like Drew,or Jay!,etc

Paul, ever since I heard the definition of "expert" I've been suspect of that word... Breaking the word down into two it's basic parts: ex = a has been; spirt = a drip under pressure. ;)

There are two schools of thought on what you bring up, both of which are valid. Some will say if you can do it in-camera, then do it, it saves time in post. Others will say, get a pristine image that can manipulated in post, because once you've done it in camera, there's no changing it. So it boils down to personal preference.

On the other side of this coin, I can say I've seen some "post filter effects" that simply didn't live up to the image a "real" filter can produce, although they're getting better.

If you don't want to invest in a case full of filters for your camera, then go the post route. Time is no real issue (most of us are just too impatient). Do the renders at night while your're sleeping, assuming you do sleep.

I'm sure others here will have additional advice/opinions.

Jay
  • 0

#3 David Mullen ASC

David Mullen ASC
  • Sustaining Members
  • 20072 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Los Angeles

Posted 09 June 2005 - 09:50 AM

Post diffusion has the advantages of being flexible, it tends to reduce noise / grain (although that can create a matching problem with non-diffused shots), you can change your mind, you can get blacks to halate as well as whites.

Render times can make it non-spontaneous, as opposed to, let's say, real time diffusion on a DaVinci with a color toolbox.

I don't know if one method is better than another.

I do believe though as a beginner, there's a lot to be said for committing to an approach in-camera and living with the decision rather than leaving yourself too many options to change your mind. You only really grow as an artist when you make strong choices in lens focal-length, filters, lighting, composition, etc. rather than take some safe approach with no consequences. Hence why learning by shooting reversal film was useful for me because of its very lack of latitude and ability to make changes (when shooting for direct projection.) But as a professional, you have to consider what approach is the most practical too.
  • 0

#4 drew_town

drew_town
  • Sustaining Members
  • 383 posts
  • Camera Operator
  • Southeast US

Posted 09 June 2005 - 02:54 PM

David brings up a number of good points. My own personal preference would be to shoot with diffusion. I think FCP effects can start to look too blurry rather than diffused and a diffusion filter can start to pick up some nice texture too. I like the look of Low Contrast filter for diffusion. It's not going to be an overall or heavy diffusion but it will lower the contrast in the image which can make it look a bit softer. Also any light sources in the shot will seep past their boundries, called halating. It's my own personal preference because I think SD video is soft enough by its nature.
  • 0

#5 Paul peabody

Paul peabody
  • Basic Members
  • PipPip
  • 23 posts
  • Producer

Posted 10 June 2005 - 12:22 AM

    THANKS ALOT GUYS I WILL DIGEST THIS INFO
David brings up a number of good points. My own personal preference would be to shoot with diffusion. I think FCP effects can start to look too blurry rather than diffused and a diffusion filter can start to pick up some nice texture too. I like the look of Low Contrast filter for diffusion. It's not going to be an overall or heavy diffusion but it will lower the contrast in the image which can make it look a bit softer. Also any light sources in the shot will seep past their boundries, called halating. It's my own personal preference because I think SD video is soft enough by its nature.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>


  • 0


Abel Cine

Media Blackout - Custom Cables and AKS

Paralinx LLC

Ritter Battery

Tai Audio

rebotnix Technologies

Metropolis Post

FJS International, LLC

Wooden Camera

Aerial Filmworks

Rig Wheels Passport

CineLab

New Pro Video - New and Used Equipment

Willys Widgets

Technodolly

Broadcast Solutions Inc

Gamma Ray Digital Inc

The Slider

Glidecam

Visual Products

CineTape

Glidecam

rebotnix Technologies

Wooden Camera

Rig Wheels Passport

Ritter Battery

Aerial Filmworks

Paralinx LLC

FJS International, LLC

CineTape

Willys Widgets

Media Blackout - Custom Cables and AKS

Technodolly

New Pro Video - New and Used Equipment

Gamma Ray Digital Inc

Visual Products

CineLab

Tai Audio

Broadcast Solutions Inc

Abel Cine

The Slider

Metropolis Post