@@luispaniagua23 I have a few tutorials here and there, but I’m also constantly improving and sometimes old tutorials feel outdated. If your comment gets 100 likes I’ll consider it again
Okay just finished watching, fantastic work as always! In a world obsessed with getting The Batman look while at the same time saying that blurring things out is always bad, it's great to see that with just the right amount of Cleverness, one can have massive control over the final image. Stay awesome dude!
@@sorinsecara I liked the Helios on The Batman. Dune 2 less so, each project is different! It’s about control and restraint to match the mood, sometimes blur sometimes sharp
@@cleverghostchili Yeah exactly, completely agree! By the way, when is a soundtrack production tutorial coming, your musical compositions are fantastic!
@@sorinsecara I have an introductory video to music composition! It didn’t perform as well so I assume there’s not a lot of interest ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-EMx_rWt7ld4.html
@@cleverghostchili Just watched it, super useful! Sorry I am slowly binging your whole channel and didn't get there yet, should have checked before asking lol. Thanks man, hope you have a great day!
I love how your content is to the point, and it is actually helpful advice that is easy to understand. I also love how you're not pretentious like so many young filmmakers are nowadays. *Cough the guy's that only shoot with a over the top film emulation, and in 1.37:1 in f1.2 with a black pro mist*Cough. It's freaking annoying and it feels more like a trend than actually thought out filmmaking.
Especially with YT, where videos have (or are forced to have) rather low bitrates, blurring will also help the encoding as more bits can be allocated to the important parts of the frame. Could be a nice side benefit. Beatiful shots as always.
I have an online acquaintance (was that you?) that did extensive testing on this, redownloading the uploaded RU-vid file of several versions with varying grain. There there were inconsistent results, but in some profiles, grain yielded a large file size suggesting it improved RU-vid performance. The main problem I’ve had with blur is the smoothing creates more gradients, which are prone to banding especially in the shadows
@@cleverghostchili that wasn't me, sorry. But sounds like what I would expect. Encoding grain is really demanding bitrate wise and bitrate is usually what YT wants to not spend. There may be a point where you can force the encoder to spend more bits for grain to get rid of banding to a point. Excessive banding is another thing that happens when an encode is bitrate-starved. I guess my point is/was: selectively blurring in a discreet fashion lets YT allocate bits to the parts of the image that *you* deemed important. You're kind of tricking the encoder in a visually pleasing way. Obviously this has limits and gradients becoming too flat and free of grain means that banding is more obvious.
This is a great video! I've just been watching videos on how traditionally cinematographers have shot at F4 or higher. But if you still keep this as the ideal, you don't take into account the effect of modern lenses and (especially 6k and above) digital sensors. It's also hard to trade off the consistent colours and contrast of modern lenses, especially when relying on colour space transforms which assume native lenses (I'm also colour vision deficient so I can't afford to deal with unpredictable, subtle colour shifts caused by different lens colour and contrast). If we stick to modern lenses and sensors there's no choice but to use post processing. But also love the anti-consumerist bit, that's so important. Enjoyed the use of radial blur - you could try combining that with zoom in small amounts to simulate spherical aberration. I also really liked the point you made about bokeh making handheld shakes less nauseating. Finally as someone else said the edge detect plus blur is really worth trying - the edge detect can produce an output which you can tweak using curves before feeding it into the alpha input (hope I've got that right) of a blur node to choose exactly which edges are going to get blurred and hopefully save the colour detail in subtler transitions.
Thank you for your thoughts. For me I find the rendering on Zeiss to be very distinct at f1.4, it’s not necessarily the bokeh that I prefer. My color deficiency is quite strange, I’m hyper attuned to contrast and subtle color shifts but can’t identify certain hues. There are more blur techniques I didn’t go over, I will cover in more detail if I make a dedicated grading video
@@cleverghostchili I'm guessing you've done the ishihara test - have you got protanomaly, deuteranomaly or something else? I think it's natural to focus on tones/contrast when colours are less prominent - I'm the same. For me (deuteranomaly) there is a sense of wrongness in a lot of colour edits but sometimes it's hard to identify how to fix them.
I just found this channel and you have a new subscriber. Beautiful work. That shot of the KTX train section at the end with your subject walking towards the vanishing point, beautiful and stunning.
Wide open isn't the only way to get softness out of a lens. You can stop it down to maximum aperture and (unless you're on a Summilux) get maximum diffraction. Soderbergh said he'd shot a lot of Che stopping down to F22 with no ND filters -- apparently, it's much more common in older films than people realize. Just keep dirt off your sensor. But that's another way.
Great call! I used to shoot f11 and f22 on a crop sensor starting out all the time without an ND, the diffraction never bothered me so I can confirm this has a great overlooked rendering as well
My experience is the base look on the FP is superior to the blackmagic. Bmcc6k has a color science designed for state of the art color grading tools. I think the Blackmagic requires more work to get a good image, but a high image ceiling. It’s also easier to achieve pushed looks due to its color separation where the FP looks more naturally accurate and great for minimal grades. Because the images are gentler in the Blackmagic with lower contrast, you can implement contrasty grading tools like bleach bypass with more balance. The key difference is the information in the highlights emulating the pleasing Arri highlight roll off. FP is fine but slightly muted for pushed color, also because non native log and workflows in Davinci. For pushing exposure, the FP wins by a landslide, much better noise and lowlight and manipulation, I would say the blackmagic performs worse when lifting shadows. Both are great, blackmagic missing the some of that FP immersive texture
@@cleverghostchili That is interesting. i noticed the same thing about the shadows when I downloaded some BMCC braw clips. I'd like to add that the arri like highlight rolloff is easily achievable with the curves node using soft clip tools when using cinemadng files. Blackmagic seems to be processing it internally which is something i'm not a fan of as it compresses the highlights waay too much
One of my key grading techniques is to compress highlights, maybe highlight roll off is not the precise term I’m referencing, but I like how highlights look on the blackmagic more
@@cleverghostchili Oh yes, that might be because the blackmagic looks like the midrange and the upper midrange of the curve is lifted while incorporating more contrast using s-curve. Also it looks like the highlights are less saturated on the bmcc but don't quote me on that i'm not too sure
