| |
| ▲ | dbspin a day ago | parent | next [-] | | Every film is colour corrected and graded digitally (in addition to all the special effects and compositing work), and this is in fact one of the cheapest parts of the process. So no, it's not remotely a consideration. | | |
| ▲ | e0 a day ago | parent | next [-] | | In his 60 Minutes profile, Nolan shows how The Odyssey was color corrected optically https://youtu.be/1GEqDZ3hQSo?si=8AP4TI9iY9otLrjM&t=271
I had the same question. I wondered why seeing a 70mm print was supposed to matter if it was going to get digitally edited and color graded anyhow. The answer turned out to be that neither of my speculations were true. | |
| ▲ | tshaddox a day ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | Not every film. It was widely reported that Oppenheimer was color graded photochemically, and the 65mm film physically spliced (the editor of course worked in Avid with digital film scans). This means that 70 mm screenings were projecting a fully analog end-to-end pipeline. The exception, of course, is the visual effects shots, which went through a digital intermediary. The same seems to be true of The Odyssey, although the reporting is less clear as of now, and I suspect there are many more visual effects shots than Oppenheimer. | | |
| ▲ | KaiserPro a day ago | parent [-] | | > It was widely reported that Oppenheimer was color graded photochemically, So I'm deeply sceptical of this. There was a DI colourist in the colour department and the editorial had a digital conform team and a colourist. I'm sure there was some photochemcial fiddling. but it was all conformed digitally and lasered out to be finished. https://www.imdb.com/title/tt15398776/fullcredits/?ref_=tt_c... Photochemical grading is hard and really sucks compared to DI. especially if you are trying to put in a butt tone of VFX. | | |
| ▲ | tshaddox a day ago | parent [-] | | As I mentioned, they obvious did a digital intermediary for visual effects shots. For Oppenheimer I don't think they was much CGI, but at the bare minimum I sure they did some digital compositing, so they must have matched their photochemical color grading with digital color grading for some scenes. Also, they had a digital colorist to produce the grade for the DCP anyway, to match the look of the film master. But it seems to me that reputable sources have clearly stated that they did a fully analog film path all the way to release prints. There's this interview with the DP: https://fotokem.com/oppenheimer-hoytema-fotokem/ > And once production began, FotoKem printed literally everything Nolan shot. Then after the edit was complete, FotoKem brought in Negative Cutter Simone Appleby from the Centre National du Cinéma et de l’image Animée in France to cut each section and glue it together, which starts with a list that comes out of the Avid that provides every single one of the over 3,000 shots. That list, coupled with a work print (a film version of the list of shots), was then rolled against the negative, using also a QuickTime reference with key numbers—all of which allowed Appleby to cut the physical negative together into the final assembly, from which final prints were made. And from there, Van Hoytema and Color Timer Kristen Zimmerman painstakingly perfected the color of each and every shot by hand. > Theodosiou’s focus was matching the color of the digital master to that of the analog film master because Nolan and FotoKem knew that not everybody in the world would be able to view Oppenheimer on analog film. “We were able to manipulate the images and make them look exactly how Christopher intended for them to look on film,” says Theodosiou. “For the final tweaks, we had to split screen the image between a digital and a film on the screen and match the film identically throughout, from reel one all the way to the end.” | | |
| ▲ | KaiserPro a day ago | parent [-] | | > so they must have matched their photochemical color grading with digital color grading The VFX would be matched to what ever the spec would be. Your argument would hold more water if it wasn't the _editorial_ department that had the DI in it. In that video from the linked article is them playing back the film on a baselight with a blackboard 2 https://www.filmlight.ltd.uk/products/control/range_cn/index... (it might be a black magic board though) I mean yes, they _did_ do a photochemical grade. But the edit was assembled digitally, the shot conformed, sent to be cut manually, and then final grade was done photochemically. The Person who assembled the film in 65 said "I get an EDL from avid and assemble to the print" Conforming film colour in analogue is _massively_ hard. its time consuming and generally not fun to do. so it makes so much more sense to do that digitally. it would also explain the number of editorial team doing colour, because normally they don't do any of that shit. | | |
| ▲ | tshaddox 21 hours ago | parent [-] | | Forgive me if my interpretation of this terminology is wrong. My impression is that "conforming" refers to assembling the final edit from the original source material, in this case literally cutting and splicing together film negatives according to exact frame counts output by Avid. What do you mean by "conforming film colour in analogue?" | | |
| ▲ | KaiserPro 12 hours ago | parent [-] | | Sorry my bad. Conform is the process of matching edits with the "master" edit, generally. One of the odd things about the "movie pipeline" is that generally the thing thats passed between compmanies is not the actual edit, but an EDL (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Edit_decision_list) which is a loosegoosey format, horrible in _many_ ways. But it means that you can assemble an edit from different media (ie proxies, or digital sources, or actual film.) and thats the same everywhere. in a finishing lab, you assemble the edit[1], and then apply a base grade. So you conform the edit, then "conform" the colour so the expensive colourist is not doing busy work infront of the director. Now, some labs might have different names for this, but where I worked, conform was the edit assembly (which was way more faff than you'd hope, EDL is a really really shit format for coordinating edits) then base grade/conform grade to make sure that everything was roughly a "neutral" grade. ie when you cut between two people talking at each other, one is not widly brighter/greener/darker than the other. In sound its like making sure the levels are the same between actors, so one isn't louder than the other. This might also be called match grading, but from what I remember match grading was for VFX people trying make sure they were producing stuff that looked right. Manual colour timing was pretty much dead back then, and that was 15 years ago. So going back and doing match/base/conform grade manually in film seems like a fucking stupid thing to do. So does doing a final grade as well, but as Nolan is the only director who manages to finish on time and budget reliably[2], perhaps I'll forgive his foibles. He seems to have actually done the final grade in analogue. [1] the finishing lab can often be a different company to the editor, so they will need to transfer the raw footage and the EDL (or hopefully something more modern, EDLs were shit when I was there and that was 15 years ago) [2] Every other director who's doing any amount of VFX seemed to always over run. they'd want clean up or changes weeks after the target end date. Nolan is the only director whos has 400+ VFX shots in a movie thats finished on time. |
|
|
|
|
| |
| ▲ | qingcharles a day ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | I thought I saw a video showing they were color-grading The Odyssey in analog using old style color filters? edit, this user found the video: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49127489 | |
| ▲ | nottorp a day ago | parent | prev [-] | | Sad. A little more cheap colour correction and grading and we'll be back to b&w movies. |
| |
| ▲ | afiori a day ago | parent | prev [-] | | I would guess that the film was still mastered/produced digitally |
|
