|
ApexAftermath posted:I just think it's dumb to dismiss something because "it's a trend". I find it really insufferable when something gets bitched about because it is used a lot. If there is something unappealing about it lets talk about that, but saying "eh I've seen too much of this, I now do not like" is so mind numbly meaningless as a criticism. It's not bad because its a trend, its bad because in the worst examples the potential for subtle contrast and depth in the image is lost in lieu of a cheap contrast achieved by bathing everything in two particularly popping shades without any thought or subtlety. It's like the "loudness war" of over-compression in music, except for film. Of course, both trends can get good results if applied intelligently. I was about to edit that post with these, but I'll just put them here:  
|
#
?
Dec 18, 2012 01:44
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 9, 2024 22:12 |
|
|
Ah yes, the Blue and Orange thing. I wish films would stop it! gently caress the fact that the color temperatures for most film lights are blue (5600 Kelvin) and orange (3200k), no, let's invent new lights that give off no color! gently caress COLOR!
|
|
#
?
Dec 18, 2012 02:53
|
|
|
TheBigBudgetSequel posted:Ah yes, the Blue and Orange thing. I wish films would stop it! gently caress the fact that the color temperatures for most film lights are blue (5600 Kelvin) and orange (3200k), no, let's invent new lights that give off no color! That really has nothing to do with it.
|
|
#
?
Dec 18, 2012 02:55
|
|
|
Lord Krangdar posted:That really has nothing to do with it. It really does. Yes, they may be color graded in these days, but the use of the colors is based on the color temperature spectrum, and their popularity is because of how prominent blue and orange is on that spectrum. Blue and Orange has been around since color film has been around. It's nothing new, and won't go away in a hurry.
|
|
#
?
Dec 18, 2012 03:02
|
|
|
The color temperature of film lights did not tint all the shadows in this image teal. Someone chose to do that, and they didn't have to make that specific choice. Especially with all the options available with current technology. EDIT: Also 5600 Kelvin lights are not teal, they are bluish white. Obviously nobody is complaining about any use of those two colors ever, the issue is only when that specific exaggerated color scheme is applied automatically to every Hollywood blockbuster and the potential for subtle contrast and depth in the image is lost. If you have examples of older movies that have the same level of exaggeration I'd love to see them, though keep in mind that reissues of old movies often have the colors re-graded. Here's a quite pleasant looking shot from (a re-issue of) The Godfather:  And here is what it might look like if modern Hollywood got a hold of it:  See what is lost? Lord Krangdar fucked around with this message at 03:54 on Dec 18, 2012 |
|
#
?
Dec 18, 2012 03:42
|
|
|
You're all being purposefully obtuse about what people mean by orange and blue.
|
|
#
?
Dec 18, 2012 03:49
|
|
|
Lord Krangdar posted:See what is lost? Nothing is lost if the look is intended and is used wisely. I do, however, hate when the color timing is hosed with after the fact on re-releases (Fellowship of the Ring, The Matrix, etc). So in that case I'm a bit of a hypocrite.
|
|
#
?
Dec 18, 2012 03:54
|
|
|
You could draw a dick all over every frame of The Godfather and say that an entirely vague group of people 'might' do it at some point.
|
|
#
?
Dec 18, 2012 03:55
|
|
|
DFu4ever posted:Nothing is lost if the look is intended and is used wisely. Of course, and I said as much at the top of this page. I'm not sure it is being used wisely, though, when it seems like its now just assumed that Hollywood movies (especially action and big franchise films) have to use that color scheme across the entire film. Dan Didio posted:You could draw a dick all over every frame of The Godfather and say that an entirely vague group of people 'might' do it at some point. Congrats on missing the point completely. I'm not concerned that someone is actually going to do that to The Godfather. It's an example illustrating that sometimes films look better without orange skin and teal shadows. Lord Krangdar fucked around with this message at 04:08 on Dec 18, 2012 |
|
#
?
Dec 18, 2012 04:05
|
|
|
Lord Krangdar posted:Congrats on missing the point completely. I'm not concerned that someone is actually going to do that to The Godfather. It's an example illustrating that sometimes films look better without orange skin and teal shadows. I didn't miss the point, you just didn't make one. An 'example' that relies on a completely farcical, vague, fictional situation that likely will never happen is pointless. "Sometimes films look better when they don't look like this incredibly specific example I made up" isn't something anyone was arguing against. Yes, some films don't look good when shifted to the 'orange/teal' color balance. No one is under the impression that it is a color balance and shift that always improves a film, just that it is common for reasons beyong just being a trend that rose out of the creative aether and settled into people's mind beyond complete coincidence. A better example would have been the Indiana Jones: The Complete Adventures Blu-Ray rerelease.
|
|
#
?
Dec 18, 2012 04:15
|
|
|
Dan Didio posted:No one is under the impression that it is a color balance and shift that always improves a film, Except apparently everyone who works in color grading on Hollywood action and franchise films. quote:A better example would have been the Indiana Jones: The Complete Adventures Blu-Ray rerelease. Is that meant as an example of good or bad color grading? Lord Krangdar fucked around with this message at 04:24 on Dec 18, 2012 |
|
#
?
Dec 18, 2012 04:19
|
|
|
Lord Krangdar posted:Except apparently everyone who works in color grading on Hollywood action and franchise films. Everyone Lord Krangdar posted:Is that meant as an example of good or bad color grading? Bad. The alterations to Raiders of the Lost Ark are garbage.
|
|
#
?
Dec 18, 2012 04:30
|
|
|
Enough for it to be an identifiable trend, which is why it comes up so often. How about instead of picking at the details of what I'm saying you actually try and understand? Do you guys really not see this trend and why one might think its a shame, or are you just being contrarian? Personally I dislike the look of teal-tinted shadows and I vastly prefer a color scheme like the one I posted at the top of this page, but that's entirely subjective. What is less subjective is that using the same generic two-toned color scheme for an entire film is giving up the potential for visual contrast and storytelling that more variety could bring to the table. Just going from the shots on BluRay.com those Indiana Jones re-issues don't look nearly as exaggerated with the teal or visually unpalatable to me as modern films like, say, Man of Steel.
|
|
#
?
Dec 18, 2012 04:45
|
|
|
What do you want to me to say? You keep confusing your argument. "Lord Krangdar posted:Obviously nobody is complaining about any use of those two colors ever And then go onto make ridiculous blanket statements, like this: Lord Krangdar posted:Except apparently everyone who works in color grading on Hollywood action and franchise films. I'm sorry, I don't think that every action movie or 'franchise film' whatever that is beside another vague appeal to blockbuster consumerism filmmaking, exhibits this trend, or failing that, is by default hurt by the implementation of a similar colour scheme. Even the trailers for Into Darkness show off shots of varying colour temperature and balance, so saying that the film's going to be hurt by a lack of variation throughout it because of some slavish boogeyman color scheme just makes me thing you'r exaggerating or fear-mongering. I mean, altering a still of The Godfather, to show what it might look like if those corporate hollywood devils got their hands on it? Really? If it's that much of an identifiable trend, you should be able to source a decent example that isn't made-up. I don't know, picking at details or not, I'm not very swayed by the way you're phrasing your argument. Sorry. I don't think it's inherently a bad colour scheme, for reasons that have already been explained or that every action film is going to be harmed by it.
|
|
#
?
Dec 18, 2012 05:10
|
|
|
epitasis posted:You're all being purposefully obtuse about what people mean by orange and blue. I really don't think this is the time for a Florida Gators derail, dude.
|
|
#
?
Dec 18, 2012 05:20
|
|
|
I don't know man. Avatar, The Total Recall remake, Dredd, pretty much every futuristic movie since at least Gattaca and the Lost in Space remake seem to love going straight for the hard steel and muted colors the closer you get to Earth. I haven't seen as much of that in JJTrek, but it's definitely there, especially in the new preview with London. In fact that was my biggest "gently caress yeah" moment to the recent Oblivion trailer, the fact that for the first time I felt like I was actually seeing sci-fi book covers that showcase brilliant white and metal technology alongside verdant greens and contrasting shades of earthy brown. It reminded me a lot of the old cover to "The White Mountains" only with more of an Apple/Portal vibe:  I actually felt the scenes on the Class M planet were too colorful, like a live-action Thunderbirds or Power Rangers. That's not a bad thing mind you, it really isn't. It felt TOS as hell in a good way--at least if you're ok with being absolutely exhausted by all the frentic pacing and ENERGY the movie is throwing around. It almost looks like Earth is designed to be more of a calling to "reality" contrasting with the fantastic adventures the crew finds itself in.
|
|
#
?
Dec 18, 2012 05:24
|
|
|
Yeah, Oblivion is playing it really smart by not falling into the same uncreative visual trap that this movie is apparently wallowing in.
|
|
#
?
Dec 18, 2012 05:59
|
|
|
Dan Didio posted:If it's that much of an identifiable trend, you should be able to source a decent example that isn't made-up. What kind of example would you accept? I don't have access to the footage of any Hollywood film prior to the color grading process by which to show a before and after comparison. If example stills of the trend itself can suffice here are a few, including the 5 top grossing films from 2012: The Avengers - http://i47.tinypic.com/sebza8.png The Dark Knight Rises - http://i46.tinypic.com/99fluw.png The Hunger Games - http://i46.tinypic.com/s3iw4g.png Twilight: Breaking Dawn part 2 - http://i46.tinypic.com/2vsma1u.png Skyfall - http://i45.tinypic.com/1zxtyqg.png Mission Impossible 4 - http://i49.tinypic.com/fngax.png Transformers 3 - http://i47.tinypic.com/2m2hlds.png Man of Steel - http://i48.tinypic.com/116hsep.png Serenity - http://i46.tinypic.com/neytxh.png Cloud Atlas - http://i47.tinypic.com/30wm235.png The Dictator - http://i49.tinypic.com/1hf441.png Drive - http://i47.tinypic.com/vmre5d.png Star Trek (2009) - http://i45.tinypic.com/vson01.jpg If you think its disingenuous for me to be picking single frames out of the films watch those trailers. quote:I mean, altering a still of The Godfather, to show what it might look like if those corporate hollywood devils got their hands on it? Really? I already said what that was meant to be an example of. I also didn't say that this film was going to be hurt by a lack of variation, and from what little we've seen this film looks to be using the same basic style in a more interesting and varied way than others I've seen recently. Lord Krangdar fucked around with this message at 06:13 on Dec 18, 2012 |
|
#
?
Dec 18, 2012 06:03
|
|
|
AlternateAccount posted:Yeah, Oblivion is playing it really smart by not falling into the same uncreative visual trap that this movie is apparently wallowing in. I wasn't saying Oblivion > Into Darkness' visual style, especially not based on a comparison of trailers. While they're both sci-fi flicks Oblivion looks like an 80s sci-fi book brought to life, while Into Darkness looks like a mix of Minority Report and Thunderbirds/Power Rangers/TOS. And again the IMAX preview--and I saw it in IMAX--is loving colorful, in the second half at least. The first half is very dreary, although it seems to be deliberate since the entire situation involves a husband and wife going to the hospital to watch over their terminally ill child and clearly working through the complex bits of grief; it's not until Cumberbatch appears, saying he can save the girl, that the scene switches and suddenly color is loving everywhere.
|
|
#
?
Dec 18, 2012 06:04
|
|
|
Star Trek 2013: We'll even poo poo on the use of basic complementary colors!
|
|
#
?
Dec 18, 2012 06:07
|
|
|
WarLocke posted:Is this actually a thing? The only time I remember this being mentioned was in Academy - Collision Course (I know, I know, I'm a sucker for the Reeves-Stevens books) where they dip into it about how little Jim was there as a glorified boy scout trip thing and some alien mold kills off the colony food supply so a guy calling himself Kodos murders most of the adults using indoctrinated teens and all this stuff. The rest of the book strays pretty far from typically accepted canon though, so I had no idea whether that's the 'official' Kodos thing. The "official" Kodos thing is straight out of the TOS episode "The Conscience of the King." Good episode, you should watch it.
|
|
#
?
Dec 18, 2012 06:17
|
|
|
Lord Krangdar posted:What kind of example would you accept? I don't have access to the footage of any Hollywood film prior to the color grading process. If example stills of the trend can suffice here are a few: No, I'd say those examples are fair enough at proving that the trend exists, which I didn't deny. It's certainly not a secret that a similar colour balance is shared between films. However, the point of contention here is that Lord Krangdar posted:What is less subjective is that using the same generic two-toned color scheme for an entire film is giving up the potential for visual contrast and storytelling that more variety could bring to the table. this trend is harming the potential for storytelling in these films and that it's alarming or distressing because of that. Those stills are examples of the trend, but I'm still not seeing what you're getting at. Is there a particular example in the context of those films you cited (that have been releaed and can be put into context) where you think the storytelling or 'lack' of visual contrast was harmed? Because all I'm seeing here is that the trend exists, which isn't something any would deny.
|
|
#
?
Dec 18, 2012 06:20
|
|
|
EX-GAIJIN AT LAST posted:The "official" Kodos thing is straight out of the TOS episode "The Conscience of the King." Good episode, you should watch it. drat how have I never seen this episode? My Trek-fu is weak. 
|
|
#
?
Dec 18, 2012 06:21
|
|
|
Honestly, I do get sick of the teal and orange thing when it's used so thoroughly to the exclusion of other colors. You end up flattening natural variance in skin tones and losing a lot of texture. If it's a product of the lighting that's one thing, but if you've gone to great lengths to exclude any other shades you're overdoing it. It's similar to the "realism is brown" problem video games had the last couple of generations. Now, having said that, the actual film may not look quite so saturated. I've usually noticed that trailers feature different grading than the movies proper- the first trailers for Fellowship of the Ring, I recall, had a kind of desaturated look that I didn't think made sense, but the movie proper featured a wider range of tones and looks according to the mood of the scene. The final grading probably has not been done yet.
|
|
#
?
Dec 18, 2012 06:23
|
|
|
Maxwell Lord posted:Now, having said that, the actual film may not look quite so saturated. I've usually noticed that trailers feature different grading than the movies proper- the first trailers for Fellowship of the Ring, I recall, had a kind of desaturated look that I didn't think made sense, but the movie proper featured a wider range of tones and looks according to the mood of the scene. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Lq-Llrt9A3M This one? I can't find a better quality link, but I'm not sure that it looks that different from the finished product, at least in the scenes glimpsed in it.
|
|
#
?
Dec 18, 2012 06:26
|
|
|
I think having every big-budget Hollywood film look the same is a bad thing. Most of the time you're not looking at a deep story - the visuals are a large part of what makes the movie good. That said I never notice tinting in films and I doubt Hollywood is going to change it up because some people posted on a forum, so eh gently caress it I'll keep watching the big-budget movies.
|
|
#
?
Dec 18, 2012 06:28
|
|
|
I didn't say it was alarming or distressing, just a shame.Dan Didio posted:Is there a particular example in the context of those films you cited (that have been released and can be put into context) where you think the storytelling or 'lack' of visual contrast was harmed? Because all I'm seeing here is that the trend exists, which isn't something any would deny. Alright, for a specific example I remember watching Mission Impossible 4 and finding it hard to follow one of the action sequences near the end because everything was just a blur of teal. Look at the still from that film, isn't it hard to make out what's going on because of the lack of visual contrast? Now that's a static shot of a relatively simple scene, but imagine that look in an action sequence (or just watch the film, I guess). Here is another example of how visual contrast effects storytelling. When I first went to see The Fellowship of the Ring apparently there was some kind of problem with the projection or print, and the entire film was tinted mainly blue from start to finish. I didn't know it was unintentional, and it really hurt the experience because there was much less visual contrast between the idyllic Shire, the creepy mines and caves, the ethereal forest, etc. Of course that example was unintentional, but when I re-watched the film that was probably the first time I was consciously aware of how much color balancing changes the experience. Lord Krangdar fucked around with this message at 06:43 on Dec 18, 2012 |
|
#
?
Dec 18, 2012 06:39
|
|
|
Lord Krangdar posted:I didn't say it was alarming or distressing, just a shame. I've seen the film. I don't recall having that much trouble with it, honestly. As for the still, I don't think it's that confusing, no. Cruise is framed by the two others and the stand of lit-up weaponry and gadgets that are in turn framing them. It's a dark and pretty pessimistic scene and it's lit coldly, which given that the movie is largely about them relying on their skill as human operatives rather than a surplus of goofy gadgets is a fair colour choice in their high-tech hideout. Each of the people, who's reactions are the focal point of the scene, are clearly seperated from the background by different framing and the lighting of the high-tech devices they're being framed by. It's dark and unwelcoming, but I would never call it confusing.
|
|
#
?
Dec 18, 2012 06:52
|
|
|
Well we can agree to disagree on that action sequence, then, but even if you didn't have problems with that specific film can you at least see why somebody might, and that there could be alternate color balancing choices that might be clearer or more engaging? It's possible to make films look bleak and cold without being murky, which is how I would describe that shot (admittedly part of that is due to YouTube's compression), and without "flattening natural variance in skin tones and losing a lot of texture" like Maxwell Lord said. Martyrs is the best example I can think of, if I had the film at hand I would give example shots.
|
|
#
?
Dec 18, 2012 07:01
|
|
|
I'm perfectly happy to agree to disagree and I'm sure there are plenty of objectionable colour choice schemes in modern films, possibly as a result of this trend. My problem is that anytime this comes up, people trip over themselves to demonize any film that looks vaguely like it has an orange or teal bent and then fail to substantiate anything about it beside vague notions of it being lazy, corporate hollywood loving up films again.
|
|
#
?
Dec 18, 2012 07:04
|
|
|
Dan Didio posted:I'm perfectly happy to agree to disagree and I'm sure there are plenty of objectionable colour choice schemes in modern films, possibly as a result of this trend. My problem is that anytime this comes up, people trip over themselves to demonize any film that looks vaguely like it has an orange or teal bent and then fail to substantiate anything about it beside vague notions of it being lazy, corporate hollywood loving up films again. Fair enough. I don't want to see color trends applied without thought, but I don't want to see them criticized without thought either. Anyway moving on, one interesting thing that stands out from the new trailer is the amount of costuming changes, and costumes for the main cast besides the standard Starfleet uniforms, in the film.
|
|
#
?
Dec 18, 2012 07:14
|
|
|
I wish Netflix would put Star Trek back up. 
|
|
#
?
Dec 18, 2012 09:31
|
|
|
Dan Didio posted:I'm perfectly happy to agree to disagree and I'm sure there are plenty of objectionable colour choice schemes in modern films, possibly as a result of this trend. My problem is that anytime this comes up, people trip over themselves to demonize any film that looks vaguely like it has an orange or teal bent and then fail to substantiate anything about it beside vague notions of it being lazy, corporate hollywood loving up films again. Here's one big, quantifiable way color grading can potentially hurt a film: it drastically diminishes the viewer's sense of setting. Typically, each setting has a distinct color scheme - using Star Wars as an example, Tattoine has intense desert colors, yoda's swamp planet is muddy browns and greens, the planet with the speeder bike chase is bright greens and browns, and the cloud city Bespin is a bright array of pinks and friendly colors. It's really easy to conjure up an image of these settings in your memory, largely because each one has a distinct color tone. Even interiors differ in tone: The interior of the millenium falcon is warmly lit greys that appear gold, whereas the interior of the death star is a cold, monotone cyan (comically, colors reserved for villainous places in old sci fi films are applied to almost all interiors in modern sci fi films) In the screenshots aatrek posted a few pages back, we see an interior shot that's dark cyan with red highlights, a brig that's bright cyan with red highlights, a shot of the engine room that's cyan with red pipes, a cryogenic chamber that's dark cyan, and most bafflingly, even an exterior city shot is cyan with one building painted red. In what almost appears to be an attempt at self-parody, the one alien planet we see is a field of red plants, with a cyan ocean below. Again, one of these is a ship's engine room, and the other is the exterior of a city:   The end result being that settings stick out less in the viewer's memory - which is especially bad for sci-fi, where one of the big draws can potentially be fantastical settings (Avatar failed at a lot of things but nailed fantastical settings).
|
|
#
?
Dec 18, 2012 15:32
|
|
|
Absolutely. Is that first shot definitely from the ship's engine room? I remember it having a pretty distinct look in the original, which for some stupid reason a lot of people criticized or something. I forget what it was, but the set was a problem for some people.
|
|
#
?
Dec 18, 2012 15:45
|
|
|
Polo-Rican posted:(Avatar failed at a lot of things but nailed fantastical settings). And Avatar didn't use that exact same color scheme that you're complaining about at all!    You seem to be ignoring the bright red planet shown in the trailers, and the fact that people are saying that colours are actually used well in the 9-minute preview. And shots like these:    Which aren't graded at all like the ones that you're talking about. thexerox123 fucked around with this message at 15:49 on Dec 18, 2012 |
|
#
?
Dec 18, 2012 15:45
|
|
|
mr. stefan posted:You know what I just thought would be absolutely hilarious, after hearing that line about family, and thinking about the reported Hospital scene in the nine minute preview? My dumb, wildly inaccurate speculation is that they went the opposite direction of Sybok. It's Spock's fully human half brother who blames Spock for the death of their mother.
|
|
#
?
Dec 18, 2012 15:48
|
|
|
The engine room in 2009 movie was the Budweiser factory I believe
|
|
#
?
Dec 18, 2012 15:54
|
|
|
Cellophane S posted:The engine room in 2009 movie was the Budweiser factory I believe I've wondered if that was actually true or not. Never got around to looking it up. That is really cool.
|
|
#
?
Dec 18, 2012 15:56
|
|
|
Dan Didio posted:Absolutely. Cellophane S posted:The engine room in 2009 movie was the Budweiser factory I believe Yeah, it was indeed a Budweiser factory, hence all the tubes everywhere. I think it was done that way due to budget concerns. In fact, I'm guessing they paid for the right to use the factory as a set by throwing that "Budweiser Classic" line in near the beginning, but I have no facts to back that up. I didn't have a problem with it, but people sure bitched about it a lot. thrawn527 fucked around with this message at 15:58 on Dec 18, 2012 |
|
#
?
Dec 18, 2012 15:56
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 9, 2024 22:12 |
|
|
thrawn527 posted:Yeah, it was indeed a Budweiser factory, hence all the tubes everywhere. I think it was done that way due to budget concerns. All this time, I thought that the 'engine room brewery' thing was a running joke online, not the truth 
|
|
#
?
Dec 18, 2012 16:01
|
|