|
Snowman_McK posted:Being worse than the avengers movie would actually be an achievement. The Avengers was so boring and ugly that I've never bothered to watch any of it's sequels, even though I love comic-book movies in general and many of the characters involved. Justice League is a potentially striking and interesting film ineptly forced into being lame and banal. That at least gives it the edge over Avengers in terms of interest imo
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2018 00:10
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 8, 2024 16:35 |
|
|
Black Bones posted:The Avengers was so boring and ugly that I've never bothered to watch any of it's sequels, even though I love comic-book movies in general and many of the characters involved. Disagree. The shots are so inconsistent during scenes in JL, it's just a tonal and technical mess. And it's a constant reminder of something good hidden back there. While avengers does what it sets out to do and for better or worse set the standard for serialized movies.
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2018 00:15
|
|
|
That's pretty much it. Avengers is exactly the movie it was intended to be sold exactly to the audience they wanted. JL failed everybody, and not just in the audience. It's the worse movie. Maybe it could have been the better movie, but that's not what actually happened.
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2018 00:18
|
|
|
Megaman's Jockstrap posted:It 100% was not, we saw shots of the scenes before the red grading got added and also there were the reports from special effects companies that they had to scramble because Whedon had totally changed the look of finalized scenes that Snyder had signed off on. This is a good tweet by Larry Fong: https://twitter.com/larryfong/status/832671892163043328 It's Zack Snyder doing color correction on his footage with his DP. It's from Justice League no less. So he got pretty far with his shoot if he's at that point. I imagine he was probably done shooting. Also all the footage from his trailers were really good with contrasts too (cool blues with warm golds).
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2018 00:58
|
|
|
He was in the middle of planning re-shoots and new scenes when his daughter died. He wasn't done.
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2018 02:20
|
|
|
Snowman_McK posted:Yeah, it's kind of like proposing Viggo Mortensen for something. Of course he'd do a great job, he's Viggo Mortensen. Mortensen should play more bad guys. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s8hzFFKCeGQ He's so good! 
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2018 02:53
|
|
|
Jimbot posted:This is a good tweet by Larry Fong: This hurts man.
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2018 03:01
|
|
|
HUNDU THE BEAST GOD posted:This hurts man. Only the good die young (in postproduction).
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2018 03:37
|
|
|
MonsieurChoc posted:Mortensen should play more bad guys. Handsome too. He's also a very accomplished poet. Are we sure he isn't a romance novel hero who escaped into our world?
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2018 03:48
|
|
|
Training for Suicide Squad 2? https://www.instagram.com/p/BeHAk-aHWGY/
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2018 07:45
|
|
|
Dark_Tzitzimine posted:Training for Suicide Squad 2? Aw no Slipknot? 
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2018 08:59
|
|
|
Jimbot posted:This is a good tweet by Larry Fong: Sorry Fong, there are plenty of filters involved. Just cause you got lots of shiny buttons involved doesn't make it fundamentally different. Snowglobe of Doom posted:Aw no Slipknot? He had to head off already.
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2018 09:24
|
|
|
Timby posted:He was in the middle of planning re-shoots and new scenes when his daughter died. He wasn't done. Wasn't he forced into the new scenes when it was thought to be too dark? His original vision could all be on film.
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2018 12:24
|
|
|
Yeah, those touch ups and reshoots were asked by the suits and were for which Whedon was brought in the first place.
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2018 14:19
|
|
|
Snowman_McK posted:Handsome too. And swordsman, based on that knife parry. Viggowns
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2018 14:34
|
|
|
Dark_Tzitzimine posted:Yeah, those touch ups and reshoots were asked by the suits and were for which Whedon was brought in the first place. The first minute is one of the worst openings I've ever experienced and it's never paid off. Let's act like that movie never existed, too much pain there.
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2018 14:45
|
|
|
Snowglobe of Doom posted:Aw no Slipknot? It would seriously be great if they brought him back just to kill him off Kenny-style, and then in the third movie the twist ending is he's the only one left standing. josh04 posted:Sorry Fong, there are plenty of filters involved. Just cause you got lots of shiny buttons involved doesn't make it fundamentally different. Fong comes from that old school of cinematography where a "filter" is literally something you mount on a lens so that you get the look of a shot in camera. 'Filter' as a term for digital intermediate work is an appropriation of pop culture fanatics. You very rarely hear or read the terms 'filter' or 'filtering' in professional digital intermediate work because it doesn't accurately describe most of the technical process. To filter literally means passing something through a device to remove unwanted material, which is what happens when you, say, add a color filter to the lens of a camera. The point is that the image you get from using that filter (in conjunction with other formal decisions) has already excluded something, the film negative now is what it is, there's no going back and undoing it. Even with digital filmmaking, in film schools one is often trained to not to use in-camera filters when just learning, because you don't want to get yourself into a situation where, in digital intermediate, you want to be able to have latitude with the image/restore something that you filtered out, but you can't because there's nothing to restore. Digital intermediate work is itself not filtering, or rarely is. You may be adjusting levels of brightness or color or contrast that are in the film image, but you are fundamentally not removing anything. Even if you were to do something completely stupid (like, say, give an entire scene a red-orange hue, completely reversing a dark-blue color palette in which it was original shot/processed in digital intermediate), there's no filtering going on here. You can't get rid of the dark blue, that's just gonna be ugly, you still need that fundamental red-green-blue spectrum to present the spectator with something that's naturalistic enough. You are adjusting levels, not filtering out. Furthermore, in conjunction with other professional digital work, you can add formal elements to an image, but this is, again, not filtering. At that point, it's literally the opposite of filtering.
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2018 15:22
|
|
|
K. W, I don't want bother you sir but, BvS had dark tone. And this dark tone didn't work in Superman character.
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2018 16:00
|
|
|
KVeezy3 posted:K. W, I don't want bother you sir but, BvS had dark tone. And this dark tone didn't work in Superman character. How, specifically?
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2018 16:11
|
|
|
BravestOfTheLamps posted:How, specifically? he's making a joke based on the twitter thread attached to Fong's post. settle down, BotL.
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2018 16:19
|
|
|
Dark tone only works for dark superheroes like Blade, Hancock etc.
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2018 16:24
|
|
|
The popular use a la Snapchat is actually from signal and image processing, where you understand many common operations performed as part of digital grading and compositing (blurs, sharpens, median passes) as signal filters. I'd guess professional graders would want to avoid the confusion when referring to a red tinted filter, but you can't really understand a Gaussian filter or Laplacian filter outside of a digital imaging context.
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2018 16:26
|
|
|
josh04 posted:The popular use a la Snapchat is actually from signal and image processing, where you understand many common operations performed as part of digital grading and compositing (blurs, sharpens, median passes) as signal filters. Again, though, in digital intermediate you wouldn't refer to it as a filter, because that's not an accurate description of the technical process. Those are effects. You are not filtering anything out of the image, you are adding compositional elements. So, for reference, when I handed off the feature I was editing a couple months ago to the D.P. to do some color correction work in Adobe Premiere Pro. Most of her work involved first desaturating the image of color, and then adjusting color and contrast levels. In order to do this, she did not use any 'filters.' Rather, she created a separate track in the editing timeline where she applied an adjustment layer, to which she then added the necessary color and contrast effects. You are correct that there is a popular basis for referring to filters as being involved in signal and image processing, specifically for file-sharing and social networking and also just faffing about. But this is why Fong insists upon "stop using the term 'filter.'" The digital processes used for something like Snapchat are analogous, but not an accurate reproduction of professional filmmaking. Filtering is something you do in camera or in photo-chemical processing. What Snyder is doing in that image is not filtering. He is not removing anything, he's adjusting the levels of elements that are already intrinsic to the media source, and also adding to them. And, of course, KVeezy3 offers the obvious joke, cribbed from the same twitter thread: The misapprehension of the cinematic techniques used to give Snyder's films the look that they have is rooted in an uncritical opposition to superficial content. The 'tone' is dark, therefore Snyder must be 'filtering' out something that was intrinsic to the image, then all we need to do is "restore" the original image so we can see what Man of Steel would have looked like in color. (Punchline: Nothing has been restored, and it looks like poo poo.)
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2018 16:42
|
|
|
The Last Jedi was poo poo, so I'm looking for a good epic space opera to remedy this. Should I watch Valerian?
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2018 16:57
|
|
|
GoldenGun posted:The Last Jedi was poo poo, so I'm looking for a good epic space opera to remedy this. Should I watch Valerian? YES
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2018 16:58
|
|
|
I'm not coming at this from an underappreciation of cinematic imaging techniques. I know what Larry Fong is saying and why he's saying it. I just think he's being a grody old cinema dinosaur who probably still wishes it was called "colour timing" and dailies weren't available till the next day. There's no meaningful difference between the saturation matrix your DP is using in Premiere and the one Snapchat is applying to my sunset*. Digital imaging won the day over film, and the digital imaging use of "filter" for any image manipulation is here to stay. * (In reality at least one of the two is probably implemented wrong because programmers really suck at implementing matrix operations accurately.)
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2018 16:58
|
|
|
K. Waste posted:YES Cool
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2018 17:01
|
|
|
GoldenGun posted:The Last Jedi was poo poo, so I'm looking for a good epic space opera to remedy this. Should I watch Valerian? Once you're done with that, I found a very sexy Kylo Ren / Valerian erotic fan fiction that really compliments both sets of source materials.
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2018 17:38
|
|
|
josh04 posted:I just think he's being a grody old cinema dinosaur who probably still wishes it was called "colour timing" and dailies weren't available till the next day. There's no meaningful difference between the saturation matrix your DP is using in Premiere and the one Snapchat is applying to my sunset*. Digital imaging won the day over film, and the digital imaging use of "filter" for any image manipulation is here to stay. I mean, that's not accurate either. Even with something like Snapchat, "filter" does not refer to "any image manipulation," it refers to a system of basic presets. Even in that most basic and popular context of digital imaging, you can do all sorts of manipulation that you would not describe as filtering. The point is that the ascendency of digital imaging has not in fact resulted at a professional level in classifying all image manipulation under the umbrella of filtering. Words have meaning, and context is key. Fong is not being a dinosaur by saying, "I am literally in the room with the guy who I've worked with before and telling you what he is doing and what he is not doing." He is not speaking to society in general or poo-pooing Snapchat or whatever. He's mocking a very specific subset of individuals who have no critical interest in filmmaking, and who conflate all image adjustment with 'filtering,' even though there is in fact no context in which that terminology is applicable to all image adjustment in general, much less to Snyder's work specifically. As he emphasizes, Snyder has not chosen a 'preset' - he is methodically editing each shot in a sequence. This is analogous, in some sense, to what any non-professional could do with photo and video editing. But the critical point still remains that in neither case does this constitute using a "filter." A filter is something specific, even in Snapchat, it is not all filtering.
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2018 19:08
|
|
|
There are some effects in Snapchat, like dog-face or whatever, which I would raise an eyebrow at calling filtering an image. Beyond that, I'd be comfortable at referring to any process which goes from a single image in (with masks) to a single image out, as a filter (you might for the sake of confusion avoid calling a LUT application or a colour space transform a filter, because they relate to the encoding of the image data rather than subsequent manipulation of it). Again, I do understand what Larry Fong is saying about the distinction between a naive understanding of colour grading ("oh you just slapped a filter on that!") and the actual labour involved. I just think Larry Fong is wrong: The majority of operations performed in a colour grading suite are properly understood as digital imaging filters, and while they're more robust and configurable than their consumer cousins, they are fundamentally the same thing. The belligerents who accuse Zack Snyder of slapping a filter on everything don't understand the process of professional colour grading, but they aren't wrong in thinking it's a process of filters. Fong's distinction here, highlighting that the work is done shot-by-shot, is akin to claiming that because you cooked each loaf separately, one at a time, you have nothing in common with the Subway bread oven.
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2018 21:05
|
|
|
GoldenGun posted:The Last Jedi was poo poo, so I'm looking for a good epic space opera to remedy this. Should I watch Valerian? Valerian whips rear end.
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2018 21:12
|
|
|
josh04 posted:The belligerents who accuse Zack Snyder of slapping a filter on everything don't understand the process of professional colour grading, but they aren't wrong in thinking it's a process of filters. Fong's distinction here, highlighting that the work is done shot-by-shot, is akin to claiming that because you cooked each loaf separately, one at a time, you have nothing in common with the Subway bread oven. Nowhere does he say they have nothing in common. He's saying there's an important difference: color adjustment in film is shot by shot, not some universal "Zack Snyder" config.
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2018 21:34
|
|
|
GoldenGun posted:The Last Jedi was poo poo, so I'm looking for a good epic space opera to remedy this. Should I watch Valerian? No. You should watch TLJ until you like it!!!!
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2018 21:48
|
|
|
CelticPredator posted:No. You should watch TLJ until you like it!!!! This but unironically. Valerian ain't gonna save you from clunky writing.
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2018 22:25
|
|
|
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2018 22:31
|
|
|
That reminds me that the practical effect Sleestaks in the LOTL movie looked cool and would have scared me as a kid.
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2018 22:48
|
|
|
K. Waste posted:he's making a joke based on the twitter thread attached to Fong's post. settle down, BotL. Oh  GoldenGun posted:The Last Jedi was poo poo, so I'm looking for a good epic space opera to remedy this. Should I watch Valerian? You should, but with the knowledge that the rest of it is not going to be as amazing as the opening scene. BravestOfTheLamps fucked around with this message at 23:02 on Jan 19, 2018 |
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2018 22:58
|
|
|
HUNDU THE BEAST GOD posted:That reminds me that the practical effect Sleestaks in the LOTL movie looked cool and would have scared me as a kid. That movie is almost good. But the comedy kind of kills it a bit. Some of it works though. The production design is off the charts.
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2018 23:13
|
|
|
 I love this. These are our heroes.
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2018 23:14
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 8, 2024 16:35 |
|
|
SleepCousinDeath posted:
I can't believe there are people who watched this and still think that "unlikeable" characters matter.
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2018 23:24
|
|