5 ms·

I tried to read this article, but I have absolutely no idea what they're talking about. Why aren't there any example images? I have never noticed this suppose

I tried to read this article, but I have absolutely no idea what they're talking about. Why aren't there any example images? I have never noticed this supposed phenomenon, and I was curious enough to try and read the article, but the article does not even make an attempt to showcase this "issue." Am I missing something so obvious that the author didn't even feel compelled to slightly elaborate on what that "something" is?

severak_cz 4y ago
a) they assume everybody has Netflix b) there are some copyright law problems with screenshots
- dylan604 4y ago
  B) No, this would clearly fall under fair use to use a screen grab to use as a visual aid in the written article.
  - jussion_zoonist 4y ago
    I think that bypassing DRM would violate DMCA even if it is for fair use.
    - dylan604 4y ago
      Oh lawdy! Netflix has promoted these programs. There are all sorts of content floating around on the interwebs released by the producers for the specific purpose of letting people see the content. Even the Netflix interface will show you something that will demonstrate the discussion. Hell, there's probably trailers for content on YouTube.
- DiggyJohnson 4y ago
  Z) Not every piece of content needs to be accessible to every person that might stumble across it. If you don’t already have a feeling for what this “Netflix look” is, maybe the article just isn’t written for you?
  - tambourine_man 4y ago
    But making an effort to increase accessibility is valid, right? There’s a limit, of course, you expect the reader to be alphabetized, have watched a couple of Netflix movies, etc. but this one may have gone a bit too far on the reader’s assumptions.
    - dylan604 4y ago
      Yes, not having a reference image for people to compare what you are directly talking about in today's multimedia world is just really being lazy. Like, supadupaüberlazy. There's really not an excuse for it.
      - ProAm 4y ago
        The article is clearly not for you. I understood what he was talking about from the first paragraph and do not have netflix.
        dylan604 4y ago
        I didn't even read the article, so there's that. Still not an excuse for being lazy. Also, I have a background in camera department, post production color grading, etc, so I'm assuming I am the target audience. I also knew what the "netflix look" looked like in my head just from the title. You kind of have to be in the industry to properly know what "look" means. Like when everyone talks about that "Cooke look", you just know what they mean.
        ProAm 4y ago
        > I didn't even read the article, so there's that. Still not an excuse for being lazy. Lol, the irony in that sentence did make me chuckle. I mean if you have a background in film (production, etc...) and didn't read the article Im not sure why you commented in the first place? HN was always a place for good discussion, usually about the posted article and (to me which doesnt really matter) the article was very clear. But in the same breathe every article is never meant for every person so maybe its just that.
deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
jacobsenscott 4y ago
Yes, this was clearly written by a film geek for film geeks. I had to google "dutch angle" for example. It just means you tilt the camera a little. But I'll see if I notice any of those things the next time I watch something.
- ZeroGravitas 4y ago
  I know what a Dutch angle is, but still came away thinking they might just need to adjust their TV settings, or sit further away from it.
- whatatita 4y ago
  I really got the sense that this was written by and for film geeks. That said, as a minor film geek, I enjoyed the piece and agree with their message. I think the example image at the top of the article does a perfectly fine job of showing the "something" they're refering to, but it's only going to help those few who have already noticed that something, and haven't put their finger on what it actualy is. For readers who haven't noticed the effect, a few comparison images wouldn't hurt.
  - syntheweave 4y ago
    It's a repurposing of a Twitter discourse from months ago where that particular image from The Sandman was called out and compared to the source material, and a few threads emerged discussing how it ended up that way. I don't have links unfortunately.
- tpetry 4y ago
  Are you sure it‘s written by a film geek? The first 3 paragraphs are so similar in what they are kust with different words… I think it‘s an AI generated text: a lot of filler words, no clear message and restates again and again a basic concept.
lostgame 4y ago
The other day I found a bloody CSS framework of all things for a specific retro style or the like trending on the front page of HN - whose GitHub failed to include images anywhere, or even an easy to access example link. I just cannot understand people’s aversion to including images in instances where the core point of the article or project is visual technology. It does not take long to take a screenshot or two of either what you’re discussing, as in the case of this article, or what your project is capable of, as in the case of that CSS framework. ‘A picture is worth a thousand words’ has never rung truer in situations regarding visual technology.
- DiggyJohnson 4y ago
  It does take significantly longer than just writing a few sentences. I loathe having to gather screenshots when creating documentation, despite not minding the other aspects of documentation much. Not disagreeing with you, but just answering the implied question of… > I just cannot understand people…
  - lostgame 4y ago
    On a Mac, it’s as quick as hitting CMD+Shift+4 and I get a PNG on my desktop. If I’m creating a CSS framework anyway, I’ve gotta test it. It literally takes 2 seconds - literally - to hit CMD+Shift+4 (I don’t know the Windows equivalent) - and when I publish to GitHub and write my readme, it takes another handful of seconds to add that image into the article. Since that GitHub page is about a CSS framework, people are much more likely to download, use, fork or contribute to it - if you’ve spent this less than ten seconds to help your potential users out. There’s lots and lots of utilities and articles for which you wouldn’t need to use screenshots as examples - command line utilities, certain frameworks, etc - but this article is an example of the opposite. The reason I can’t understand people who would do that - especially in the example of said CSS framework - is if you’ve spent all this time working on something like that, and you’re choosing to share it with people - why not undergo that ~10-15 second long process for their sake?
    - zapzupnz 4y ago
icedchai 4y ago
I do, but I can't describe it well, other than "something stylistically similar about the colors, angles, and motion". You'll get a feel for the "something" with their self-produced shows. With the films they acquire/purchase, you won't see it, even if they're labeled as produced by Netflix.
- Supermancho 4y ago
  This feels like a viral article to get people to watch The Sandman (again). It is literally unbelievable for someone to be so visually detail oriented to ignore how poorly the rest of the production is. Visual style was the least of the problems...following being relatively obscure, as comic book readèrship has been crashing over and over since the 80s.
boomboomsubban 4y ago
Does Netflix offer a non-HDCP streaming format? Taking a screenshot may be somewhat difficult.
- Freak_NL 4y ago
  Works fine in Firefox on Linux; I just tried with The Sandman. That's Netflix limited to 720p because it prevents piracy¹ of course, but that's fine for a screenshot. 1: No, it doesn't.
tobbob 4y ago
I couldn't even get past the legal work to read the article.
Melatonic 4y ago
Its not about Dutch Angles at all - this article just sucks. Trust me - I am a film nerd. I own a camera on the Netflix approved list. There is absolutely no reason shooting in 4K HDR on the approved cameras and then going through Netflix compression would result in any of the things they are talking about at the start (moody lighting, etc etc). This is just a stylistic choice when shot / lit / edited. In fact shooting on one of Netflix approved cameras and shooting in something like 4K HDR ProRess or DNxHD gives you a ton MORE flexiblity to colour correct your footage for a completely different look after the fact. If they wanted to they could re-edit The Sandman right now and make the whole thing an insanely colourful show. Goodluck doing that shooting in compressed H264. TLDR: Netflix just likes greenlighting a lot of angsty content and that kind of content gets lit, shot, and colour corrected like this (current day). Its just the current style at the time. It also looks really impressive if you do have a 4K HDR TV and maximizes the higher dynamic range.
- bogomipz 4y ago
  Interesting. While I'm not able to articulate these things I do feel like there is a certain visual monotony to much of the original content on not just Netflix. You mentioned color correction, isn't that related to saturation that the author mentioned in the article? Doesn't original content all have their own production teams though i.e they are not in-house Netflix production? If that's the case wouldn't be unusual for all these independent teams to produce very similarly lit, shot and color-corrected content?
twoxproblematic 4y ago

severak_cz 4y ago

a) they assume everybody has Netflix b) there are some copyright law problems with screenshots

dylan604 4y ago
B) No, this would clearly fall under fair use to use a screen grab to use as a visual aid in the written article.
- jussion_zoonist 4y ago
  I think that bypassing DRM would violate DMCA even if it is for fair use.
  - dylan604 4y ago
    Oh lawdy! Netflix has promoted these programs. There are all sorts of content floating around on the interwebs released by the producers for the specific purpose of letting people see the content. Even the Netflix interface will show you something that will demonstrate the discussion. Hell, there's probably trailers for content on YouTube.
DiggyJohnson 4y ago
Z) Not every piece of content needs to be accessible to every person that might stumble across it. If you don’t already have a feeling for what this “Netflix look” is, maybe the article just isn’t written for you?
- tambourine_man 4y ago
  But making an effort to increase accessibility is valid, right? There’s a limit, of course, you expect the reader to be alphabetized, have watched a couple of Netflix movies, etc. but this one may have gone a bit too far on the reader’s assumptions.
  - dylan604 4y ago
    Yes, not having a reference image for people to compare what you are directly talking about in today's multimedia world is just really being lazy. Like, supadupaüberlazy. There's really not an excuse for it.
    - ProAm 4y ago
      The article is clearly not for you. I understood what he was talking about from the first paragraph and do not have netflix.
      - dylan604 4y ago
        I didn't even read the article, so there's that. Still not an excuse for being lazy. Also, I have a background in camera department, post production color grading, etc, so I'm assuming I am the target audience. I also knew what the "netflix look" looked like in my head just from the title. You kind of have to be in the industry to properly know what "look" means. Like when everyone talks about that "Cooke look", you just know what they mean.
        ProAm 4y ago
        > I didn't even read the article, so there's that. Still not an excuse for being lazy. Lol, the irony in that sentence did make me chuckle. I mean if you have a background in film (production, etc...) and didn't read the article Im not sure why you commented in the first place? HN was always a place for good discussion, usually about the posted article and (to me which doesnt really matter) the article was very clear. But in the same breathe every article is never meant for every person so maybe its just that.

deleted 4y ago

[deleted]

jacobsenscott 4y ago

Yes, this was clearly written by a film geek for film geeks. I had to google "dutch angle" for example. It just means you tilt the camera a little. But I'll see if I notice any of those things the next time I watch something.

ZeroGravitas 4y ago
I know what a Dutch angle is, but still came away thinking they might just need to adjust their TV settings, or sit further away from it.
whatatita 4y ago
I really got the sense that this was written by and for film geeks. That said, as a minor film geek, I enjoyed the piece and agree with their message. I think the example image at the top of the article does a perfectly fine job of showing the "something" they're refering to, but it's only going to help those few who have already noticed that something, and haven't put their finger on what it actualy is. For readers who haven't noticed the effect, a few comparison images wouldn't hurt.
- syntheweave 4y ago
  It's a repurposing of a Twitter discourse from months ago where that particular image from The Sandman was called out and compared to the source material, and a few threads emerged discussing how it ended up that way. I don't have links unfortunately.
tpetry 4y ago
Are you sure it‘s written by a film geek? The first 3 paragraphs are so similar in what they are kust with different words… I think it‘s an AI generated text: a lot of filler words, no clear message and restates again and again a basic concept.

lostgame 4y ago

The other day I found a bloody CSS framework of all things for a specific retro style or the like trending on the front page of HN - whose GitHub failed to include images anywhere, or even an easy to access example link. I just cannot understand people’s aversion to including images in instances where the core point of the article or project is visual technology. It does not take long to take a screenshot or two of either what you’re discussing, as in the case of this article, or what your project is capable of, as in the case of that CSS framework. ‘A picture is worth a thousand words’ has never rung truer in situations regarding visual technology.

DiggyJohnson 4y ago
It does take significantly longer than just writing a few sentences. I loathe having to gather screenshots when creating documentation, despite not minding the other aspects of documentation much. Not disagreeing with you, but just answering the implied question of… > I just cannot understand people…
- lostgame 4y ago
  On a Mac, it’s as quick as hitting CMD+Shift+4 and I get a PNG on my desktop. If I’m creating a CSS framework anyway, I’ve gotta test it. It literally takes 2 seconds - literally - to hit CMD+Shift+4 (I don’t know the Windows equivalent) - and when I publish to GitHub and write my readme, it takes another handful of seconds to add that image into the article. Since that GitHub page is about a CSS framework, people are much more likely to download, use, fork or contribute to it - if you’ve spent this less than ten seconds to help your potential users out. There’s lots and lots of utilities and articles for which you wouldn’t need to use screenshots as examples - command line utilities, certain frameworks, etc - but this article is an example of the opposite. The reason I can’t understand people who would do that - especially in the example of said CSS framework - is if you’ve spent all this time working on something like that, and you’re choosing to share it with people - why not undergo that ~10-15 second long process for their sake?
  - zapzupnz 4y ago

icedchai 4y ago

I do, but I can't describe it well, other than "something stylistically similar about the colors, angles, and motion". You'll get a feel for the "something" with their self-produced shows. With the films they acquire/purchase, you won't see it, even if they're labeled as produced by Netflix.

Supermancho 4y ago
This feels like a viral article to get people to watch The Sandman (again). It is literally unbelievable for someone to be so visually detail oriented to ignore how poorly the rest of the production is. Visual style was the least of the problems...following being relatively obscure, as comic book readèrship has been crashing over and over since the 80s.

boomboomsubban 4y ago

Does Netflix offer a non-HDCP streaming format? Taking a screenshot may be somewhat difficult.

Freak_NL 4y ago
Works fine in Firefox on Linux; I just tried with The Sandman. That's Netflix limited to 720p because it prevents piracy¹ of course, but that's fine for a screenshot. 1: No, it doesn't.

tobbob 4y ago

I couldn't even get past the legal work to read the article.

Melatonic 4y ago

Its not about Dutch Angles at all - this article just sucks. Trust me - I am a film nerd. I own a camera on the Netflix approved list. There is absolutely no reason shooting in 4K HDR on the approved cameras and then going through Netflix compression would result in any of the things they are talking about at the start (moody lighting, etc etc). This is just a stylistic choice when shot / lit / edited. In fact shooting on one of Netflix approved cameras and shooting in something like 4K HDR ProRess or DNxHD gives you a ton MORE flexiblity to colour correct your footage for a completely different look after the fact. If they wanted to they could re-edit The Sandman right now and make the whole thing an insanely colourful show. Goodluck doing that shooting in compressed H264. TLDR: Netflix just likes greenlighting a lot of angsty content and that kind of content gets lit, shot, and colour corrected like this (current day). Its just the current style at the time. It also looks really impressive if you do have a 4K HDR TV and maximizes the higher dynamic range.

bogomipz 4y ago
Interesting. While I'm not able to articulate these things I do feel like there is a certain visual monotony to much of the original content on not just Netflix. You mentioned color correction, isn't that related to saturation that the author mentioned in the article? Doesn't original content all have their own production teams though i.e they are not in-house Netflix production? If that's the case wouldn't be unusual for all these independent teams to produce very similarly lit, shot and color-corrected content?

twoxproblematic 4y ago