4 ms·

I'm an old guy...in my 60s. I grew up with film and love the look of old movies. But this is 2023. Why are we still hanging on to a "look" that peaked in the 50

I'm an old guy...in my 60s. I grew up with film and love the look of old movies. But this is 2023. Why are we still hanging on to a "look" that peaked in the 50s and 60s? Technology moves on. I mean, I get it. People are stubborn in their ways. They don't like change. It's SUBJECTIVE that someone may not like the look of something. But it drives me batty when people want their subjective opinion somehow presented as "fact". "Based on empirical data". Okay...so?

yladiz 4y ago
Partly because it looks pleasant, and partly because it “became” part of cinema’s visual language (photography too). The way that light interacts with the film is something that people have positive associations with, and they want to keep and use that look. The reasons are varied but just because the technology has improved doesn’t mean that the old way didn’t function better in certain ways (and, outside of purists who really just want to use it, film still has a place in larger formats which either don’t exist in a comparable digital form or are way too cost prohibitive). One note: I think you’re reading something that the creators did not intend. When they say “based on empirical data” what they’re referring to is the way that a specific color would look at a specific intensity based on how films actually do.
kristiandupont 4y ago
Because it's a nice look? I like it not for nostalgic reasons but because I think it looks good. I also like guitar music even if that sound can be said to have "peaked" many years ago.
josephg 4y ago
It’s not about better or worse. These filters aren’t useful in every film. It’s style. Some styles will work better for some movies than others. The color palette, the lenses used, lighting, color grading, music and, yes, film grain are all things filmmakers use to subtly guide your experience watching a movie. It’s like the wallpaper in a meeting room - you can have any meeting in any room, but a second date in a corporate white meeting room will feel sterile and bad. Digital cameras with digital CG have a certain look. If your movie is set in the 80s but it has that crisp modern netflix look, it’ll feel kinda wrong. High quality filters like these prime the audience just as much as 80s costumes and 80s music.
Netcob 4y ago
I agree, I'm also usually the one person arguing in favor of high framerates, I find it silly when people pretend that vinyl records are in some way "superior" to digital and so on. But I don't really see the website going out of its way to say that this look is the way it should be. Maybe a bit of light marketing speak that is talking to people who like this. I don't think there's anything wrong with turning a necessity of the past into a style choice of the present, now that we can do basically anything we want. Pixelized games are a popular thing, cel-shaded graphics even when there's no need to actually draw anything by hand, black and white used to be popular in film making long after color had been introduced. Also I think the "empirical data" isn't as much an argument for using the style everywhere, rather for the effectiveness of the plugin.
lm28469 4y ago
De gustibus et coloribus non est disputandum
atoav 4y ago
My theory as a film person (worked as a DoP, colorist and VFX guy) is that the grain of a film has three main appeals: 1. It simulates detail and depth where optically it may be lacking. This gives the imagination of the viewer some space to operate (think how pixel graphics in video games work) 2. The moving grain makes the glow of time visible. A grainy still picture of a empty room feels different than the very same image without it. The one without grain feels like a photograph. 3. Grain on an image can make the image feel like something you look onto rather than into depending on how it is used in editing. Just like the visible brush stroke in a painting it can be artistically desirable to make the viewers aware they are looking at a picture that has been made. In the end more often than not it is just a matter of taste. Personally I like the feel film gives
projektfu 4y ago
I think to some extent, there is a desire to make period pieces look like they are on period stock. The 70s had a very Kodachrome feel, the 80s were more saturated. The 50s and 60s were Technicolor mostly. I almost believe that the 70s had that overriding yellow tint to it even though that's really just the film stock. And that was such a grainy film as well, it really fit with the dirty appearance of major US cities of the time. On the other hand, if you drop the nostalgia, you can make old time periods look fresh. The 70s was a time of vibrant color. Cars, clothes, rooms, signage was all bright, though it got dirty and faded quickly so that in the 80s we mostly saw it as a relic.

yladiz 4y ago

Partly because it looks pleasant, and partly because it “became” part of cinema’s visual language (photography too). The way that light interacts with the film is something that people have positive associations with, and they want to keep and use that look. The reasons are varied but just because the technology has improved doesn’t mean that the old way didn’t function better in certain ways (and, outside of purists who really just want to use it, film still has a place in larger formats which either don’t exist in a comparable digital form or are way too cost prohibitive). One note: I think you’re reading something that the creators did not intend. When they say “based on empirical data” what they’re referring to is the way that a specific color would look at a specific intensity based on how films actually do.

kristiandupont 4y ago

Because it's a nice look? I like it not for nostalgic reasons but because I think it looks good. I also like guitar music even if that sound can be said to have "peaked" many years ago.

josephg 4y ago

It’s not about better or worse. These filters aren’t useful in every film. It’s style. Some styles will work better for some movies than others. The color palette, the lenses used, lighting, color grading, music and, yes, film grain are all things filmmakers use to subtly guide your experience watching a movie. It’s like the wallpaper in a meeting room - you can have any meeting in any room, but a second date in a corporate white meeting room will feel sterile and bad. Digital cameras with digital CG have a certain look. If your movie is set in the 80s but it has that crisp modern netflix look, it’ll feel kinda wrong. High quality filters like these prime the audience just as much as 80s costumes and 80s music.

Netcob 4y ago

I agree, I'm also usually the one person arguing in favor of high framerates, I find it silly when people pretend that vinyl records are in some way "superior" to digital and so on. But I don't really see the website going out of its way to say that this look is the way it should be. Maybe a bit of light marketing speak that is talking to people who like this. I don't think there's anything wrong with turning a necessity of the past into a style choice of the present, now that we can do basically anything we want. Pixelized games are a popular thing, cel-shaded graphics even when there's no need to actually draw anything by hand, black and white used to be popular in film making long after color had been introduced. Also I think the "empirical data" isn't as much an argument for using the style everywhere, rather for the effectiveness of the plugin.

lm28469 4y ago

De gustibus et coloribus non est disputandum

atoav 4y ago

My theory as a film person (worked as a DoP, colorist and VFX guy) is that the grain of a film has three main appeals: 1. It simulates detail and depth where optically it may be lacking. This gives the imagination of the viewer some space to operate (think how pixel graphics in video games work) 2. The moving grain makes the glow of time visible. A grainy still picture of a empty room feels different than the very same image without it. The one without grain feels like a photograph. 3. Grain on an image can make the image feel like something you look onto rather than into depending on how it is used in editing. Just like the visible brush stroke in a painting it can be artistically desirable to make the viewers aware they are looking at a picture that has been made. In the end more often than not it is just a matter of taste. Personally I like the feel film gives

projektfu 4y ago

I think to some extent, there is a desire to make period pieces look like they are on period stock. The 70s had a very Kodachrome feel, the 80s were more saturated. The 50s and 60s were Technicolor mostly. I almost believe that the 70s had that overriding yellow tint to it even though that's really just the film stock. And that was such a grainy film as well, it really fit with the dirty appearance of major US cities of the time. On the other hand, if you drop the nostalgia, you can make old time periods look fresh. The 70s was a time of vibrant color. Cars, clothes, rooms, signage was all bright, though it got dirty and faded quickly so that in the 80s we mostly saw it as a relic.