Professional vs Unprofessional Movie Look

There's also a noticeable visual difference between, say, primetime TV shows and soap operas. I can't quite put my finger on it either.

Quote:

Original post by drakostar There's also a noticeable visual difference between, say, primetime TV shows and soap operas. I can't quite put my finger on it either.

Exactly, soap operas stand out the most, everything looks more natural (not in a good way) compared to movies.

I could be entirely wrong, but it could have to do with the types of cameras used, the medium on which they recorded the image, aspect ratio and conversion, progressive vs interlaced, frame rate, etc...

Films are at 24 FPS and TV is, I think, often at 60 (or 50?). 24 FPS is one of the things that gives it that "cinematic" look, particularly because at 24 FPS that means that each frame can be exposed for a longer period of time.

Another difference is the difference between film and video. Film allows for a much better range of contrast (though a lot of video does this surprisingly well) and, for better or worse, color in film is usually a bit different.

It is true, though, that some movies use digital video, and some TV shows use film, but this is often another distinguishing factor.

You may find this useful: Filmizing on Wikipedia

IIRC the type and amount of cameras can change how something looks. Look at Scrubs (uses one camera for almost all scenes IIRC) and some prime-time shows and you can tell the difference right away, or at least I can.

That is all I have to say about that.

[Edit]
Man I was late in my reply.

Also consider:

Lighting (which can vary widely, but big budget movies are going to have the best lighting)

Cinematography

Quality of set pieces, art

Variety of camera angles

Variety of locations

One interesting thing to consider is to compare the quality of the pilot episode of a TV series to subsequent episodes. For major television producers with established records, the pilot filming budget is sometimes close to the filming budget of a small film. When the series gets picked up, however, a budget is chosen for each episode that is often quite a bit smaller (therefore you see more reuse of set pieces, less on-location filming, etc.)

I always attributed it to filters that are used, which seem to be important. Soap operas, especially old ones, tend to use this weird filter that actually makes it look like soap had been smeared onto the lens. Blossom did that, too (oh god I actually remember that show), and Soap parodied it back in the day.

Effect in action


and



How can framerate make that much of a difference?
@ Cowsarenotevil, so if larger fpss give more exposure to each frame, wouldn't the frames be brighter (more exposed)

A lot of it is post effects these days. Rarely will you see what is actually recorded make it to the screen unaltered. But a LOWER FPS gives each frame more time to be exposed, allowing more information to be gathered in each one. However it also gives more of a blur to each frame for any motion.

I'm no authority on the subject, but I think it's a mixture of the following:

1.) The 24fps thing does play a part in that "movie" feel. It looks very smooth though, because of the motion blur that takes place while filming with the particular cameras they use. Also, I found this thread from a different forum on Google. Explains the mechanics of projecting the film on screen, which contributes to that smooth look.

2.) Post-effects (like the others have said). Movies spend a lot of time in post-production, some up to a year or two to get things just right.

3.) Cinematography. I believe that the cinematography in film is generally of a much higher calibre than television. From the set pieces/design, to the camera work and the lighting .. there's a bigger budget here and it shows.

I don't think there's *one* specific thing that gives movies that certain quality, because there are some big picture movies that feel like long TV shows ..

Quote:

Original post by Radioactivebloke You may find this useful: Filmizing on Wikipedia

The first show that came to mind when I thought of this was Doctor Who. I've only seen one episode but I noticed that they apply this stuff to their show. It's on that list in the page. Very noticeable.

Differences in cameras and lighting can make a difference, but I would agree with blueEbola, a major factor, I beleive is that films have more time and budget for post-production editting.

Have a look at the Matrix. Want the "Real-life" to look dull and boring? Increase the Cyan levels.

Um... fog.

A thin mist applied to the set reflects some of the hard, harsh light and creates that soft, fuzziness. More here.

Lighting in general is a huge, huge part of how any photographic image presents. Major films have more elaborate lighting apparatus, more gaffers, and more space in which to create their lighting effects.

That said, part of the look of a film comes from the film stock used to shoot it: 8mm, 16mm and 35mm all have distinct base looks, and then the chemical processes used to treat the film impart their own characteristics as well.

@ Oluseyi, I doubt it's fog, the images I posted are from the movie 8 Mile, and they are one of the extended scenes, which the film makers did not edit. The time between the fist pic and second is seconds, so as you can see there is no fog on stage at the time. Also It might be the after afects. Just look at the pics. The environment in the "movie" shot is much darker, and the colors look more vivid. As for the movies budget, I know movies that were shot on cheap equipment and on very low ($7000) budget (see Primer ) and they still had that movie feel. A lot of people have been saying after effects, but what kind? I want to see if I can at least partially reproduce them.

Lighting is probably the biggest difference. Shooting for TV requires more light because as was said above, TV doesn't have the range of colors that film does. Blacks are blacker, etc. Sitcoms are shot on sets where it isn't feasible to rearrange everything for every shot to fit in the appropriate lighting equipment (and to those who haven't really studied film- it takes a lot to get good lighting). Characters are also moving around all the time, so they just light the damn set from every angle, almost. With movies, you have a lot of time(comparatively) to set up every shot with the appropriate lighting.

Just chiming in that I am very much interested in this topic as well and always noticed how my own movies always look different than blockbusters (crappiness aside). Though I did notice that after doing some color correction (not anything in specific, merely making one shot have the same hues as another) made it a bit more filmish.

Quote:

Original post by VanillaSnake21 @ Oluseyi, I doubt it's fog, the images I posted are from the movie 8 Mile, and they are one of the extended scenes, which the film makers did not edit. The time between the fist pic and second is seconds, so as you can see there is no fog on stage at the time. Also It might be the after afects. Just look at the pics. The environment in the "movie" shot is much darker, and the colors look more vivid. As for the movies budget, I know movies that were shot on cheap equipment and on very low ($7000) budget (see Primer ) and they still had that movie feel. A lot of people have been saying after effects, but what kind? I want to see if I can at least partially reproduce them.

You are correct in that there is no fog, but they do appear to be running a hazer.

A fog machine produces a thick, opaque water/glycerin based fog, whereas hazers produce a much finer particle which is sometimes oil based. Haze is mostly transparent but when you direct an intense beam of light through it (like the ellipsoidal spots in the first image you posted), you can see the beam.

Just one of the many tricks used...

Yea a lot has to do with the lighting. I've lit stage plays in high school and that was a pretty heavy job, I can only imagine what a freakin movie set must be like. In the majority of behind-the-scenes they always talk about how a lot of time on set is spent waiting around for the lighting crew to get the look right. It's tough alright!