Jump to content
biswasg

Wish the Q2 came with a 35mm lens

Recommended Posts

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I suppose we can also add, for the sake of the conversation in the thread, that the shot that you just posted could be taken with any lens. If you stepped back a little and shot it with a 50 1.4, it would look even more cinematic. Step a little more and shoot with a 90 2.0, you have a cinematic orgasm. 
Get closer to shoot with a summilux 28 though and you’ll have a shot more cinematic than with a summicron 28, but less cinematic, in the common sense of the word, than the shot with the 50 or the 90. 
 

as far as I’m concerned though, and as previously stated, you can create cinematic images with an 18mm at f11 if you know what you’re doing. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

jaapv asked a good question and the answer seems to be that "cinematic" is a useless term, unless its precisely defined when used. As far as I am concerned, the term "organic", when used for a photograph, is equally meaningless: usually, I've seen it used to apply to a digital image that looks like it's been shot on film. But I find nothing organic about the physical substance of film or the chemicals used in the developer. Now, if you were developing in caffenol...
________________________
Frog Leaping photobook

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, Steven said:

I suppose we can also add, for the sake of the conversation in the thread, that the shot that you just posted could be taken with any lens. If you stepped back a little and shot it with a 50 1.4, it would look even more cinematic. Step a little more and shoot with a 90 2.0, you have a cinematic orgasm. 

Yes, tele lenses cropped to a panoramic aspect ratio can give a very cool effect. 

That also means that the picture's aspect ratio is important for a cinematic look, more important than the focal length. 

Edited by evikne

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
45 minutes ago, Steven said:

Yep, that’s a cinematic shot. 

I suppose a cinematic shot is one that looks like a movie still. 

And how does a movie still look different from a "photographic" (I suppose that is the opposite ? ) shot?  This is simply a nice shot that could have been taken with any camera and lens that shows a moderately shallow DOF However, it has a rather centric composition - the girl should have been slightly to the right and it should have been framed lower to avoid the horizontal colour transient  right through the middle. Maybe cinematic means sloppily composed? . If anything, the term  "cinematic" shot  gives me the impression of a photograph that moves, a bit like the Live function on the iPhone.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here's the thing, cinematic is a very trendy term, but there's no precise definition of it. 

If you type on YouTube "cinematic footage", you'll find that the internet is flooded with influencer videos, taking their new sony camera with an 85 mil plastic lens, travelling the world, filming themselves staring at waterfall at the golden hour of the day, in slow motion, set their Sutter angle without understanding the impact it really has on their footage, and then they add black bars on top of it to make it all look like a cheap knockoff of a Michael Bay movie. A dramatic music on top (which they also call a cinematic music!) and done. 

The term has started to gangrene to photography lately. Shallow DOF, tight lens, flares everywhere, sometimes they add grains and fake dust and scratches too... Like I said, you cant look into the dictionary for what a cinematic image is. 

In my definition, a cinematic image is an image that looks like it could be taken out of a film. Therefore, I don't believe that some lenses wide opened can achieve a cinematic look better than a WA stopped down all the way. Yes, if you open open your lens a 1.4, you straight away make your photo look a bit more professional than an iPhone or point and shoot photo. But to create a cinematic image, just like in cinema, all ingredients must be gathered. And that doesn't include just a shallow DOF. Sometimes it can be quite the opposite, like I said. A cinematic shot to me must have a good light, a good subject, a good wardrobe, a good story, and a good grading. And probably much more stuff I forget. But more importantly, the right choice of lens. Any lens. 

And if there are any YouTube influencer reading me right now and getting insulted, please do me a favor: stop adding black bars on your footage on YouTube ! this drives me nuts. Real films don't add black bars. Real films are shot with and aspect ratio of choice, that is often narrower than a screen, so a black space is created on it when it is projected. But it is not artificially added. When I see a video on YouTube that is not full screen yet but still shows some black bars on it, I stop it straight away, turn off my computer, and go punch a punching bag for 15 minutes. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Couldn't any photograph have been taken out of a film?  Let's leave  "trending" Hipster-slang off this forum.

I took this definition from F-Stoppers:

Quote

 good non-flat lighting, tasteful color grading, composition, and, most importantly, story that is being told

There is not one thing there that does not apply to a photographic image. I call the Emperor's Clothes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Advertisement (gone after registration)

16 minutes ago, jaapv said:

Couldn't any photograph have been taken out of a film? 

Definitely not (unless you include homemade camcorders family films). 

 

17 minutes ago, jaapv said:

Let's leave  "trending" Hipster-slang off this forum.

Definitely yes. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Nowhereman said:

^ Okay, RIP "cinematic". Now, how about "organic", which I raised above?
________________________
Frog Leaping photobook

Organic is equally useless. Or at least, it’s equally misused. 
There are words that we use, and that are hard to define precisely, but that still mean something intuitively. Character, or vintage,  as far as I’m concerned is one of them. Cinematic, I understand, even if it’s hard to pin point what people exactly mean by it. 
Organic, however, can go straight to the garbage. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Steven said:

 

The last film I produced, actually, is shot on a 25mm Cooke lens, on a tripod the entire movie. Not one move. Only 60 cuts during the whole 2 hours. 

On what sensor was that shot? And do you have any link to your work? Thanks

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Daedalus2000 said:

On what sensor was that shot? And do you have any link to your work? Thanks

35mm Arri camera (Kodak vision 3). 

This film is not out yet, it's still in festival. But it will be available soon! We won Cannes, Toronto, San Sebastien, and we also screened in New York film festival... 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, Steven said:

35mm Arri camera (Kodak vision 3). 

This film is not out yet, it's still in festival. But it will be available soon! We won Cannes, Toronto, San Sebastien, and we also screened in New York film festival... 

I see, many congratulations! If there is any other place (apart from IG) where one can see your work please let me know.

All the best

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I love the old portraits of film stars from yesteryear  taken with continuous lighting in black and white.

They had that cinematic look.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, steve 1959 said:

I love the old portraits of film stars from yesteryear  taken with continuous lighting in black and white.

They had that cinematic look.

show us ! 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Steven said:

show us ! 

Ha ha,I wasnt about when they were the fashion but i believe some modern photographers partly go for that  that look.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I just came back to this thread and read through the comments.  The persepctive distortion I was discussing was for similar framing as illustrated in the video below.  

 

Edited by Dr. G

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...