What makes an image cinematic?

[TwoScoops]

Set, lighting, post grading etc is probably most important. But with fuck all budget, a more cinematic camera helps a lot too.

[elgabogomez]

Maybe saying something obvious, known for a century now... But what makes an image cinematic is the image before it and the image after it. It's the arrangement of those moving parts that works in our brains and eyes... and souls.

[terozzz]

Simple, you. You make the image cinematic :P Its all about you ans what you produce. 

[Oliver Daniel]

The young guy in the video makes a lot of sense - you have to give him credit for being uber-sensible. 

My mantra is: If there's noise in my shot, so be it. I got the shot. And it works.

Light, composition, lens choice, perspective, location, filming style, people.... all these things have way more impact than filming with a better camera. It's easy to kid yourself that you need a better camera, but SO MANY forget the bigger picture of having a camera in the first place. A better camera will have very little influence on making your stuff "cinematic" if you don't apply the key principles around it. 

Right now - I have the FS5 and the A6500. I have the FS5 to cover all my jobs as a great all-rounder - plus due to many requests for HFR, it does that too. The A6500 is used for gimbal work, B-roll and stills shots. For every job i do, I'm covered. New GH5? Ursa Mini Pro? Nice, but not needed. A waste of money. 

Have these Sony cameras had a dramatic impact on my overall content quality? No. It's the artistic choices like lighting, lens choice, grading and style. It's the casting choices (spending more on talent). It's using a location in creative ways. It's editing and rhythm. It's getting everything synchronised. It's publishing work to be proud of. 

The cameras are now at a point where we don't need to be concerned with them, or have to jump through hoops to work properly. We're in a content age where video is the biggest type of media on the planet, and to stand out, you have to wake up from the merry-go-round of camera obsessions and make some really engaging stuff.

I really couldn't think of any big reasons that I'd part with my cameras just now. There would be little benefit to upgrading them, just another hole in the wallet. 

Frankly, I'm done with the gear acquisition illness many of us have. It's incredibly distracting, time-wasting and not creative at all. Of course, it's part of my job to keep up to date with it. But losing time due to thinking about new cameras, not anymore. 

There's a lot of camera gear blogs now. Many of them are sponsored because people have to make a living. They are a good source of news. Opinion pieces are subjective. BUT...there is a gap in these blogs. There's barely a focus on the craft, experimentation and artistry of film making. Maybe because these topics are less hyped, monetised and clickable. 

 

[Inazuma]

@Oliver Daniel I strongly agree with all your points... but it is easier to say those things when you have an FS5, which is the most perfect all round video camera I can think of at the moment... and also out of a lot of people's budgets here. Most people here seem to be in the sub £1000 or £2000 category, so the long debates all revolve around your a6500's, g80's, BMPC's, etc - which all have their pros and cons. 

[webrunner5]

Quote

 

Well I agree most modern camera Can get the job done, but every manufacturer has a "Baked In Look" to them. They can't all look like a Arri or Arri would sue the hell out of them. And on the low end cameras they look worse than the high end cameras. Sony is not going to sell you a A6000 that looks just like a F55! The new GH5 is not going to look like the 45,000 dollar Varicam, get real.

Like TwoScoops says, you have to buy a More Cinematic camera to get a Cinematic look. And that usually means a higher end camera. Like 5,000 bucks or way more for one new one or used, that maybe cost that much or more in the past. If high end movie makers are not buying A6000's to make great movies, I doubt we are going to buy one and make it Cinematic as hell. But we can try if that is all we can afford.

Can we make a pretty good movie well yes. BMPCC can do it about as well as anything we can afford. But it does take everything to click to make it happen, right lens, right lighting, right grading, right edit, on and on. And well, big need, Right Story.

But we are in a position of being able to afford a camera that Can make a decent, no very good movie, for not a heck of a lot of money camera wise new or used, and with these new LCD lights that is not a killer thing to buy anymore either. We do have a Chance to look more professional now, I think, than we ever had before..

I just received, bought, a Refurbed AG-AF100AP camera that I have taken two test shots with that I am Very encouraged that it can produce a some pretty amazing, well at least great footage. Well sort of amazing for what you can buy one for now. I really think I have no excuse now to blame the camera, it is ME that will be the blame.

And that leads back to a lot of these comments, it is on OUR shoulders to make it happen really with any camera now, it sort of can be done. We need to read articles, watch others movies,take advice from here and Make it happen. Not as easy as it sounds, but hey it is certainly something we enjoy, and strive to accomplish.

[Nicolas MAILLET]

to me :

- Aspect ratio

- 24 fps with motion blur associated

- Shallow depth of field

- camera movements

- Music used

- colors and lights

and the most of it : Actors and story.

 

Here's a little joke i've made with friends that uses some codes of what i call a cinematic video :

Slow motions here to be a bit parodic... And you'll notice a hommage to Marion Cotillard somewhere in the video... That couldn't be more cinematic with this !!!!! lol

[webrunner5]

Well that was different LoL! Looked damn good also.

[Oliver Daniel]

18 hours ago, Inazuma said:

@Oliver Daniel I strongly agree with all your points... but it is easier to say those things when you have an FS5, which is the most perfect all round video camera I can think of at the moment... and also out of a lot of people's budgets here. Most people here seem to be in the sub £1000 or £2000 category, so the long debates all revolve around your a6500's, g80's, BMPC's, etc - which all have their pros and cons. 

I'm with you on that. I won't need much else with an FS5 hanging around. 

However, whether your camera is $1000, $50000 or $10,000 - it's likely that all those cameras are more than enough to shoot quality footage with. 

Focus your energy on everything else - the camera is just a screwdriver in a toolbox when building a boat.  

[mercer]

5 hours ago, Oliver Daniel said:

I'm with you on that. I won't need much else with an FS5 hanging around. 

However, whether your camera is $1000, $50000 or $10,000 - it's likely that all those cameras are more than enough to shoot quality footage with. 

Focus your energy on everything else - the camera is just a screwdriver in a toolbox when building a boat.  

I just saw an FS5 on the trade show floor and I cannot believe how tiny it is... it looks like a digital Krasnogorsk. Looks like a little workhorse. 

[Nicolas MAILLET]

Amen !!!!

Oliver Daniel you're damn rignt !!! Camera is just a tool. It helps when your tool is a good quality one but you can even tell stories with iphones or "shitty" cameras...

How many movies miss the focus ? How many movies have some bad camera movements ? How many films have big problems with technique itself ? Some big movies i've seen have sometimes these mistakes... and so what ?

When the story is here and talents too... you have a good movie. That's all folks.