how to simulate the original "shake" of the old movies shot on film?

[Hans Punk]

Yeah, HFR and HDR demos are incredible when showcased properly, through work I've recently been to a few private demo's and also seen some unreleased laser hardware and screens in Germany (very impressive). I just fear that by the time that HDR will hit consumer TV's, the implementation may be hobbled by default processing of non HDR content that most consumers just accept as 'normal' but are nowhere like how the filmmaker intended to be shown (like example pic in my previous post). It will be that awkward transition period where things need to take time to settle, before all content can be displayed as intended. It will be fine, I just hate the hype and bullshit when anything hits the consumer market...remember 3D TV's anyone?

I have much higher hopes for the next gen of theater projection, the upcoming Avatar films will probably be a considerable driving force for the next roll out of projection upgrades worldwide if Jim Cameron succeeds in the HDR/HFR Glass-less 3D solution he is ultimately aiming for. 

[fuzzynormal]

21 hours ago, Orangenz said:

@Hans Punk Literally no one else commenting has read your first reply  Well, at least I care. 

FWIW, I have "misfire".  It sort of works, but the results arent authentic to my tastes.  Tweaking the parameters can get you sort of there, but I just never "felt-it" with that plugin. 

10 hours ago, Hans Punk said:

 Film projection and its degradation through many cycles of showings in theatres is what made a huge influence of the viewers of the 'film' effect.

Yes. This is my experience as well. Since I was but a poor lad in my childhood, going to the 1dollar matinees at the second run movie house was my movie-world. 

Bad projection is "film" to me. 

[odie]

jj abrams just shook the mag while filming  (is that what you mean?)

[Hans Punk]

1 hour ago, odie said:

jj abrams just shook the mag while filming  (is that what you mean?)

That is for more of a violent camera shake (not subtle gate weave)...the mag is just a good place to grab onto!

I heard of a music video where the director got a bit overexcited and actually tore the mag off by doing this.

[Axel]

On 23.6.2017 at 8:33 AM, fuzzynormal said:

Bad projection is "film" to me. 

Good point. It's a layer of meaningfulness, if you will. On the one hand people strive for ever higher resolution and and ever more realistic detail, on the other hand this never was the reason why audiences suspend their disbelief. They are captured by something that looks stylized, intentionally distorted, artistically transformed. It's not about reality, cleanness, it's about transcendence. Filmlook recipes during the last decade made these looks exchangeable. If not used with due subtlety und scrupulousness It's not perceived as a genuine quality (subconsciously associated with the old and magic techniques of big cinema) but as amateurish. It's then more linked to millions of cheap music videos on youtube.

EDIT: so if Dan Wake wants to simulate original "shake" of the old movies in 2017 he should be aware that the average viewer might also subconsciously see through this and spontaneously decide whether the whole simulation is worth suspending his disbelief. 

[jonpais]

This got me thinking about the beautiful clip shot with a Voigtlander and uploaded in one of the threads recently. I don't think shake would have improved the clip at all, and I would probably have stopped watching. 

[Axel]

1 hour ago, jonpais said:

This got me thinking about the beautiful clip shot with a Voigtlander and uploaded in one of the threads recently. I don't think shake would have improved the clip at all, and I would probably have stopped watching. 

Which clip was that?

I am not saying don't use retro looks. They are in the giant tool box, and everything is permitted. 99% of these tools are there to enhance the experience by reducing the input, to filter out mundane or distracting elements. The content of the images (the 'what' you see) should be as strong in itself as possible, without music enhancing it (and ironically often shiftening and lessening the original impact). A well-composed image will make it easy to choose the right style (the 'how'), be it sDoF, HDR, punchy, black & white, strong grain or moody colors. Or reduced image steadiness.

[Dan Wake]

I just made a little test, the video has been shot in few minutes (I had no time even for correct framing, focus, I was in hurry I just made it to test this plugin so I used a little tripod to be super stedy). Sorry also for color correction.

Tested one of the Jarle’s Deadpool Handheld Camera presets. I made it because I wish to ask you your feeling about your suspension of disbelief, let me know please.

 

[Hans Punk]

That looks good to me, very similar to what the Wiggle expression does when dialled down to low parameters in After effects. It is perhaps not a traditional side to side 'Gate Weave' look, but definitely gives a physicality to the locked off shots that look quite natural.

The rhythm to that movement is similar to operator breathing whilst holding a heavier camera as steady as they can...so it is not distracting IMHO. The advantage of adding post moves like this - is that is can (as in your example) make the camera appear to have added weight, and that its nodal point to be further back...like a physically larger and heavier camera. This little visual cue can often give the viewer the impression that it has been shot on a 'movie camera', rather than a super light weight dslr. I often apply stabilisation to my footage (even for tripod pans) at a very low setting. This gives a similar effect of a larger camera being used, since it dampens the camera moves to appear to be a bit softer.

you could even go a bit more subtle for the longer takes - the nice thing is it that these subtle moves work great when very little movement is introduced...just enough to break the staticness of a locked of tripod shot (if that is the intended look). 

[freeall]

Of course, even at perfect efficiency (which is not possible to achieve so far as I know, and it was already LED based), that tv would be too energy inefficient for consumer use and so it is many orders of magnitude (I think) brighter than today's tvs. So while the HDR tech can be mind-blowing, truly incredible, I think its implementation might be garbage for home use right now. Still, you're comparing those images on an SDR screen. Of course the HDR one looks flat. On even the lowest end HDR screen, the one on the left should have brighter looking whites than the one on the right has on even a very good SDR screen. 

[HockeyFan12]

3 hours ago, freeall said:

Of course, even at perfect efficiency (which is not possible to achieve so far as I know, and it was already LED based), that tv would be too energy inefficient for consumer use and so it is many orders of magnitude (I think) brighter than today's tvs. So while the HDR tech can be mind-blowing, truly incredible, I think its implementation might be garbage for home use right now. Still, you're comparing those images on an SDR screen. Of course the HDR one looks flat. On even the lowest end HDR screen, the one on the left should have brighter looking whites than the one on the right has on even a very good SDR screen. 

Yes, exactly. The power consumption is massive. It is actually the cooling that contributes more to the power consumption than the display itself. As LED efficiency improves, so should the need for cooling decrease. But I think we've hit an asymptote, or are closing in on one, as regards LED efficiency, so I suspect that consumer HDR will still get really crazy good but it won't reach the mind-blowing levels that made me want to immediately sell my Panny Plasma...

However, on a small enough screen (on an AR or VR device) I think a true HDR image might be viable. The closer we get the screen to the eye, the less brightness we need, and exponentially. That's why HDR tech in cinemas isn't great. And it won't be. True HDR (10,000 nit plus) really is incredible, powerful, and immersive tech. As is VR... which has a tiny screen...  Just saying...  

As regards the original question, I'm working with a high quality 16mm scan now. I love film but I have to say the headache is huge. There is gate weave but it's very subtle. I can't see it at 100% but when I zoom in it's like ugg... so I need to do a position track on every lock off! I think most people here would be surprised by how incredibly subtle it is. The Red Giant plug in is about 100X too strong. 

Whether you want to emulate it or not is up to you, but it's crazy subtle. I would like to come up with a procedural after effects expression but the shape of the gate wave is difficult to translate into an equation. Bizarrely, the Y weave is slightly greater than the X weave, and it doesn't seem to correlate to it at all. Same frequency, greater quantity... I think. At first glance, dimensions seem to move pretty independently?

Note that those are speed and not position graphs. But I think it illustrates gate weave in a clearer way. Value graphs seem to show multiple frequencies. Even more chaotic than the speed graph. I do think a procedural option is viable, but it's more than a simple wiggle expression. 

Also, grain is interesting. It is indeed per-channel. And highlights never blow out but when they even get close they have a beautiful orange glow. Difficult to emulate in post without a lot of work, so mind your highlights. As regards grain, a b&w overlay doesn't do the trick. You need to refrain each channel. With digital, the green channel has the finest grain texture, then red and blue have bigger grain texture and more grain, too. With film, it seems the size of grain is more consistent between channels (makes sense when you consider three equal layers vs bayer sensors favoring green) but the quantity is still greater in the blue channel. There doesn't seem to be any correlation between grain pattern in each channel, though. Looks like three random, really nice grain textures. So you should offset the time of your film grain scan to regain each channel imo; they don't seem correlated at all. And just boost the blue grain's opacity relative to the others. 

[HockeyFan12]

Position graphs are even harder to pin down. :/