h1

Why not Cinelook?

July 31, 2008

I was thinking about this post the other day…

https://theclubabove.wordpress.com/2008/07/21/wombah-wotta-rant/

Stefan Sargent really hated using Cinelook (a plugin for After Effects).  And he was right, at the time.

Computers were slower back in those days – which would make the wait for each frame of the movie to render out slow death for anybody not acquainted with long render times per frame (as an aside – I seem to recall each frame of Starship Troopers animation needing 24 hours to render – not surprising at all, considering how many “passes” it takes to make a believable CGI animation.)

But as to discarding Cinelook as a tool, simply because it takes a long time to render out a movie?  I have to disagree with that!

Back in the day, I was preparing to use Cinelook to do a feature (this was before the advent of 24P video).  We low-budget filmmakers need to trade time for money often, and so this was “a match made in heaven”.  Shoot the movie in regular video, Cinelook the selects, then cut these into your final cut.

And even if you don’t like the time involved, Cinelook still has some of the best presets to make video look like film, in my opinion. Even moreso, if you consider people shooting HD video for their projects nowadays; with Cinelook, you could shoot (in theory) “Standard-Def” video, Cinelook it, then cut it into your movie. Same as you might cut a blow-up of Super 8 and cut it into to your 16mm film back in the day…

Look here…(and no, I’m not gay, that guy in the thong just was in the shot).  This is “normal” video – it might be hard to tell with YouTube’s compression…

And here’s one of Cinelook’s 35mm presets…

An 8mm preset without damage…

But film damage does have some use once in a while – Artistic License, flashbacks, & such… 

It’s even got some really fun presets…

So, Sargent doesn’t like the tool.  Doesn’t mean the tool it completely useless (especially nowadays).

Advertisements
%d bloggers like this: