Jon Tubb Posted August 25, 2004 Share Posted August 25, 2004 Does anyone know how to create the look of old martial arts movies. I love the look and feel of them and was curious what camera and stock etc. was used in the likes of Enter the Dragon and Fist of Fury. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matt Pacini Posted August 25, 2004 Share Posted August 25, 2004 Not sure of what stocks, etc., they used, but if you want a good example of how to copy that look cheaply, check out the Steve Wang "Kung Fu Rascals" shot on Super 8. Cheesy movie, but definitely has "that look". All Kodachrome 40 Super 8. Matt Pacini Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Premium Member David Mullen ASC Posted August 26, 2004 Premium Member Share Posted August 26, 2004 Most of those movies were shot in the 35mm Kodak color negative that everyone was using at the time; besides the lighting, some of the look is due to the fact that prints were used for earlier telecine transfers, which makes them look a little harsh. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Premium Member Adam Frisch FSF Posted August 26, 2004 Premium Member Share Posted August 26, 2004 They're often lit with mainly hard sources too, which makes them kind of old school. Simpler than the old studio-technicolor look, but on the same kind of line. As a simple sidenote - I wonder how many DP's could do a big classical hard lit Technicolor film like they used to back then - ever since the softlight arrived, that skills almost lost. I'd love to try some day - just having fresnels and flags. Good exercise. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Morgan Peline Posted August 26, 2004 Share Posted August 26, 2004 Quick question if anyone knows...How was the 'swaying arms' windmill effect achieved in 'Enter The Dragon' was this a 'double-printing' optical? Cheers Morgan Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Christian Appelt Posted August 28, 2004 Share Posted August 28, 2004 Remember that most martial arts film from the 1960s and 1970s arrived on US and European screens in prints from dupe negatives often very cheaply produced. This was before dupe processes could deliver the original neg's quality to the release print. I think you can achive the desired look this way: 1. Use medium speed film, zoom lenses (older 10:1 models for spherical, Lomo adapter anamorphic zooms or anamorphic adapters that fit older zoom lenses). 2. Have the original camera negative duped onto interpositive stock, add cinch marks and small emulsion scratches to it (not to the OCN), have it dry-printed (not liquid gate!) on dupe negatiove stock. Treat the dupe negative like the interpos, give it small scratches and cinch marks too. The typical 1970s martial arts look comes from fast zooms and pans, focus pulling, and from both pos and neg scratches from the dupe process. If I had to recreate the look, I even would put some changeover marks in the dupe positive, maybe even some jumpy looking cuts (with wide operlapping neg splices). Scratches can make vintage scenes believable. Recently I got some CGI air battle footage, refilmed it on 16mm negative, gave it a rough scratch&cinch treatment, and when it was scanned at 2K and rerecorded to 35mm, everybody liked the documentary WW2 look (before they had tried to get the scratches digitally, which didn't look real). My first job as "scratch advisor" - or should it be "director of abrasional effects" ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Premium Member John Pytlak RIP Posted August 28, 2004 Premium Member Share Posted August 28, 2004 A bit of physical "wear" on the master positive or duplicate negative can match new footage to older worn material. As noted, don't risk damaging your camera original. Scratches and dirt on a master postive will be black in the final print/transfer, on a duplicate negative, they end up as white. In most cases, you don't want to gouge the emulsion, which will cause a colored scratch. Unfortnuately, "fake" wear is often overdone, and not enough care is used to match the original worn footage. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Premium Member David Mullen ASC Posted August 29, 2004 Premium Member Share Posted August 29, 2004 >As a simple sidenote - I wonder how many DP's could do a big classical hard lit Technicolor film like they used to back then - ever since the softlight arrived, that skills almost lost. I did it on a short film -- it was fun. The only thing missing was the fact that our actors (students) were not as attractive as the ones in old studio movies... The thing you can get screwed on is that once you start out spotlighting every important element in the frame with hard light, you can forget how dark some unlit areas might go since there is so much less ambient spill, so contrast can get too high unless careful. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Premium Member Adam Frisch FSF Posted August 29, 2004 Premium Member Share Posted August 29, 2004 I'd love to get to do something like that, David. I've noticed recently that the obie-light wasn't just used on pretty leading ladies, it was pretty much used on everyone! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now