Malcolm & Marie - Netflix Feb 4 - 35mm Eastman Double X

[Stephen Perera]

......so I keep hearing about streaming platforms and digital and all that but all I can see is more and more and more great films being shot on film for Netflix and so on......so the future is bright notwithstanding the anti film brigade 

Directed by Sam Levinson and starring John David Washington and Zendaya Coleman

Anyway.....critical acclaim already on the screeners pre it's Feb 4 worldwide release on NETFLIX 

 

 

 

 

Edited January 10, 2021 by Stephen Perera

[Stephen Perera]

Just saw the film.....notwithstanding any comments regarding the storyline, styling, pacing, casting and acting......as far as visually is concerned......this film.....alongside The Lighthouse from our friend Jarin is a big capilatised F*CK YOU to those that think pseudo black and white digital looks as great as B/W film....the only true black and wWhite medium in stills and moving image is film.....there you go.....just my opinion......regardless of my lack of credentials in moving pictures to justify you even considering listening to anything I say I urge you to sit back and enjoy this film......

Edited February 6, 2021 by Stephen Perera

[Stuart Brereton]

On 1/10/2021 at 6:37 PM, Stephen Perera said:

notwithstanding the anti film brigade 

Who exactly are these people? I know plenty of pro-digital people, but I've never met anyone that was actually anti-film. It's not a zero sum game, after all.

The film looks great, btw.

[Stephen Perera]

2 hours ago, Stuart Brereton said:

Who exactly are these people? I know plenty of pro-digital people, but I've never met anyone that was actually anti-film. It's not a zero sum game, after all.

The film looks great, btw.

Stuart, yeah you're right I did word it wrong.....the point I'm making is that it's an exquisite use of Eastman Double X that absolutely reigns high and above digital BW in my opinion.....having shot and scanned BW photographic film for decades in many film/developer combinations I am just standing ovation mode at the look of this film....as I am at The Lighthouse.

[Phil Rhodes]

One thing that's worth talking about here is exactly what "black and white" means.

There's more than one way to derive a monochrome image from a colour one and people often don't ask what exactly is happening when we wind the "saturation" control down to zero. There's almost never any way to control that, anyway. Very often, what you'll get is some sort of average of the RGB channels; something like:

0.2126R + 0.7152G + 0.0722B

...which is the Rec. 709 Y channel derivation, or something similar. The contribution of the blue channel is very, very small.

Compare old-style, non-orthochromatic black and white stock, or The Lighthouse, shot through heavy filters, which sees only blue or blue-green light.

 If you just copy the blue channel into the red and green channels, you get something much more interesting on many subjects.

Notice the Photoshop desaturation is most similar to the green channel.

 

Original:

[Stuart Brereton]

1 hour ago, Stephen Perera said:

 Eastman Double X that absolutely reigns high and above digital BW in my opinion

As Phil points out, there are many ways to make digital B&W, and they are not all created equal. Whether digital B&W looks like film, and whether it looks good are two separate questions.

That said, the movie looks great, although a lot cleaner looking than I would have expected. Makes me wonder if there hasn't been a pass through Neat Video or similar.

[Tyler Purcell]

On 2/6/2021 at 9:34 AM, Stephen Perera said:

as far as visually is concerned......this film.....alongside The Lighthouse from our friend Jarin is a big capilatised F*CK YOU to those that think pseudo black and white digital looks as great as B/W film....the only true black and wWhite medium in stills and moving image is film

Oh agreed, the texture alone is amazing. You can tell it's "emulated" when you see films like "Mank" and for what reason? Like, if you want that look, why not get that look in camera. People have lost all sight of capturing your movie in-camera and not creating it in post. 

I just wish someone made a Black and White film this way, that did well in the box office and wasn't "meh" script wise. Strike a few prints, show them theatrically and get people on board with that look. 

Edited February 7, 2021 by Tyler Purcell

[Satsuki Murashige]

52 minutes ago, Tyler Purcell said:

Like, if you want that look, why not get that look in camera.

Because getting the look in-camera isn’t always the director’s priority, and it’s usually their decision. Not everyone has the same process for making a movie.

[Tyler Purcell]

37 minutes ago, Satsuki Murashige said:

Because getting the look in-camera isn’t always the director’s priority, and it’s usually their decision. Not everyone has the same process for making a movie.

For sure! And some things you can't get in camera, content depending. 

[Stephen Perera]

13 hours ago, Tyler Purcell said:

Oh agreed, the texture alone is amazing. You can tell it's "emulated" when you see films like "Mank" and for what reason? Like, if you want that look, why not get that look in camera. People have lost all sight of capturing your movie in-camera and not creating it in post. 

I just wish someone made a Black and White film this way, that did well in the box office and wasn't "meh" script wise. Strike a few prints, show them theatrically and get people on board with that look. 

I guess I'm too B/W film 'encoded mentally' haha as I've shot it for 32 years now in stills photography.....and in recent years also at 25fps on 16mm......I applaud the way it has deep contrast and great midtone range at the same time.....magnificent.....also The Lighthouse.....should have won best cinematography but instead they gave it to 1917.......anyway....the modern day Who Killed Virginia Woolf with Burton and Taylor

Also the irony of my argument that FILM B/W is the best B/W when digital B/W can be what some people prefer and thus its great we maintain the options....is not lost one me haha

Edited February 8, 2021 by Stephen Perera

[Stephen Perera]

21 hours ago, Phil Rhodes said:

One thing that's worth talking about here is exactly what "black and white" means.

There's more than one way to derive a monochrome image from a colour one and people often don't ask what exactly is happening when we wind the "saturation" control down to zero. There's almost never any way to control that, anyway. Very often, what you'll get is some sort of average of the RGB channels; something like:

0.2126R + 0.7152G + 0.0722B

...which is the Rec. 709 Y channel derivation, or something similar. The contribution of the blue channel is very, very small.

Compare old-style, non-orthochromatic black and white stock, or The Lighthouse, shot through heavy filters, which sees only blue or blue-green light.

 If you just copy the blue channel into the red and green channels, you get something much more interesting on many subjects.

Notice the Photoshop desaturation is most similar to the green channel.

 

Original:

....not to mention you can of course simulate camera filter effects in Photoshop for example......when converting to B/W......yellow filter....blue filter....red filter....green filter......etc