"Cinematic" colors/hues and edits

boingy wrote in post #13146584
I'm going to try and play around with it when I get home later tonight. I don't know if I have any past candid shots that would fit the cinematic look, but I'll take a look. I tried to dl the free version of Mogrify, but it didn't work for some reason...I probably installed it wrong and I kind of just forgot about that plug-in...I can add borders my ghetto way, by using MS Paint, which I've done for fun. I just do a background at 16:9 and then add the photo at 2.35:1 ratio.

I haven't gotten into using layers, and have never used Mogrify, but I know there are plenty people here who have gotten good use for it, so I'd say you should be able to come up with a pretty simple solution there!

As far as using Paint for the border, sure thing it would be a simple process! Easy to create a new black background canvas with the proper dimensions and paste the image into into it and move to position it properly and bang! You're there! Really, for this, it would be just as simple as using Photoshop to do it!

I find the Lightroom HSL tools are very useful and powerful for working with color channels. If you've never checked them out then do that without further ado! Each of the toolsets, Hue, Saturation and Luminance, could play a part in all this and, if you look, you not only have control of eight different color channels, but also a "targeting" tool for choosing one tone in the image that you can mess with.

Well, if you want to work with layers but don't have/can't get CS, then your choices are maybe Photoshop Elements, which is very inexpensive (<$100), or the free Gimp, which has a lot of things but requires a lot of plug-ins and can be a bit cumbersome to learn and get a handle on things...

But I'd say if you can score Perfect Layers legitimately then give it a try! I did download the Beta, but for my workflow it just didn't meet my needs. I do have a working copy of CS3, though, so it's there for when I need it. In fact just yesterday I used it for my focus-stacking project! I don't know if Perfect Layers would work as well for that type of thing but the Beta period ran out and I'm not going to shell out more $$ for software I don't need!

Yeah I always mess with the HSL tools and love it. Yeah he purchased Perfect Layers so it's legit. I've been debating if I should get PS Elements or not (I believe 10 just came out?). The price is very reasonable and cheaper than what I paid for LR3. I would have to relook at my workflow if so since I would love to mess with layers and RGB curves. I really want CS5, but I just can't see myself forking over that kind of $$$ right now since Id rather buy another lens or flash and a tripod since I'm still slowly building my gear. I'm not really into the indepth editing, well at least for now, so I just can't justify getting it yet. I'm also so new to all of this so still have so much to learn and improve in all other aspects of photography.

http://www.flickr.com …6109909064/in/p​hotostream

Here's my attempt in LR3 from a random shot I took a two weeks ago. Funny thing is that flickr says I took it two days ago! what the! Just doesn't look 'cinematic' enough to me. Tone's too warm? Not enough constrast? Maybe reduce sharpness and clarity a little?

IMAGE LINK: http://www.flickr.com/​photos/boingyman/61741​67764/

If it were taken at their eye level, and allowed for a bit more headroom, and a shallower depth of field, it'd be fine. It think right now it already looks quite nice.

Yeah I agree, I would have stepped back a little too. I was just finding any random shot from my LR3 catalog. The original photo actually has much more headroom, but hard to include everything using the 2.35:1 format unless I crop the legs more. Some dude's jacket was to the left, which made me have to crop in even more... Shot was taken at f/1.6

One thing I've learned is that when shooting for CinemaScope on a much taller format like 16:9 or for photos, 3:2, you have to anticipate the crop and frame wider. Either you can imagine the crop, or physically mark your screen, which could possibly be a choice with viewfinder screens and certainly with live view. But more realistically, it just helps to frame wider and imagine the crop.

DOF may just be a result of the small size. Though a more compressed background would help diffuse the out of focus areas.

Heh! You know, this brings back a funny memory!

Even though I've had a few cameras that had video, I've never gotten into the habit of using it.

So, a few years ago, in fact back in '03, I was at a family get-together in Southern California, one of those occasions where you want to capture memories, and I had my digicam out and was snapping away.

And then, at some point there was some activity going on, and I got the bright idea of switching to video, and I did, and began shooting away!

Well, in a brief period of time I noticed that my field of view was way too wide. The photographer in me kicked in, and I just automatically kicked into turning the camera into portrait orientation, and just kept shooting, I believe for the rest of the video sequence...

So, imagine my abashedness at reviewing the video and realizing I had create a pile of sideways junk!!

My attempt.

tonylong wrote in post #13149347
Heh! You know, this brings back a funny memory!

...

So, imagine my abashedness at reviewing the video and realizing I had create a pile of sideways junk!!

Haha, I've seen people do that before. It's still usable though! Just flip it to vertical like they do in the news when they get video from cellphones.

Eric Xu wrote in post #13153004
Haha, I've seen people do that before. It's still usable though! Just flip it to vertical like they do in the news when they get video from cellphones.

Really? They can do that? Kewl!

i love thiss tyle. I usually process in Lightroom.
I havent change the aspect ratio to a cinematic style - how are you guys doing this?
here's a bunch from my flickr. None of them are particularly wide though. I also wondered is it worth DLing technicolour cinestyle for stills?

IMAGE LINK: http://www.flickr.com …/43398743@N02/6​232395752/

IMAGE LINK: http://www.flickr.com …/43398743@N02/6​231440368/

IMAGE LINK: http://www.flickr.com …/43398743@N02/6​220781807/

IMAGE LINK: http://www.flickr.com …/43398743@N02/6​214892673/

IMAGE LINK: http://www.flickr.com …/43398743@N02/6​184560032/

IMAGE LINK: http://www.flickr.com …/43398743@N02/6​168267817/

IMAGE LINK: http://www.flickr.com …/43398743@N02/6​165712728/

^^

got you as a contact on flickr. love the edits. want to disclose what you normally do in LR3?

hey thanks for the comment
I do use lightroom for PP
main things:
adjust brightness/fill light/ exposure to get that kind of movie lighting going on
play with the WB on the picture to try and get that movie like colour - slide the cool/warm wb slider to a place you feel you are achieiving the right look for that shot
i also use the nd filter function to add blues or tan/beige colours to go over some or all of the image.
plus i play with the split toning - usually blues and tans in shadows or highlights until i feel ive achieved the right look
personally though i still dont think i have nailed it - the actuall movies/tv series i watch seem to have it much subtler but yet really noticable - im working on it!

I think you've done a great job.

My two attempts, ideas of which I got out of a YOutube tutorial. It's mainly Gradient Maps. I've done better w/ curves in other PP projects though.

IMAGE LINK: http://www.flickr.com …/20478368@N03/6​197715749/

IMAGE LINK: http://www.flickr.com …/20478368@N03/6​199922826/