[HN Gopher] Colors in movies and TV: What happened to them?
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       Colors in movies and TV: What happened to them?
        
       Author : JaimeThompson
       Score  : 291 points
       Date   : 2022-01-11 15:50 UTC (2 days ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (www.vox.com)
 (TXT) w3m dump (www.vox.com)
        
       | mmcnl wrote:
       | I also believe the advance of HDR is at fault here. 90% of the
       | runtime of a show or movie the colors are muted to have an
       | additional "pop" in the remaining 10%.
        
       | pja wrote:
       | One theory I've seen put forward on YouTube is that this is
       | because modern digital cameras use a linear LUT when recording,
       | which means that images displayed to everyone during the
       | production process are naturally very washed out compared to how
       | they would look colour-corrected to sRGB. As a result, production
       | staff have become so used to the washed out colours of the linear
       | colourspace that they've become accustomed to it, sub-consciously
       | viewing a true colour-corrected version as being wildly over-
       | saturated. The end result is that the films they're delivering
       | are desaturated because that seems normal to them!
       | 
       | It's a plausible story if nothing else, but I would also guess
       | that a large part of the reason is just fashion & trends in film
       | making. A more saturated look will return in time no doubt.
        
         | hipshaker wrote:
         | I am a colorist, and you would be wrong. We transcode with a
         | color spacae tranform applied, but even if the footage ends up
         | in log space (not common anymore as most have learned what log
         | is) it doesn't inform he final grade. And big budget
         | productions certainly have a color managed pipeline.
        
           | pja wrote:
           | Here's the video I was probably remembering:
           | https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hpWYtXtmEFQ
        
       | sumo89 wrote:
       | Video games used to have this problem really bad as well as so
       | much overuse of bloom. There was a few years where every big
       | budget game looked like it had a brown filter on the screen.
       | People have speculated it was used to much to try and hide bad
       | graphics but I get the feeling it was more of a fashion thing.
       | Luckily it seems to be going away recently.
        
       | sandworm101 wrote:
       | One show: X Files.
       | 
       | 1990s Vancouver. Rain. Grey. Science fiction changed from the
       | bright colors of LA (Star Trek) to Vancouver's rain forests (X
       | Files, Stargate, Outer Limits). Why were Star Trek's colors so
       | bright? Desi Loe Studios paid extra for the color film and wanted
       | to use it. X files was on a tight budget and couldn't afford to
       | brighten Vancouver enough to make it look like California. So the
       | backgrounds become dark and grey.
       | 
       | Similar things happened in many film. Alien had budget problems
       | and difficult creature effects. Net result: hide everything in
       | darkness. The color has as much to do with budget as art.
        
       | motohagiography wrote:
       | I always attritbuted this style to one music video director whose
       | career started in the 90s and who had perfected the washed
       | saturation and goth look. She was the originator of Marylin
       | Manson's video aethetic in the 90s, and after she landed David
       | Bowie's "little wonders," that's when I think the style really
       | took off:
       | 
       | https://etcanada.com/photos/171117/14-music-videos-directed-...
       | 
       | While I don't know if she knew the Watchowskis then, the original
       | Matrix movie was absolutely a stylistic homage to her videos, and
       | that they would have been familiar with her work via Bowie and
       | Manson videos, makes it more plausible. If you look up Floria
       | Signismondi's work, it's so distinct and often emmulated or
       | copied, and once you've seen it, you can't unsee it.
        
       | ChrisMarshallNY wrote:
       | I remember when _Serenity_ came out. It was one of the first
       | movies (that I had seen) that had bright, colorful, sunshiny
       | days, with lots of visual effects.
       | 
       | I know that it wasn't the first, but I hadn't really seen much,
       | before that. _Star Wars_ had effects in color, but there wasn 't
       | any actual CGI involved.
        
         | greedo wrote:
         | It actually did. During the briefing for the attack on the
         | Death Star, the wireframe image of the DS was CGI.
        
           | ChrisMarshallNY wrote:
           | Ah. That makes sense. That was about the extent of CGI, back
           | then.
           | 
           | I know they added a bunch of CGI, when they remastered the
           | series, some years ago.
        
       | xgkickt wrote:
       | Grayscale is easier to composite than color so if the lighting is
       | off in one layer it isn't as noticeable or can easily be
       | compensated for. Shots can be matched up with a common tone.
       | 
       | I had also wondered if streaming was driving some of these
       | changes, by reducing noise and providing better compression
       | reducing the image to simple gradients.
        
       | zzzbra wrote:
       | counterpoint: B&W was all we had for almost half a century and
       | many of the greatest works of (B&W) cinema came out after that --
       | notably Film Noir. Maybe B&W is good, and muting color in "color"
       | movies is a recognition of that fact.
        
         | maldusiecle wrote:
         | I doubt it. A film with a muted color palette doesn't come
         | across the same as a black and white film--even if works well,
         | it doesn't work the same way. And the characteristics that made
         | film noir work so well visually--dramatic, unnatural lighting
         | and inventive composition--just aren't present in these new
         | movies.
        
       | [deleted]
        
       | notjes wrote:
       | Funny thing. For about 5 years now I manually adjust hue,
       | saturation and other stuff to my liking for each product, because
       | the colors felt bad very often. Now I am just waiting for an AI
       | colorizer to watch "Schindlers List" how it was supposed to be.
        
         | pvillano wrote:
         | Color design would not be a great choice for AI. It is not
         | objective, and there are many, many "right" answers. It also
         | requires understanding the intent and greater context of a
         | scene. To grade the following scene, you need to have watched
         | the Batman movie it references, know they're trying to sell
         | jean jackets, and infer the client's preferences from their
         | personality and previous projects.
         | 
         | https://youtube.com/watch?v=FClp1qGPAuM
         | 
         | "the way it was supposed to be" irks me too. You can't reify an
         | artists vision better than they can.
         | 
         | I suppose I would watch a fan-recoloring. The movie would not
         | be how it was supposed to be -- it would be something new --
         | but that could be something interesting to watch.
        
       | jillesvangurp wrote:
       | There's a great tutorial on color grading by Joanna Kustra. It's
       | mainly about photography (she's a fashion photographer) but it
       | applies to movies as well and she takes a lot of inspiration from
       | cinema (old and new). Of course, color grading was always a thing
       | ever since color movies became a thing in the nineteen forties.
       | E.g. Stanley Kubrick, Ridley Scott, or Tim Burton would have been
       | very opinionated on that topic and very intentional in how they
       | capture and process color.
       | 
       | Color grading is also something that is subject to fashion. And
       | that's something that we see with recent movies and TV a lot
       | because it is so easy these days. People are trying to imitate
       | the look and feel of other successful works.
       | 
       | Joanna Kustra makes a few great points about how colors are
       | associated with particular emotions and moods and how you can be
       | scientific about using e.g. using the color wheel to color grade
       | a particular scene. One key lesson from that is that color
       | grading becomes a lot easier if you simply plan and orchestrate
       | the light of your scene to match what you want rather than trying
       | to fix it in post processing. Old school but really effective. A
       | couple of colored filters for your camera's and lights is still a
       | good investment.
       | 
       | Check out her tutorial here:
       | https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mC8ol2-V7Ck. You may want to skip
       | past the sponsored stuff about her monitor though.
       | 
       | Modern digital sensors capture a lot of information these days,
       | which makes color grading a lot easier without introducing
       | undesirable artifacts. Better dynamic range of screens also means
       | we can have more colors and tones. So the over saturated look of
       | the nineteen eighties is less of a necessity these days.
       | 
       | Recent cameras store color at much greater bit depths and with
       | log profiles which bias towards using most of the bits for
       | storing the darker tones (the human eye is more sensitive there).
       | Of course this is a double edged sword. Because it is so easy, a
       | lot of people do color grading poorly or lazily. Select a filter,
       | click, done. Basically, Instagram is full of people doing that.
       | There's a difference between that and doing it with some skill.
       | 
       | Understanding color and tone is actually not that trivial. Some
       | people develop an intuition for it but a lot of this stuff is
       | actually counter intuitive. And funnily enough, a lot of
       | photographers and movie makers actually lack the theoretical
       | background to understand this properly. Aurelien Pierre, one of
       | the lead developers of Darktable has a few nice in depth
       | tutorials on these topics on his youtube channel:
       | https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCmsSn3fujI81EKEr4NLxrcg
       | 
       | Recent versions of Darktable have some interesting modules that
       | allow you do some really nice things with color grading, tone
       | mapping, perceptual changes to saturation, etc. that he worked on
       | and that definitely make my life a lot easier for post processing
       | my photos.
        
       | formerly_proven wrote:
       | The color correction explanation seems kinda weird. Having the
       | best color correction tools in history available causes... no
       | color correction to be used? ("Look LUTs" _are_ a thing but
       | mostly a thing peddled by Youtubers to amateurs)
        
         | TonyTrapp wrote:
         | I guess it's kinda like everyone in the music industry
         | following the loudness war. You _could_ have the best possible
         | sound using the best available audio processors... but instead
         | you just optimize everything to maximum loudness.
        
         | SkeuomorphicBee wrote:
         | You got it backwards, it causes color correction to be used
         | everywhere. All movies and TV shows now a days are recorded
         | with pretty realistic colors, but in post-production they use
         | "the best color correction tools in history" to correct the
         | colors into the grey and brown sludge that is in vogue. Modern
         | tools give film makers full color liberty, and they use that
         | liberty to apply the same tone to every movie/series because
         | they believe that is how movies/series should look like.
         | 
         | It is the same reason why Mexico is always sepia.
        
       | Fraterkes wrote:
       | There's a lot of random mentions of this new hbo series, station
       | Eleven, in this article, kinda odd.
        
         | azernik wrote:
         | Because the same author wrote a review of that ran on the same
         | day, and seems to have written this as a companion piece to the
         | review. https://www.vox.com/culture/2022/1/10/22872347/station-
         | eleve...
        
       | flenserboy wrote:
       | The Lord of the Rings theory appeals to me, not because I think
       | it's right, but because those movies set much else in motion that
       | has plagued film since. For one: fight scenes. The constant cuts
       | from close-up to close-up of the faces of those fighting did an
       | absolutely terrible job of getting the combat across, whether the
       | scale, the difficulty, or what was even logically happening. Many
       | of the fight scenes in movies since have focused on the up-close,
       | refusing to use the vast expanse of the movie screen to do what
       | it's built to do -- show large-scale action, give a sense of
       | where this is happening in the world, and showing the characters
       | as being a small part of that world instead of, well, giant faces
       | grimly emoting.
        
         | SavantIdiot wrote:
         | Totally. My issue with the LoTR fight scenes is that they don't
         | look natural. The lighting is all off because they want to show
         | everyone's face all the time. It ended up feeling very ...
         | flat. (Putting aside the constant banter of Legolas/Gimli
         | keeping score that made it seem like a joke, and every monster
         | having to scream into the camera that also made if feel corny.)
        
         | jfengel wrote:
         | I recall seeing that hyperkinetic cutting in Gladiator a few
         | years before Lord of the Rings. I didn't like it then, either.
         | It conveys the feeling of confusion in a battle, which is
         | realistic, but I don't find it a very interesting feeling.
         | 
         | I'd much rather see something with stakes. It doesn't even have
         | to be that large-scale. Two actors hitting each other --
         | showing their whole bodies, for at least a few seconds between
         | cuts -- gives me a chance to sense how they feel each other
         | out, what risks they're taking, how a blow actually hurts and
         | has consequences.
         | 
         | If the only emotion I'm getting is "confused", then I'm just
         | marking time until somebody tells me who won and who lost.
        
         | jonpurdy wrote:
         | There's a great quote from Jackie Chan about fight scenes: "I
         | never move my camera. Always steady. Wide angle."
         | 
         | Most action scenes in movies have moving cameras with fast cuts
         | and zoomed in faces. Makes it impossible to actually track
         | what's happening. I didn't realize this until I saw this* YT
         | video specifically about his action comedy style.
         | 
         | * - https://youtu.be/Z1PCtIaM_GQ
        
           | [deleted]
        
           | oneoff786 wrote:
           | I think he meant he doesn't cut away. He moves the camera all
           | over the place because he is moving all over the place, and
           | it works really well.
        
           | parenthesis wrote:
           | Similar thing with Fred Astaire dance sequences (e.g.
           | https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mxPgplMujzQ), or kpop dance
           | practice videos (e.g.
           | https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ovztfpWPo5M). The actual
           | dancing provides all the excitement you could ever need.
        
           | lupire wrote:
           | Jackie Chan can do that because he has the talent to
           | choreograph and perform fights.
        
             | fullshark wrote:
             | Now that most stunts are performed by computer generated
             | humans instead of talented actors/stuntmen, it does seem a
             | lot of this is to avoid the uncanny valley. The Neo v. 10k
             | Smiths fight from Matrix Reloaded used wide angles and
             | avoided quick cuts if I remember correctly and looked like
             | a cartoon even when it was cutting edge in 2003. I wonder
             | if it was tried again in 2022 the technology would have
             | advanced enough to make it look real.
        
               | zepearl wrote:
               | I remember many people saying that that was a great
               | scene, but to me it immediately looked horrible -> big
               | mistery... .
               | 
               | I hate that scene - the idea is great, but the quality of
               | the <textures?> is in my opinion horrible... . Weird.
        
               | fullshark wrote:
               | The technology wasn't far enough along to accomplish the
               | directors' vision imo, maybe it's there now. It was a
               | cutting edge technological advance (I think it took a
               | year to render or something) just like Jar Jar Binks and
               | the CGI backgrounds in Episode I, but because it was
               | cutting edge mistakes were made in implementing it. The
               | weird colors affecting films and quick cuts I think are
               | just tricks used now to make it work given so much of
               | modern film involves blending live action and CGI.
        
               | zepearl wrote:
               | That theory doesn't convince me too much.
               | 
               | Jurassic Park (mentioned as well by the author), maybe as
               | well Terminator 2, maybe something else had some reaaally
               | well done rendered scenes, in my opinion done a lot
               | better than the one of Neo vs Smiths, therefore a movie
               | done a few years later should be able to at least reach
               | the same level of quality... .
               | 
               | In my opinion it's more related about the company doing
               | the CGI and their technical capabilities/know-
               | how/experience of employees than the overall level of
               | technology being available. Mmmhh... .
        
             | shantara wrote:
             | And a willingness to retake every shot hundreds of times
             | until it reaches an acceptable level of perfection.
        
             | quartesixte wrote:
             | Not to mention the will to get himself almost killed on set
             | -- along with the rest of his stunt crew.
        
             | Mindwipe wrote:
             | Yes, but also he's not trying to make films that have to be
             | suitable for eight year olds.
        
               | rasz wrote:
               | Armour of God II: Operation Condor - basically kung fu
               | Raiders of the Lost Ark
        
         | kevinventullo wrote:
         | I always though Gladiator was what really kicked this off.
        
         | kodisha wrote:
         | Transformers movies took that to a very extreme, where every
         | fight scene is just a constant motion blur (zoomed).
        
         | jl6 wrote:
         | I've always assumed it's cheaper to have an editor quick-cut
         | footage into fake combat than to have a choreographer create
         | realistic combat.
         | 
         | Also, combat in general is incredibly boring in modern films.
         | Punch, punch, grunt, grimace - without any consequence. Maybe
         | someone has a cut lip which is gone in the next scene.
         | Superhero movies are the worst for this, where characters
         | routinely throw each other through walls and none of it matters
         | because they are as good as invincible.
        
           | spookthesunset wrote:
           | > combat in general is incredibly boring in modern films.
           | Punch, punch, grunt, grimace - without any consequence
           | 
           | I mean this kind of stuff has been around forever. The A-Team
           | pioneered "punch punch grimace, get up and walk away" to the
           | point where it was comical.
        
             | stronglikedan wrote:
             | > to the point where it was comical
             | 
             | So much so that I was actually shocked to see characters
             | actually dying in the most recent film.
        
           | cipher_system wrote:
           | Yes, why can't all fight scenes be brutal and brilliant like
           | the prison scene in the Punisher?
           | https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0MHJHkA6LMk
        
             | lupire wrote:
             | That's a perfect example of the extreme orange+blue color
             | grading.
        
           | oneoff786 wrote:
           | I think marvel has actually gotten fairly good at fights and
           | making them interesting to watch as a function of why the
           | hero is unique tbh.
           | 
           | Throwing huge punches is bad. Firing arbitrary laser blasts
           | is even worse. Especially when the consequences of being hit
           | seem so trivial. But it can be done well. I think Thor
           | Ragnarok is a good example of this.
           | 
           | This is the first movie in which both Thor and Hulk were
           | actually shown as extremely strong with little more than just
           | physical blows. What's noteworthy is that most of the fights
           | they're in are very easy for them, and frankly it's much more
           | fun to watch them stylishly stomp 100 goons and look strong
           | rather than incomprehensibly struggle to fend off 10
           | nobodies. Filmmakers tend to be afraid of having a fight
           | scene without tension.
           | 
           | Avengers infinity war fight v. Thanos also comes to mind as a
           | quick little highlight reel of each of a dozen characters
           | special contributions. It comes across as competent and
           | unique.
           | 
           | Off the top of my head, black panther, iron man 1,2,3,
           | guardians of the galaxy 1,2, Shang chi, wandavision, earlier
           | avengers, all felt particularly bad at this.
        
             | programd wrote:
             | While I respect your opinion I urge you to watch any early
             | Jackie Chan movie to see how magnificent cinematic fighting
             | can be. The Marvel fights are amateur hour! Please exit my
             | lawn, stage right.
        
               | oneoff786 wrote:
               | Jackie is a genius, no doubt.
               | 
               | There's a big difference in movies though. Jackie is
               | basically always a human fighting humans. He is always
               | either fighting an extremely competent opponent and it
               | will be fairly serious martial arts; or it will be him
               | comedically fighting a ton of goons which you know are
               | way weaker than him but he's got some sort of hilarious
               | disadvantage. But it's always somewhat grounded.
               | 
               | Superhero movies tend to have weird matchups where the
               | balance is already heavily skewed.
               | 
               | Shitty movies do this dance where the bad guy is slightly
               | stronger and does irrelevant damage to the protagonist
               | before being one shotted by a dumb trick, which is
               | probably a call back to something earlier in the film.
               | 
               | Better films actually have this implication that in a
               | fight, if an opponent does their thing, you're going to
               | die.
               | 
               | Marvel is starting to do more of the latter. It's just
               | much more rewarding when protagonists win by virtue of
               | competence and their own abilities.
               | 
               | https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=sFFwvr6l2mM
               | 
               | This fight contains no particularly good martial arts,
               | has a lot of cuts, and has a lot of big blasty attacks
               | but they're all very juicy and you do believe the threat
               | is real. It's especially good because everything both
               | characters are doing are somewhat novel to them. It's on
               | the fly improv and physical character development.
               | 
               | Very different from Jackie's stuff but I think very good.
        
               | egypturnash wrote:
               | hell yeah, you will see sequences that boil down to
               | "Jackie found this weird prop and spent two days figuring
               | out interesting ways to use it to beat the shit out of
               | people" and they will be _amazing_.
        
               | Fricken wrote:
               | This episode of "Every Frame a Painting" does an
               | excellent job of explaining why Jackie Chan's way of
               | doing action is awesome and why contemporary Hollywood
               | (generally) sucks:
               | 
               | https://youtu.be/Z1PCtIaM_GQ
        
             | rand49an wrote:
             | I couldn't disagree with that more. The 'MCU' Marvel films
             | seem to be filled with massive fights between two
             | effectively invincible forces with no consequences. Added
             | to that all the characters in many of the scenes are
             | completely CGI so they don't carry any visual weight to
             | them.
             | 
             | Compared to Sam Raimi's Spiderman films, which has a lot of
             | less CGI and smaller set pieces in general but the fight
             | scenes look more impactful because of it.
        
               | dragontamer wrote:
               | "Ghost in a Shell" is 100% CGI / Anime, but the fights
               | absolutely had consequences and weight.
               | 
               | I actually hate Attack on Titan as a show, but damn the
               | action scenes actually have weight and logic to them, far
               | superior to the Marvel stuff despite being 100% cartoon.
               | 
               | ---------
               | 
               | That being said: Marvel seems to be going with more of a
               | "Dragonball Z" or "RWBY" approach to combat. Which is
               | fine as long as the writing is good enough. Its a
               | different style for sure...
               | 
               | Except ya know. Dragonball Z / RWBY largely does it
               | better.
               | 
               | -------
               | 
               | Its less about action shots and more about demonstrating
               | superpowers. Everyone knows Goku will try to end the
               | fight with a Kamehameha wave. At some point, Goku will go
               | Super Saiyan or beyond, etc. etc.
               | 
               | Similarly: Capt. America will throw his shield, Iron Man
               | shoots some lasers, Hulk will grab, punch, and grapple
               | something.
        
               | oneoff786 wrote:
               | I think it varies tremendously by film and director. I
               | guess I wouldn't say the median marvel film is good at
               | this.
               | 
               | I also happen to think that the best Spider-Man fight
               | scenes were by far the Andrew Garfield ones. Those scenes
               | were incredibly juicy, especially the second, for all its
               | terrible writing and worldbuilding.
        
             | dragontamer wrote:
             | > Shang chi
             | 
             | Shang Chi had some good long-shot Wuxia-style scenes.
             | 
             | It wasn't as good as "Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon" but
             | unlike the rest of the Marvel films, Shang Chi actually had
             | proper fight scenes in them.
             | 
             | But you're right in that most Marvel scenes make no damn
             | sense from an action perspective. I'm constantly annoyed by
             | their cuts personally. I'm just surprised that you threw
             | Shang Chi into the same boat, because Shang Chi had more
             | proper action shots than I can remember.
             | 
             | I'm not talking about the CGI-dragon fight at the end
             | (which went back into the Marvel mold of CGI + jump cuts).
             | I'm talking about like, the first scene between Ying Li and
             | Weng Wu (Shang-Chi's mother and father). Or the Bus-fight,
             | which was pretty good IMO. At least, good by Marvel
             | standards (which are pretty bad).
             | 
             | It doesn't hold a candle compared to a good Jackie Chan
             | scene, but at least they kept the camera still _SOMETIMES_
             | in Shang-Chi, rather than never keeping the damn camera
             | still.
             | 
             | -------
             | 
             | That being said, I enjoy Marvel films. I just wish they
             | shot the action better.
        
               | WalterBright wrote:
               | > It wasn't as good as "Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon"
               | 
               | I saw it, it was all people swinging around on wires with
               | the wires painted out. By the arc of their movement, I
               | knew where the wires were, anyway. The whole thing just
               | looked silly.
        
               | oneoff786 wrote:
               | I thought Shang chi was very disappointing as a martial
               | arts film. The choreography seemed weak. The bus fight
               | was decent. Jackie Chan portrays himself as an incredible
               | fighter but always very human. Shang chi, in my opinion,
               | portrayed himself as a... pretty good fighter but weirdly
               | powerful.
               | 
               | Marvel's best raw martial arts fights were probably on
               | the likes of Daredevil (Netflix), Winter Soldier, and the
               | Falcon Series. But I don't feel they've gotten Kung fu or
               | traditional Chinese stuff down well ever.
        
           | usrusr wrote:
           | It's a double win, because it's not only cheaper, it's also
           | more "like being there". Because unless the battle happens to
           | be commanded by an AI embodied as a flock of observation
           | drones, nobody would have that generous wide shot view, not
           | even the highest ranking commanders.
           | 
           | I agree with the boring nature of most "superhuman" fight
           | scenes (of both "declared" kind, superheeoes, and the
           | "undeclared" kind, regular mortals who just happen to be over
           | the top for cheap awe effects).
           | 
           | But there have also been some recent examples (ca this
           | century) that I found quite impressive, usually characterized
           | by a short violent burst of crazyness and then everybody is
           | dead, heavily inured or routing, and _maybe_ slowly beginning
           | to consider that perhaps they haven 't actually lost.
        
             | dmitriid wrote:
             | > because it's not only cheaper, it's also more "like being
             | there".
             | 
             | "Being there" is an excuse Hollywood has used for ages for
             | not training actors properly, not doing any fight
             | choreography etc.
             | 
             | Marvel now spends millions of dollars on boring CGI fights
             | because they couldn't be bothered to spend the same (or
             | actually less) money on filming actual fights. Just look at
             | what John Wick did with a _54-57-year old_ actor and Nobody
             | did with a _57-year old_ actor for the fraction of the
             | price of most modern action movies.
        
             | alickz wrote:
             | >But there have also been some recent examples (ca this
             | century) that I found quite impressive, usually
             | characterized by a short violent burst of crazyness and
             | then everybody is dead, heavily inured or routing, and
             | maybe slowly beginning to consider that perhaps they
             | haven't actually lost.
             | 
             | I enjoyed the fighting scenes in the animated show
             | _Invincible_ much more than any fight scenes I've seen in a
             | Marvel film for this reason.
             | 
             | Explosive and (usually) consequential.
        
             | 5560675260 wrote:
             | Wouldn't "being there" also include observers not directly
             | involved in a fight? Like all the people supplying us with
             | mobile phone footage of real life happenings. Usually real
             | life shots are shakey and not that generous, but the kind
             | would feel natural to moviegoers.
        
             | anthk wrote:
             | With Dragon Ball you saw actual brushes and injuries.
             | Nowdays, with Dragon Ball Super...
             | 
             | At least the manga it's still respecting the original
             | artwork.
        
           | KineticLensman wrote:
           | > Maybe someone has a cut lip which is gone in the next scene
           | 
           | Agree in general. Atomic Blonde is one of the rare films that
           | doesn't fall into this trap. The lead character gets cuts and
           | bruises that persist between scenes and even changes her hair
           | style at one point to hide a black eye picked up in a fight.
        
           | extesy wrote:
           | Watch Gangs of London and The Punisher. Fighting scenes are
           | much better choreographed and are more realistic and brutal.
        
             | robohoe wrote:
             | Heck, even Daredevil had some fantastic scenes too.
             | Particularly the staircase scene.
        
           | monkeynotes wrote:
           | Wider shots would require so much more CGI work.
           | 
           | Many movies these days are simply a formula that as a middle
           | aged person I've seen so many times I just can't watch action
           | or superhero movies, I have zero interest. I am not the
           | target audience though. Even movies aimed at my demographic
           | are laden with tropes, little interesting or creative
           | storyline.
           | 
           | Long form TV is generally much more creative story based and
           | does not reboot old TV so much (Bell Air is more of an
           | exception than a rule).
        
             | pjc50 wrote:
             | Early in the pandemic my wife and I started a small virtual
             | film club with a remit of "old, bad, B, or unheard-of
             | films". It's been hugely entertaining, far more so than the
             | modern repetitiveness of superhero movies. And a lot of
             | them make great use of colour, such as the Hammer/Amicus
             | horror movies. Those tend to do fun things with red/green
             | lighting, side or underlighting, or splashes of light
             | across the eyes of an otherwise in darkness character.
             | 
             | Re: Bel Air reboot, "dark reboot of light comedy series" is
             | such a ridiculous cliche that I can't believe they've
             | actually done it. Very 2020s.
        
               | smnscu wrote:
               | Enjoy :) https://www.redlettermedia.com/best-of-the-worst
        
             | nottorp wrote:
             | > Long form TV is generally much more creative story based
             | 
             | Agree with the rest, but I'm afraid that i find 99.95% of
             | the current TV series as boring as superhero movies. At
             | least a movie finishes in (up to) 3 hours...
        
         | jjoonathan wrote:
         | Grimly emoting is cheap and easy -- convincingly animating
         | large-scale action is difficult and expensive. LARPing it out
         | is difficult and expensive too. I don't think it's a LoTR
         | thing, I think it's an economics thing.
        
         | CoastalCoder wrote:
         | I think the battle scene [0] from The Lion, The Witch, and the
         | Wardrobe did a pretty good job of balancing up-close chaos with
         | big-picture clarity.
         | 
         | [0]
         | https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FixGtngBdhE&ab_channel=EdenK...
        
         | Angostura wrote:
         | ? The one thing I loved about the films was the sweeping
         | grandeur of many of its shots, including the battle scenes.
        
         | acdha wrote:
         | I'd also attribute some of this to the superhero glut: they're
         | generally not very good plots stretched out to many hours and
         | the combat is supposed to be a big draw but since they've
         | removed the limits of realism (the audience usually knows who's
         | going to win, and that the writers can always cancel out the
         | consequences in the next episode either way) there isn't much
         | left but posturing iconically and visual effects.
        
           | gcanyon wrote:
           | > the audience usually knows who's going to win
           | 
           | I just watched The Eternals, and spoiler: they're not _all_
           | eternal. It added an excellent real sense of risk to the
           | film.
        
             | udbhavs wrote:
             | The Eternals is also fantastic for not using slow motion
             | _at all_ for the speedster. Although she doesn 't have a
             | lot of screen time, the little action that is there feels
             | great.
        
               | gcanyon wrote:
               | Absolutely agreed, that was awesome.
               | 
               | It's unlikely, but if you haven't seen it, check out
               | Dash's 100-mile run from The Incredibles:
               | https://youtu.be/t5v2qBBD-gE
        
             | acdha wrote:
             | Oh, yeah, that's why I said usually. It's just that when
             | you remove the usual constraints on what people can do, how
             | much damage they can handle ("plot armor"), and set the
             | precedent that almost anything can be changed retroactively
             | as desired for the next movie, the writers have a lot less
             | to keep the audience's interest with.
        
               | gcanyon wrote:
               | Absolutely agreed. I read an article years back that
               | criticized superhero films where the stakes are world-
               | ending, or similarly large-scale, because that actually
               | _lowers_ the stakes, since you _know_ the world isn't
               | ending. With smaller stakes, it's actually possible for
               | the protagonist to lose, at least in some ways.
        
               | acdha wrote:
               | That's much more succinctly expressed
        
         | tomxor wrote:
         | This is so true, I get really bored of combat scenes these days
         | for many reasons, this is a big one.
         | 
         | I remember the first time I really noticed this was when trying
         | to watch batman (can't remember which one), at an "imax"
         | cinema, ya know, those ones where you sit very close to a huge
         | screen designed for films that intentionally fill that extra
         | space with peripheral vision information... But for an already
         | annoyingly close cut series of fight scenes it made it so much
         | worse, unwatchable, I had to just close my eyes for half of the
         | film because it was so physically hard to look at.
        
         | ghaff wrote:
         | I remember listening to the DVD commentary on one of the LOTR
         | films many years ago. One of the things that struck me was the
         | amount of "Oh, and we changed this in post production."
         | Obviously there are limits but CGI, color correction, etc. must
         | lead to a degree of not worrying _too_ much about getting it
         | right in the camera because you can (sorta) fix things later.
        
         | jcranberry wrote:
         | I don't think all movies do up-close quick-cut camera shots
         | during fights. I'm fairly certain the reasons they do that are
         | not because it's trendy, but because of other constraints.
         | Things like a lack of actor training, time for practice or
         | reshoots, or good choreography in general. It's what they can
         | use to get away with these things.
        
         | dekhn wrote:
         | LoTR for some reason has a "make the detail hard to see with
         | fast camera motion" problem.
         | 
         | I just watched the latest episode of Boba Fett and it had a
         | great fight and a great chase scene. It's like everything was
         | slowed down and you could see the details.
        
           | titusjohnson wrote:
           | I was just thinking that the Boba Felt chase scene was too
           | slow. I could practically 'feel' the weight of the mopeds,
           | and some of the movement made it obvious these were wheeled
           | devices with CG trickery applied after. The general speed of
           | the chase made me feel like I was watching Mitchel.
           | https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BOCqlKNW9rU
        
             | dekhn wrote:
             | Are you 100% certain the mopeds were wheeled? I think these
             | days it's also possible to just have a moped on a rotating
             | stilt in front of a blue screen, and that's a lot easier
             | for interior shooting/stunts.
        
               | titusjohnson wrote:
               | That certainly might have been it too, but if they're
               | going that direction I would have expected everything to
               | just feel more weightless/frictionless.
        
               | dekhn wrote:
               | I think this is a core part of the aesthetic of Star Wars
               | as originally created by Lucas. In particular, those
               | characters were amalgams of 50s greasers, 70s punks and
               | 80s mods. If you haven't seen American Grafitti, it's
               | worth watching as a reference, but basically, they're
               | going for landspeeder physics and landspeeders kind of
               | hover a constant distance over the ground.
        
         | adflux wrote:
         | >show large-scale action
         | 
         | There are many large panning/sweeping shots in this series,
         | such as when the ents attack Isengard, orcs besiege Helms Deep,
         | when the fellowship runs through Moria...
         | 
         | Sure there are some quick cuts happening in some swordfighting
         | scenes. And I agree it could have been better if these scenes
         | were shot in a different format.
        
         | jccalhoun wrote:
         | I think this was a thing for a while before Lord of the Rings.
         | I remember talking about it in grad school in 1999. I think it
         | is a combination of things: digital editing makes it easy to
         | have a million edits compared to when they used to do edits on
         | actual film, and by cutting a lot they can put in the actor's
         | face more.
        
           | oneoff786 wrote:
           | Agreed. This has always been a weakness of mainstream western
           | films. Filming fights is hard, especially if actors don't
           | know how to fight. LoTR doesn't seem noteworthy in this
           | respect.
        
         | v7p1Qbt1im wrote:
         | I also watched an unhealthy amount of behind-the-scenes for
         | lotr.
         | 
         | Peter Jackson mentioned that there is a thing called ,,Battle
         | fatigue". Battles should focus on the the main characters and
         | their journey through a battle. Otherwise battle scenes could
         | get boring or repetitive really quickly.
         | 
         | Also it's cheaper, as someone else said.
        
           | rconti wrote:
           | Funny that he knew this, and yet somehow the first LoTR was
           | still 2 hours of battle scenes and 1 hour of interesting
           | stuff happening.
        
         | parenthesis wrote:
         | Your comment is making me want to watch a bunch of old movies
         | with the opposite. For example, Errol Flynn and Basil Rathbone
         | sword fight:
         | 
         | https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=liZD1qScUYA
        
           | js2 wrote:
           | _They Live_ alley fight:
           | 
           | https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dgyue1tT-uE
           | 
           | https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vlTPIYTd32Q
           | 
           |  _Star Wars_ epic light saber battle:
           | 
           | https://vimeo.com/7051676
        
       | josteink wrote:
       | There seems to be a "standard palette" or standard colour-
       | template in use when creating modern video-content.
       | 
       | I mean, when my kids are seeing children's programming on Netflix
       | I can very rarely tell what show they are watching, because they
       | all look alike.
       | 
       | Maybe reusing a good template is a cost-saving/production-
       | optimizing strategy?
       | 
       | I don't know, but I can tell it's being done deliberately purely
       | by observing.
        
       | sersi wrote:
       | What's also very interesting is the differences in colors between
       | the original theater version of certain movies and the newly
       | released remastered blu ray.
       | 
       | For example, take a look at Terminator 2 and see how the recently
       | released remaster have a huge shift towards blues everywhere.
        
       | S_A_P wrote:
       | The movie traffic was one of the first I noticed that made use of
       | this. However it was kind of a cool effect. Suburban home shots
       | were a cool blue, and desert and outdoor were more reddish. I
       | want to say they did this with characters as well.
        
       | pimlottc wrote:
       | The author makes the point that it's somewhat ironic that the
       | Marvel movies, having originated in the vibrant world of comic
       | books, are one of the most prominent examples of drab coloring.
       | But I wonder if this isn't perhaps an intentional contrast. An
       | attempt to recast what is often considered a childish genre as a
       | more adult art form targeted towards a more mainstream audience,
       | with a more somber color grading to match. Similar to how modern
       | retelling of Batman have leaned to darker imagery, contrasting
       | with the kitschy colorful 60s version.
       | 
       | Dark colors are an easy way to present your work as more dramatic
       | and serious, and not "for the kids".
        
       | 734129837261 wrote:
       | And I completely disagree with the complaint and his examples.
       | Too saturated makes things look unrealistic and plastic. I prefer
       | scenes that make me think "holy shit, this looks like real life"
       | instead of "yawn, another movie turned into a comic book".
       | 
       | There are ML-efforts underway to make games look more realistic.
       | And they do that by reducing colors and reducing contrast.
       | Because Caucasian people don't look orange in real life, we look
       | a pale beige with a hint of pink.
        
         | NikolaNovak wrote:
         | I see what you're saying, but I don't think it's talking about
         | other extreme of hyper-saturaed sitcom rainbows. While agreeing
         | overly saturated is unrealistic, so is undersaturated or colour
         | tinted. My 'real world' experience is frequently nice and
         | bright and contrasty and colourful. My wife has a bright red
         | xmas sweater on right now, I'm wearing blue, my daughter's toys
         | are... every colour of every gamut. Kitchen is white with lime
         | green accents. Our car is a very bright orange. Even in winter,
         | the evergreens around us are reasonably green.
         | 
         | And then we go to Maritimes and the North east where every
         | house is a beautiful vibrant colour, and yet movies always try
         | to make them look bleak through desaturation.
        
         | fock wrote:
         | I'm very fortunate not to live in the deserts of the US (like
         | new Dexter) and to actually live somewhere, where trees will be
         | green in summer and new cars and houses have color. Just for
         | your point that everything is unsaturated; in fact, real-life
         | colors in the greens are seldomly represented in a "realistic
         | way": https://tftcentral.co.uk/articles/pointers_gamut
        
           | astrange wrote:
           | Modern TVs are much better at it than an article from 2014
           | would suggest. Though computer monitors aren't; you shouldn't
           | watch a movie on a computer anyway since it has to fit 24fps
           | into a typically 60fps display.
        
         | Retric wrote:
         | These movies don't look even vaguely realistic though. It's
         | winter in North America right now, but walk outside even
         | vaguely close to noon and colors pop in a way they just don't
         | in these films.
         | 
         | The article brings up a great point, it's just lower effort to
         | make dull films which minimize how much people notice digital
         | effects and mistakes in general. In full sunlight you notice
         | where shadows are which stands out if you want to stitch
         | together shots across hours. Makeup and wardrobe mistakes
         | similarly standout when things aren't simply a big blur.
        
       | pwenzel wrote:
       | On the other end of the spectrum (ha) you have over-the-top
       | saturation on shows like The Great British Bake Off. I know it's
       | a food show, but people's skin and eyes sometimes look so bright
       | when shots are overcompensated for food.
       | 
       | For comparison to the desaturated things on TV:
       | https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9kMICkmW8r8
        
         | lupire wrote:
         | The OP really applies to "serious/drama", not "happy/comedy".
        
       | dilap wrote:
       | Just hit this with the show "Dirilis: Ertugrul". Seasons 1 and 2
       | had vibrant colors. Season 3 suddenly everything is desaturated
       | and desparate feeling. Super annoying! Presumably GoT influence.
        
       | l33tbro wrote:
       | This article and many of the comments here are mistaking color
       | grading for being the culprit, when it is mostly production
       | design. Grading is obviously the post processing of images, but
       | production design is how the colors are organized to be shot.
       | 
       | Within this current fad, production designers have taken color
       | theory and color symmetry to the extreme and bled all of the
       | primary colors out of what is shot on set. Of course there are
       | accent primaries left in, but they have this down to a science
       | right now and it is why everything looks so perfect these days.
       | 
       | Cinematographers even will gloat about capturing "everything in
       | camera, man" and only having only tweaked minor things in post.
       | Roger Deakins supposedly shot the last Bladerunner like this,
       | where there was little to no grading in the organic scenes.
       | 
       | While I think it's definitely better to get stuff in camera from
       | a craft perspective, this obsession with applying the extreme
       | uses of color theory and winnowing everything down to
       | lifelessness is just so, so boring.
       | 
       | In the 90s things were a little more random and films had a range
       | of colors that lacked symmetry. It felt real! But after the whole
       | teal and orange phase of the 2000s (vomit), people took that same
       | kind of reductionist thinking and broadened the palette ever so
       | slightly.
        
         | gavinmckenzie wrote:
         | Deakins has also said the same thing about Skyfall -- that for
         | the most part what we see on screen is what he saw from behind
         | the camera. And Skyfall also has scenes of super bright
         | colours, although those bright saturated scenes do have a
         | limited palette.
         | 
         | There was a recent comparison of the very different look
         | between Deakins' Skyfall and Van Hoytema's Spectre.
         | 
         | https://twitter.com/sadhilldevan/status/1458863501015851008?...
        
       | e40 wrote:
       | Speaking of color, the new Wes Anderson movie, _The French
       | Dispatch_ has stunning colors.
        
       | kranke155 wrote:
       | It helps with CG integration.
       | 
       | It's changing now with color spaces like ACES becoming the
       | standard (wider color gamut).
       | 
       | I Work in the industry.
        
       | Koshkin wrote:
       | The big part of the modern approach to art in general is to
       | replace content with form. In film in particular, "Let's shake
       | the camera to create an illusion of action! Let's show more
       | facial expressions to create an illusion of suspense! Let's
       | insert a lot of talking to create an illusion of... watching a
       | movie in the first place?" (One could go on and on: fancy intro
       | sequences etc.)
        
       | JKCalhoun wrote:
       | This too shall pass.
       | 
       | And we'll laugh about it some day.
       | 
       | Like the "hand held shot" that became popular a decade or so back
       | -- in every serious drama the director seemingly gave a GoPro to
       | someone with tremors. A number of TV series were comically
       | unwatchable (well, for me at least).
        
         | NathanielK wrote:
         | Oh man, 24FPS shakey cam was rough. Glad it's mostly gone away,
         | it was a good way to get motion sick.
        
       | airstrike wrote:
       | Posted less than 24 hours ago:
       | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29909329
        
       | perardi wrote:
       | 1. They credit/blame "The Matrix", but let's also note David
       | Fincher's work, especially "Fight Club".
       | (https://www.studiobinder.com/blog/movie-color-palette-david-...)
       | 
       | 2. We still aren't there yet on CGI. CGI humans are still in that
       | uncanny valley. And what helps cover that up? Well, muddy up the
       | color palette, and decrease brightness and contrast. I've
       | certainly done that in my still photography work, where I was on
       | a deadline for a volunteer project, and I thought to myself "you
       | know, dialing up that vignette slider is really going to cover
       | that up."
        
         | m_mueller wrote:
         | Se7en is mentioned as well.
        
       | KaiserPro wrote:
       | Spoiler: Its almost always an artistic choice. However, In some
       | rare cases, its to make up for shit cameras: I'm looking at you
       | RED/Hobbit trilogy. But nowadays its a choice to give the film a
       | certain feel.
       | 
       | There was a while when all action movies were graded to look teal
       | and blue: http://theabyssgazes.blogspot.com/2010/03/teal-and-
       | orange-ho... However when cheaper cameras, better grading tools
       | seeped into the masses, that style was felt to have been played
       | out.
       | 
       | DI, the stage where the colour "grade" is tweaked, crafted and
       | perfected is now an integral part of the edit/VFX stage. Colour
       | is used to push emotion, just like sound and music design.
       | 
       | The bit about LUTs is mostly distraction. LUTs are normally used
       | as a reference, to make sure that all the footage has roughly the
       | same colour (important when you have different cameras for
       | different scenes) They are static colour offsets, so are great
       | for techincal colouring, but not overly useful for making an
       | artistic grade.
       | 
       | TLDR: Its a fashion, just like the pricks who removed the obvious
       | on/off indicators from slider buttons.
       | 
       | EDIT: If you want to see some interesting grading, look up "day
       | for night" https://noamkroll.com/color-grading-tutorial-creating-
       | a-day-... where they take normal footage and make it look like it
       | was shot at night
        
         | coldtea wrote:
         | > _Spoiler: Its almost always an artistic choice._
         | 
         | If you mean, a choice by the team making the movie, and not
         | something imposed upon them by technology or otherwise, then
         | yes.
         | 
         | But I'd say it's usually not very artistic as in artful, as
         | it's neither well done, nor necessary for the story/mood, and
         | is not even about a genuine vision from the director, but
         | rather following the fad.
        
           | KaiserPro wrote:
           | > If you mean, a choice by the team making the movie
           | 
           | thats art darling! _exaggerated arm movements_
           | 
           | I kid, but agree completely.
           | 
           | > not even about a genuine vision from the director, but
           | rather following the fad.
           | 
           | I once heard about a monthly, where the exec producer's
           | current shag was spit balling changes, expensive changes. It
           | was great to see the faces of the VFX producer mentally
           | totting up the cost.
           | 
           | Also when filming the prince of persia, the production team
           | realised that they had a massive plot hole linking two parts
           | of the movie, so they asked the VFX company to figure
           | something out. From what I recall, this is the origin of this
           | scene: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yfVu52tZxd0
           | 
           | In clash of the titans(remake), they spent a boat load of
           | cash on a real set for mount olympus, but then decided that
           | they wanted to make it more "google maps-y" so scrapped it
           | and redid it in VFX.
           | 
           | Some films are Art, others less so. None of them are as
           | artistic as film theory dictates.
        
         | 323 wrote:
         | > _take normal footage and make it look like it was shot at
         | night_
         | 
         | You can do that in reverse too, shoot at night with a super
         | sensitive camera and make it look like day:
         | 
         | https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kBPcinUz-L0
        
           | dylan604 wrote:
           | While this is possible (I have done and still do this as
           | well), but it is absolutely not the norm.
           | 
           | Shooting day-for-night is much more common. It has less to do
           | with the ability of a camera shooting at night. We have these
           | things called lights that helps things.
           | 
           | The main reason for day-for-night is that it is much more
           | expensive to shoot at night. Shooting off-hours is much more
           | expensive. Shooting more than a certain number of hours away
           | from home is also more expensive. There are a lot of things
           | going into the decision of why a shoot is done the way it is,
           | but you can pretty much always assume that it was done the
           | way it was done because it was the cheaper option.
        
             | 323 wrote:
             | > _It has less to do with the ability of a camera shooting
             | at night. We have these things called lights that helps
             | things._
             | 
             | Did you watch the video? It's shot in total darkness, with
             | zero lights. As in night vision. It's not about shooting at
             | night under film lights.
             | 
             | I'm not saying it will replace day shooting, it's just
             | another technique available if you want to go for a weird
             | unreal look.
        
               | dylan604 wrote:
               | Yes, I clicked the link. I've shot this style several
               | times, only you have to do it on a full moon. Full motion
               | video with no lights. Even got the laurel wreaths for one
               | of the videos. I've shot WFO at T/1.5 and ISO32000 on a
               | Sony a7sii. One interesting thing that we noticed was
               | catching lens flares from the moon. When stepping through
               | the footage frame by frame, you can see the lunar surface
               | details in the lens flares. Most peole never notice, but
               | it's one of those things you get to enjoy once you know
               | about it.
               | 
               | I've also taken that same camera to use as prime
               | photography attached to my telescope. Cranked up the ISO,
               | and it was the first time I was actually able to view the
               | heavens as the scope slewed to its target. No more adjust
               | position, take single long exposure test shot, adjust
               | focus/position/etc. You can do it all in real time.
               | 
               | Yes, I'm fully aware of some of these camera types
        
         | MikusR wrote:
         | Guardians of the galaxy 2 - RED cameras has color. Captain
         | America: Civil War - ARRI Alexa no color.
        
           | KaiserPro wrote:
           | I should be more specific.
           | 
           | The RED Epics used on the Hobbit (they used other REDs later
           | on, but I can't remember what they were) were running at
           | 48FPS. The set had to be painted in hilarious day glow
           | colours for it to be picked up properly. Part of is was the
           | 3d, a lot of it was the cameras. REDs were not very good for
           | a long time. Sure had huge resolution, but that was literally
           | it.
           | 
           | They were/are expensive. ".r3d" was a proper cock to deal
           | with (Hurrah for cheap GPUs!) and the fan base utterly toxic.
        
             | dylan604 wrote:
             | What? Shooting at 48fps would not effect the color
             | rendition ability of the camera. Nor would shooting 3D.
             | Shooting a higher framerate just means more light required
             | than shooting at 24fps. Shooting 3D also doesn't affect
             | color. Where are you getting your information?
             | 
             | Debayering r3d was not an issue for professionals as they
             | more than likely had a Red Rocket level card to deal with
             | the footage.
        
               | KaiserPro wrote:
               | > Shooting at 48fps would not effect the color rendition
               | 
               | doubles the amount of light you need. got to adjust the
               | shutter angle to control motion blur. need to bump the
               | ISO, which means more noise, which mean less optical
               | resolution....
               | 
               | > Shooting 3D also doesn't affect color
               | 
               | Half mirrored camera rigs completely fuck your colour,
               | well half of it...
               | 
               | > Debayering r3d was not an issue for professionals as
               | they more than likely had a Red Rocket
               | 
               | They cost PS4k, were fucking fragile, We broke two of
               | them on one job. Debayering is simple, uncompressing the
               | jpeg2000 at any speed was the main challenge in 2012.
        
       | hilbert42 wrote:
       | The problems of washed-out colors making movie scenes look like
       | gray wastelands isn't limited to the digital era, if a
       | competition were held then there are plenty from the film-
       | emulsion era that could easily compete for first prize.
       | 
       | In the 1930s a quantum leap in the quality of color film occurred
       | with the introduction of an updated tricolour version of
       | Technicolor. The quality of the colour in Disney films and others
       | such as the _Wizard of Oz_ and _Gone with the Wind_ (both 1939)
       | was truly exceptional when compared with anything that had
       | preceded it and the color still holds up very well even by
       | today's standards without any digital tweaking or remastering.
       | 
       | In 1950 rival Kodak introduced its Eastmancolor color negative
       | process which used a single filmstrip with a tricolour emulsion
       | that captured the full color range and by mid 1950s studios had a
       | choice of using Eastmancolor negative in cameras and printing
       | onto either Kodak's own color theater release stock or to use
       | Technicolor's dye transfer process for same.
       | 
       | The trouble started with the introduction of Eastmancolor stock
       | because it was far less stable than Technicolor. Technicolor is
       | stable because it used a tri-separation process involving three
       | B&W emulsions--B&W film being inherently very stable--as well as
       | stable dyes in its dye-transfer process (for its theater release
       | prints). As no photographic process is used in the dye transfer
       | process, its dyes can be selected for both stability and
       | vibrancy, whereas Eastmancolor has significant limitations in
       | that its dyes have to be compatible with the photographic process
       | (they use chemical couplers to bind dyes to the photographic
       | process and there's not that many options available). Moreover,
       | color dyes generated by the coupler process have both a smaller
       | color gamut and, as mentioned, they're far less stable and fade-
       | prone than Technicolor.
       | 
       | Under ideal conditions Eastmancolor produced good results but QA
       | issues as well as Eastman's theater release shock faded quickly,
       | deliberately so--as theater release prints were designed only to
       | last one season or to do one round of the circuit--for if film
       | got lost or stolen it would be useless after a year or two
       | (otherwise it was worn out anyway).
       | 
       | Of course, things never went to plan, and all too often faded,
       | badly color-graded and rerun prints long past their use-by date
       | made their way back into theaters and were continued to be used.
       | The net effect was that one would often see Eastmancolor theater
       | release prints that were unacceptable for stated reasons, thus it
       | was not unusual to see significant numbers of movies that
       | suffered from fading, significant exposure and color errors and
       | even cross-color+, which, in my opinion, looks damn horrible even
       | in small amounts. To help minimize these problems theater release
       | prints would often be printed in somewhat desaturated/subdued
       | colors as they were less obvious.
       | 
       | The Viewer's Problem:
       | 
       | Whether we're dealing with film or digital source material that
       | needs colour grading/correction then there are very effective
       | solutions are but they're not necessarily accessible to the home
       | consumer (or even to theater projectionists).
       | 
       | What viewers need are TV/screen remote controls, that in addition
       | to their usual functions, would also include optional features
       | that enable the viewer to (a) either colour correct a movie on-
       | the-fly or (b) select color corrections from a set of
       | preprogrammed color terms (color correction matrices) similar to
       | those used in professional photo printing machines (those which
       | use color negatives as their source material).
       | 
       | I'm not just talking about the basics such as the usual
       | saturation, colour balance, contrast and brightness, but also
       | vibrancy, curves, shadow and highlight correction and midtone
       | contrast. In essence, all the necessary tools needed to correct
       | both exposure and color errors in movies similar to, say, those
       | that one finds in Photoshop's _Adjustment_ menu such as _Shadow
       | /Highlight_ (one of my most favorite and most used adjustments).
       | 
       | If studios do a good job in color grading/correcting their movies
       | then we need do no adjusting. But I find that's rarely the case.
       | What bothers me most, perhaps even more than color adjustments
       | are the all-too-frequent excessive instances of black crushing
       | and loss of detail in the shadows and highlights and I want
       | sophisticated tools to correct them. _(Surely, I 'm not the only
       | one who's noticed the high contrast and crushed blacks in many of
       | the recent transfers of old films to DVD etc. It's clear no one
       | has even bothered to make any corrections.)_
       | 
       | _______
       | 
       |  _+ Cross-color is color distortion that occurs as the result of
       | a nonlinear transfer process (cross-modulation) and essentially
       | it very difficult to correct or remove because of the newly
       | created intermodulation products (artifacts--new colors that
       | weren 't there at the outset). Cross-color in a film emulsion
       | usually occurs when one dye layer bleeds or diffuses into another
       | which then mix to form the new colors. Moreover, the amount of
       | dye diffusion isn't linear across the transfer curve, it may be
       | at maximum or minimum in the shadows or highlights or anywhere
       | along the curve. There are many causes, aged prints, bad
       | processing, bad handling, one dye being more unstable than
       | another and thus it fades more than other layers (color
       | degradation of this type is largely exacerbated by the film
       | emulsion's exposure to projector light.
       | 
       | That said, cross-color effects can be corrected or eliminated in
       | modern digital effects generators, that is if people bother to
       | take the time to do so (and often they don't). Presumably in the
       | near future AI will do the corrections according to some
       | proscribed algorithm._
        
       | kloch wrote:
       | Counterpoint: Bridgerton. What amazing eye candy that is, not
       | just because of the Victorian sets and costumes but the rich
       | vibrant colors.
        
         | pvillano wrote:
         | in general, why complain about popular music these days when
         | you could just listen to other music?* I play mostly older and
         | indie games, and am unaffected by industry trends like
         | microtransactions, style-less photorealism, always online and
         | _shudder_ NFTs
         | 
         | *because you want to watch a new superman with your friends.
         | you got me there
        
       | activitypea wrote:
       | Crazy to me that someone can watch The Matrix and think "wow this
       | is really dark and muddy". I suppose the on-ship scenes are a
       | blueish gray, but they contrast so nicely against the
       | progressively greener tint inside the matrix, it's nothing like
       | Dexter or the HBO shows.
        
       | yoyopa wrote:
       | duller pixels require less light, so more profits can be made for
       | shareholders. this is the main reason why marvel movies, the most
       | commercial movies of all time, have gone that route. also the ceo
       | happens to be colorblind.
        
         | Broken_Hippo wrote:
         | I'm not even sure if this is true, because duller pictures also
         | require blocking of light and besides, they are doing a lot of
         | this after filming anyway (as per the article). I don't work in
         | film, but I'm guessing most of us posting here do not. And
         | considering that they likely already have the folks working on
         | it and already have some lights about, the savings would be
         | negligible.
         | 
         | And seriously, I'm pretty sure that the CEO being colorblind
         | doesn't matter whatsoever. They likely realize they are
         | colorblind by now and it isn't like they are the ones filming
         | nor making final calls on color nor other artistic stuff. In
         | fact, I'm going to guess the CEO is more concerned with money
         | and the pandemic and that sort of thing. I'm honestly not sure
         | why you would bring that up. It also wouldn't explain the
         | reasoning for, say, DC movies to be similar nor the myriad of
         | films that _aren 't_ superhero movies to be the same.
        
       | wruza wrote:
       | See also "Why Is Every Movie Poster Orange and Blue?"
       | 
       | Another overused (imo) coloring technique is different color
       | sources, often used in youtube videos and game interiors, like
       | cyberpunk.
        
         | oneoff786 wrote:
         | And sound tracks. Many soundtracks are made by the directors
         | saying "make something that sounds like {scene from other
         | movie}" and you get similar outcomes. Especially for trailers.
        
       | scoutt wrote:
       | > One truism of computer effects is that it's easier to hide
       | their seams if you are placing them in a dark or rainy
       | environment.
       | 
       | I don't own the best TVs in the world, but for the last 5 years
       | (maybe), I have to turn all the lights off when watching movies
       | and series, otherwise I can't see a thing. And if the movie has
       | CG they always happen to be in dark scenes, ergo some movies
       | fully loaded of CG are dark, flat and I have to make an effort to
       | see them (also happens to series/movies for TV only, like those
       | on Netflix).
       | 
       | This, or my forties are hitting hard.
        
       | UncleOxidant wrote:
       | In contrast, for Station Eleven they made the colors of the post
       | apocalyptic scenes more vibrant and muted them in the pre
       | apocalyptic scenes to give the idea that the post-apocalyptic
       | world isn't actually so bad.
       | 
       | https://www.vox.com/culture/2022/1/10/22872347/station-eleve...
        
       | vmception wrote:
       | Euphoria does the opposite, most of the time! Enjoy the hues!
        
       | habibur wrote:
       | I thought it was more because of green screen or blue screen
       | dominating production now a days. They had to turn one color off.
       | The side effect.
       | 
       | I was wondering why no one was noticing the lack of color and
       | details in post 2010 films. Watch any 80 or 90s film and see how
       | sharp and details those looked.
        
         | dylan604 wrote:
         | Color correction choices being discussed are not related to
         | chroma keying. They are all "artistic" choices being decided
         | between the Direction, DP, Colorists, and maybe Producer. The
         | only color choices are in wardrobe so that nobody wears the
         | same color as the color of the backdrop.
        
       | lkxijlewlf wrote:
       | It's funny they mention Ozark, but Ozark color grades very much
       | towards the blue.
        
       | xixixao wrote:
       | Once you realize that the Hobbit movies are either "orange" or
       | "blue" all.the.time. they become unwatchable. I hope some future
       | rerelease fixes them.
        
         | vkou wrote:
         | I don't think there's a power in the 'verse that can fix the
         | Hobbit. The colour balance is the least offensive thing about
         | it.
        
       | timonoko wrote:
       | No worries. I have solved the problem:
       | 
       | https://github.com/timonoko/Context-Aware-Auto-Brightness
        
         | goldenkey wrote:
         | As an optometrist, I'd be careful with backlight fiddling. High
         | intensity backlight can cause eyesight strain. Backlight
         | shouldn't be turned up to unreasonable levels to compensate for
         | lack of saturation or poor black/white points.
         | 
         | Backlight should only be used to adjust the contrast between
         | the screen and your environment, and not in an extreme fashion
         | either. That is, don't sit in the dark or in a very sunny
         | place, and use backlight to try to fight unreasonable
         | environmental lighting.
        
           | marcan_42 wrote:
           | Backlight level is just an overall brightness adjustment
           | (i.e. it is a factor of the light output*). It is entirely
           | reasonable to crank the backlight up to make up for an overly
           | dark picture; the effect is the same as increasing the
           | brightness of the image at the pixel level. This is already
           | done automatically, in the opposite direction, by many modern
           | screens and projectors, to save power.
           | 
           | * modulo black levels, but you aren't going to get eye strain
           | from backlight bleed.
        
             | goldenkey wrote:
             | PWM is done by modern phone displays (iPhone and Android)
             | but is terrible for eyes and the nervous system at large.
             | Its only advantage is cheapness. In layman's terms, PWM is
             | when instead of lowering the brightness of the display, it
             | is instead flickered to lower perceptible brightness.
             | Please don't try to purport popular with healthy. That ship
             | has long sailed.
             | 
             | [1] https://medium.com/@moe.zainal/screens-monitors-
             | headaches-mi...
        
           | timonoko wrote:
           | Duly Noted. "noko-auto-brit-with-bounds" is designed just to
           | avoid sudden flashes of bright screens. Depends on the
           | machine, some adjust brightness quite slowly already.
           | 
           | Some better machines and displays have also light sensor
           | built in, it is quite possible to include that input with the
           | "ddcutil"-program.
        
       | robbrown451 wrote:
       | Weird that they call it "color timing" because "color correction"
       | isn't all that accurate. But "timing"? That applies to film, like
       | real, chemical film.
       | 
       | Surely there is a better word? "Optimizing"?
       | 
       | (of course "grading" is also used, but "timing" really needs to
       | be dispensed with)
        
       | SirHound wrote:
       | Games went through this during the PS3-360 generation. I'm sure
       | it'll pull back over time.
        
         | ginko wrote:
         | Haven't you heard? Real is brown.
         | 
         | https://www.vgcats.com/comics/?strip_id=222
        
         | nathanyz wrote:
         | Is this why Mafia 3 is so dark? I mean game is unplayable on
         | Stadia because you can't see anything.
         | 
         | /endrant
        
         | acomjean wrote:
         | My partner plays . Some games are so bright and colorful in
         | contrast to others it is almost a defining characteristic.
         | Horizon zero dawn and assasins creed odyssey come to mind.
        
       | ecolonsmak wrote:
       | Is there any possibility this trend is an attempt by filmmakers
       | to mitigate the impact streaming service compression schemes will
       | have on the appearance of their art? Less colors - plays better
       | with something outside their control. I scanned the whole thread
       | here and didn't see anyone suggesting this. I know I've watched
       | titles that really seem to suffer from the effects of compression
       | and others where it's not as horrible. the banding - chunky
       | swathes of mono color that's distracting and needless, imo. Is
       | there a TIDAL style service for video that doesn't use
       | compression, or uses some sort of lossless compression?
        
       | 323 wrote:
       | Just another fad.
       | 
       | Visual artists are very fashion driven. As technology creates new
       | possibilities, they get abused.
       | 
       | In the 80/90s music videos had fade/dissolve effects. Then in
       | early 2000s a lot of them played with the aspect ratio "black
       | bands" (like when you play 4:3 on 16:10), making them white,
       | pink, or textured, with border lines and other effects.
       | 
       | In 2010s slow-motion (high FPS played back at regular speed) was
       | the thing. So every other video had the slow motion
       | "water/colored dust hitting something" scene.
       | 
       | Since 2015, color grading is the new fad. Also unnatural weird
       | (LED) lighting, like the left half of the frame in strong red
       | light and the right half in strong blue light.
       | 
       | Color grading is also infecting instagram. For example in city
       | photography, there is quite a trend of grading them orange/teal.
       | 
       | There is also a lot of social pressure to color grade. If you
       | don't, fellow artists will say something like "look at that
       | peasant, he didn't grade his stuff, what a noob, putting out real
       | colors, he probably doesn't even know what a LUT is".
       | 
       | And then you have the honest noob who tries to improve his skill,
       | and he sees all the pros doing it, so he concludes that he should
       | too, since all the pros can't be wrong, even if to his eyes the
       | strongly color graded video kind of looks like shit, but he's
       | just probably wrong and just needs to educate his aesthetics.
       | 
       | There will come a point when color grading will fell out of
       | fashion, just like you rarely see a fade/dissolve or slow-motion
       | effect today, and when they are used it's because they make
       | sense, not because you must do it no matter what.
        
         | woolion wrote:
         | It's also way easier to have "good colors" (in a color
         | theoretical sense) this way, and achieve a coherent and
         | consistent look throughout the movie. It's thus one of the best
         | ways to keep budget down, as it will hide a lot of issues you'd
         | have while filming, while generally requiring less work. I
         | believe it to be an important factor since full 3D movies have
         | excellent color comps --see for instance Nathan Fowkes' works.
         | (as an side, in the opposite direction, I remember Kung-fu
         | Panda having pretty good colours, yet I found it a bit tiring
         | to watch.)
        
         | mixmastamyk wrote:
         | Reminds me of the lens flares of the mid 90s and ring
         | explosions of the late 90s. Think Babylon 5 and the Star Wars
         | reissue.
        
         | dragontamer wrote:
         | > In 2010s slow-motion (high FPS played back at regular speed)
         | was the thing. So every other video had the slow motion
         | "water/colored dust hitting something" scene.
         | 
         | Probably more late-00s than 2010s, but IIRC, the optical-flow
         | slowdown effect was created (and cheaply) distributed.
         | 
         | Older slow-mo effects required high FPS cameras. But with 00s
         | technology, you could optical-flow time warp to any slowdown
         | you desired, with mostly good looking results. 300 (released in
         | 2006) was the first popular film that did this, but IIRC the
         | effect was being used in a lot of action films all over the
         | place.
         | 
         | Slow-motion was definitely the "Oh wow, that looks cool, and it
         | costs so cheap. Lets do it" effect of the 00s.
        
           | basch wrote:
           | >300 (released in 2006) was the first popular film that did
           | this
           | 
           | Does Spider-Man count in 2002?
           | 
           | https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jM7Eou4bV-Q&t=56s
        
             | dragontamer wrote:
             | That's definitely not the optical-flow slowdown trick I'm
             | talking about. That spiderman slow-motion was some
             | combination of 3d effects and maybe real-life cameras
             | ("Matrix" style:
             | https://beforesandafters.com/2021/07/15/vfx-artifacts-the-
             | bu...)
             | 
             | https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FCfdyroV7kc
             | 
             | This scene from 300 is very clearly just a wide-angle shot
             | (initially), with someone playing with the Optical Flow
             | timewarp effect (sliding it up and down). Its incredibly
             | cheap.
             | 
             | See this demo in Premier Pro:
             | https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ErOc_LkZaIk
             | 
             | ----------
             | 
             | That's the thing. 300's main innovation was using _cheap_
             | effects. Optical flow time-warp didn't appear on Premier
             | for another few years, but the algorithm was popular and
             | was just a custom filter / program that was getting passed
             | around at that time.
        
               | basch wrote:
               | Upon rewatch, im not even convinced its bullet time and
               | not just a bunch of people standing very still. Which
               | worked for the most part in Anna Karenina and that one
               | video of kids playing basketball.
               | 
               | Your point makes sense though, the commonization of frame
               | interpolation is a landmark moment.
        
         | lkxijlewlf wrote:
         | Sounds very much like what happens in other industries (such as
         | software development). "Look at that peasant, he didn't use
         | Rust, ..."
        
           | systemvoltage wrote:
           | Rounded corners! Radius on buttons ("Pills") started its
           | journey in 2018 and it spread like a plague.
        
             | NoSorryCannot wrote:
             | Pill-shaped buttons were part of the Aqua theme in the
             | original release of OS X. For a long time after that, UIs
             | aped Aqua with pinstripes and jelly-shaded pills and while
             | the pinstripes and jelly have gone, I think the pills are
             | here to stay for some styles.
        
               | Angostura wrote:
               | Aqua - the "lickable" theme. I miss it, I prefer it to
               | the current washed out MacOS where I cant tell what is
               | what.
        
               | systemvoltage wrote:
               | Yeah but there was a huge push just last year, basically
               | every single SaaS app to Firefox, everyone folded. During
               | the Aqua days, every company had their own unique take on
               | design. Today, it is a design monoculture driven by the
               | types of Stripe and Apple.
               | 
               | Design used to be a _differentiating_ feature. Everything
               | looks the same today. Kind of a Big Tech dystopia, even
               | in design.
        
               | NoSorryCannot wrote:
               | My point was, a lot of UI followed or was heavily
               | inspired by whatever Apple was doing even then. These
               | days, there's more Google in the mix.
               | 
               | Before pill buttons, they were gray beveled rounded
               | rectangles, be it native or web, on every platform.
               | 
               | I don't view now as being especially dominated by
               | sameness versus the past.
        
               | dvtrn wrote:
               | As the owner of an ultrawide... _so_ much whitespace.
        
               | kevin_thibedeau wrote:
               | It was already there 10 years earlier in OpenLook.
        
             | akersten wrote:
             | I just updated to Android 12 and the new border-radius on
             | nearly every UI element is beyond absurd. It actually looks
             | like someone just discovered that CSS property, and instead
             | of being told by a designer "that looks goofy and
             | childlike, tone it down," they doubled the value and put it
             | on even more elements.
             | 
             | My notifications pull-down fits about 3 useful
             | notifications. The rest is whitespace and rounded corners 4
             | layers deep. It's horrible.
        
             | Freak_NL wrote:
             | Not every change is based on stylistic fads alone. Rounded
             | corners on elements can increase the ability of users to
             | recognize them and separate them from other elements,
             | because visually the borders are less likely to be confused
             | with other UI elements (lower cognitive load).
             | 
             | This article quotes a researcher on this topic:
             | 
             | > A rectangle with sharp edges takes indeed a little bit
             | more cognitive visible effort than for example an ellipse
             | of the same size. Our 'fovea-eye' is even faster in
             | recording a circle. Edges involve additional neuronal image
             | tools. The process is therefore slowed down.1
             | 
             | 1: https://designmodo.com/rounded-corners/
        
               | systemvoltage wrote:
               | Mark my words - there is going to be a reverse trend, say
               | 5-10 years from now. Same with color gradients, it will
               | become uncool. It's all fashion.
               | 
               | > sharp edges takes indeed a little bit more cognitive
               | visible effort
               | 
               | I have my doubts about this. It is 100% fad IMO.
        
               | 323 wrote:
               | Like how Windows slowly removed colors from it's icons,
               | until they almost became black and white, only to
               | reintroduce color back in Windows 11.
               | 
               | And how Windows 11 lists rounded windows and corners as a
               | "signature feature"!
               | 
               | https://docs.microsoft.com/en-
               | us/windows/apps/design/signatu...
        
               | 4cao wrote:
               | And they still managed to get the round corners wrong,
               | apparently. According to that page, the radius values are
               | hardcoded in pixels, so they don't scale with the
               | display's DPI setting.
               | 
               | That's at least a decade after the W3C had a well-
               | developed concept of relative units for use with the CSS:
               | 
               | https://www.w3.org/Style/Examples/007/units.html#future
               | (2010)
               | 
               | Thus, with a sufficiently high DPI display, you're going
               | to miss out on one of Windows 11's "signature
               | experiences" and end up with "legacy" squarish corners
               | instead.
        
               | 323 wrote:
               | I'm pretty sure those pixels are some form of "ideal
               | pixels", just like CSS pixels are not actual pixels.
               | 
               | Also, Windows scales the pixel size when you use a legacy
               | application (non DPI aware) on high DPI displays.
        
             | dmitriid wrote:
             | Corporate Memphis!
        
             | spookthesunset wrote:
             | Don't forget gradients for everything.
             | 
             | Going even further back, the tacky wild fractal wallpaper
             | backgrounds on websites with animated gif "under
             | construction" banners on top.
             | 
             | Give it 5 years and iOS and android will get some visual
             | refresh that makes the current stuff look very dated.
             | 
             | Fashion is constantly changing and being revisited. It's
             | just the way it is. Something about it is what makes humans
             | what they are. We love it...
        
         | skeeter2020 wrote:
         | And all this time we've had star wipe. To paraphrase Homer
         | Simpson, why are we eating hamburger when we can have steak?
        
         | Cloudef wrote:
         | Happens to games too, i often spend good time modifying the
         | game to get rid of the screen filter effects that ruin the
         | whole render.
        
         | lloeki wrote:
         | > there is quite a trend of grading them orange/teal
         | 
         | I could swear I read in essence the same article about movies
         | being all orange/teal a couple or three years ago.
         | 
         | EDIT: oh, that was 2013 actually. Ironically O'Brother gets the
         | blame for that too.
         | 
         | https://shootandcut.wordpress.com/2013/01/01/teal-and-orange...
        
           | lupire wrote:
           | tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/OrangeBlueContrast
        
             | h2odragon wrote:
             | How very kind of you to format that un-clicky (not sarcasm)
        
               | monkeybutton wrote:
               | Making you think twice before opening tv tropes is
               | probably for the better. Do you _really_ want to go down
               | that path right now?
        
               | spookthesunset wrote:
               | Oh man is that site a rabbit hole.
        
               | benrow wrote:
               | Reminds me of Every Frame a Painting on YouTube - another
               | fascinating place where hours can fly by.
        
               | d0mine wrote:
               | The understated comment ^
               | 
               | Consider it a warning before you visit the site.
        
         | b1c837696ba28b wrote:
         | Gated reverb on snare drum. Looking at you, Hugh Padgham.
        
         | cmckn wrote:
         | > Since 2015, color grading is the new fad. Also unnatural
         | weird (LED) lighting, like the left half of the frame in strong
         | red light and the right half in strong blue light.
         | 
         | I recently learned this specific combo is called "bisexual
         | lighting":
         | 
         | https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bisexual_lighting
        
         | cjohnson318 wrote:
         | I don't think this is a fad. Artists have been purposefully
         | using limited palettes or limited gamuts for a long time.
         | Often, painting the color that you actually see ends up looking
         | garish, amateurish, or at best, out of place. The film industry
         | is just doing what traditional representative Western Art has
         | been doing for hundreds of years; even after artists had access
         | to cheap, vibrant colors.
        
         | kazinator wrote:
         | > _In the 80 /90s music videos had fade/dissolve effects._
         | 
         | See "Be in my Video" song by Frank Zappa, _Them or Us_ album
         | [1984].
        
         | SavantIdiot wrote:
         | "Requiem for a Dream" is a peak fad, notorious for using "MTV
         | Editing": it has over 1500 cuts. Completely unheard of.
        
         | hungryhobo wrote:
         | probably not another fad, it jus stems from color theory, which
         | have been incorporated in film one way or another for a really
         | long time. Even before these digital color grading took place,
         | scenes in movies are carefully planned out, from set to
         | costumes to lighting, so they fit within a certain range in the
         | color space such it's pleasant for viewers.
         | 
         | The orange and teal look is just a very widely used combination
         | that utilizes complementary colors. Even though it's been used
         | a lot i personally still find it quite appealing.
        
       | aranchelk wrote:
       | Reminds me of an unusual and short-lived sci-fi series called
       | Space Above and Beyond; it predates the current trend
       | significantly.
       | 
       | "The series featured a very dark and desaturated color grading,
       | apparently inherited from the cinematography of series such as
       | The X-Files and Millennium, co-produced by the same team, but
       | taken to a greater extreme. The strength of desaturation employed
       | in many scenes reaches the level that makes them almost black and
       | white (quantitatively, the saturation in CIE xy color subspace of
       | a typical scene in Space: Above and Beyond is in the range
       | 0.03-0.15, approximately 1/4 of a typical contemporary film or
       | television program)."
       | 
       | https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space:_Above_and_Beyond
        
       | Kye wrote:
       | It must be because I watch sci-fi more than anything else, but
       | things have gotten more colorful for me. Compare Babylon 5's CRT-
       | targeting colors with the vibrant lights and colors of Foundation
       | or The Expanse. Though even Babylon 5 is brighter than the
       | examples in the article.
        
         | throwanem wrote:
         | Babylon 5 looks a lot better in the recent HD remaster, which
         | (IIRC) worked from different masters than those used for the
         | DVD set. The remaster's colors look like I remember from my
         | initial viewing of the show on VHS taped from broadcast -
         | lively, saturated, not at all the muddy muted mess you get on
         | the DVDs.
        
       | acomjean wrote:
       | There are some interesting visualizations of color in movies.
       | It's not up to date (last movie 2019) but shows color over time
       | 
       | https://thecolorsofmotion.com/
       | 
       | And this one. (Done in processing)
       | 
       | http://dillonbaker.com/#/spectrum/
       | 
       | Of course it makes more sense to look at each scene by itself,
       | but it's less fun
       | 
       | https://www.boredpanda.com/famous-movie-color-palettes-cinem...
        
       | dsego wrote:
       | Not sure if this yt video was referenced, but it offers a good
       | overview:
       | 
       | Why are modern films underexposed? https://youtu.be/ctXc6YHIyac
        
       | sslayer wrote:
       | Conspiracy theorist here; TPTB/Hollywood is selling us on how
       | bleak the future is, as if they wish to manipulate peoples
       | emotions.
        
         | nwatson wrote:
         | It's very effective too ... every "modern Evangelical prophet"
         | (there theologically should be no such thing) that already
         | believes the end is near more conjure and relate fantastical
         | divinely inspired dreams whose plot twists are lifted from or
         | hugely inspired by fantasy, comic book, and apocalyptic films
         | and TV series. They're hugely entertaining delusions but would
         | be C-grade at best.
        
         | pjc50 wrote:
         | A film which does not cause you to feel anything - to
         | manipulate your emotions - has failed. Without that it's just
         | moving wallpaper.
        
         | flavius29663 wrote:
         | You don't need to be a conspiracy theorist here: producers and
         | filmmakers are humans too, they are impacted about constant
         | bashing from media, social media and others than sell/promote
         | fear such as terrorism, global warming, refugees, disasters of
         | all kind. Also social media in our pockets tends to exacerbate
         | the alarmism with every bad event reaching us instantly, and
         | the good ones never really do. Filmmakers, being artists, they
         | tend to express themselves, so they might be some of the first
         | to show this new trend.
         | 
         | Media and especially social media are not a conspiracy either:
         | they want to sell and they are also humans.
        
       | zozin wrote:
       | I noticed this trend previously and I assumed it was a cost
       | decision. A dark scene has less details, so it would conceivably
       | cost much less to incorporate CGI/post-fx.
        
       | munificent wrote:
       | God, I fucking _hate_ the current color grading trend of killing
       | every color except for two opposing ones (usually amber and blue)
       | and then pushing almost everything else into a chiarscuro of inky
       | shadows.
       | 
       | Watch a 90s movie sometime and it will make you weep for how
       | beautiful today's movies could be.
       | 
       | For superhero movies in particular, I think a big part of this is
       | a deliberate attempt to distance themselves from the stigma that
       | comics are for kids. They want to sell to an adult audience but
       | adults feel foolish if they consume something too clearly
       | sanitized and kid friendly.
       | 
       | The last thing any Hollywood director wants to do is make their
       | superhero movie look like 1990's "Dick Tracy", or something in
       | the Spy Kids franchise because it will drive adult audiences
       | away. So they slather the whole fucking thing in grimdark so it
       | looks like serious grown-up stuff who are too insecure in their
       | maturity to watch a silly movie about dudes in spandex doing
       | magical acrobatics and punching each other.
       | 
       | (This is also why so much YA fiction which is heavily read by
       | adults is dystopian. And it's why modern superhero movies so
       | rarely have characters use their actual superhero titles, which
       | sounds corny.)
        
         | tomtheelder wrote:
         | I think a lot of really beautiful films will have many if not
         | most scenes lean heavily on two colors, maybe 3. I don't think
         | there's anything fundamentally wrong with that, and it's
         | actually really great for creating moods and drawing attention
         | to certain things. But here's the thing: it's not the same two
         | for every scene!
         | 
         | Films that are in teal and orange the whole time drive me
         | absolutely nuts. That combination has a place, but there are
         | others! Two similar hues to create a sense of stuffiness and
         | formality. A neutral tone plus a vibrant one (yellow or
         | something) to create an intensity and focus on the vibrant
         | elements. Green and red to really force the feeling of lushness
         | in a natural scene. Monochromatic scenes have a place as well.
         | 
         | Like I understand that a two toned scene can create a very
         | striking atmosphere, but lets use a _little_ bit of creativity
         | in how we apply that.
         | 
         | Agree about superhero movies though. The color grading does
         | always seem like an intentional choice to create feelings of
         | maturity and grittiness.
        
         | [deleted]
        
       | zoomablemind wrote:
       | To echo one of the possible reasons for desaturatuon trend is a
       | curiuos widespread of badly configured screens out there. Same
       | problem as was back in time in a random hotel an image on a room
       | TV set would be way overly saturated and often the
       | contrast/brightness balance would be off too.
       | 
       | These days the default profiles on TVs are better, but perhaps
       | people's expectations may be off from the past experiences. Just
       | the other day, by chance witnessed a neighbor's gigantic TV wall
       | with a pronounced orange cast and almost toxic spill of overly
       | saturated colors showing something as mundane as news
       | broadcast... No need for any dramatic enhancement here. Well,
       | perhaps the warmed tones are deliberately set for some other
       | primary content ...I don't need to know.
       | 
       | So, aesthetic may be at play, but simple lack of a technical
       | ability to configure the screens may still be the factor, so
       | directors may be compensating for the target medium, which in
       | this day is prevalently a TV/device screen.
        
       | psim1 wrote:
       | Star Trek demonstrates the changing times pretty well.
       | 
       | For the Original Series, the producers were just starting to
       | explore color television and they used the whole pallette.
       | 
       | 1990s Star Trek feels more "natural" to me: warm where you expect
       | warmth (ship's crew quarters, hot planets), cool where you expect
       | cool (Borg ship), fairly neutral otherwise, though some of the
       | sets did have an office-park vibe to them.
       | 
       | Current Star Trek, specifically Discovery and Picard, are about
       | as gray-blue and washed-out as ever.
       | 
       | The pictures in this tweet show it perfectly:
       | https://twitter.com/ShelfNerds/status/1481452739754405889
        
         | jerf wrote:
         | It is sort of funny to read over that and think that the best
         | (filmed) shot in the whole set is the first McCoy from the
         | 1960s. Though the 90s Trek fares well too, certainly. One might
         | call the 90s Trek "dull" or "perfunctory", but it _works_.
         | 
         | It occurs to me I'm watching Stargate SG-1 right now, which
         | also has a color grading similar to 90s Trek, and now that I
         | think about it, it's almost a relief. Here I've got this HDR 4K
         | OLED display and it seems like everybody's all like "Hey let's
         | use half-ish of the color gamut of NTSC". I've rejected
         | monitors and laptops for having only the capability of
         | displaying that color gamut and here professionals are using it
         | _voluntarily_. As a valid choice every so often, sure, like
         | someone else mentions Young Frankenstein in out-and-out black
         | and white, but all the time, everywhere, as the solution to
         | every problem? Come on!
        
         | giantrobot wrote:
         | > For the Original Series, the producers were just starting to
         | explore color television and they used the whole pallette.
         | 
         | More that the producers had to deal with that fact a
         | significant chunk of the audience only had black and white TVs.
         | Even on color TVs the broadcast would crush colors. So they had
         | to use bright colors that would differentiate characters
         | despite being the same "uniform".
         | 
         | Look at The Cage, all the characters had the same color uniform
         | so everyone sort of blended together except Number One. Shatner
         | and crew were much easier to differentiate in black and white,
         | especially when red shirts beamed down with the principal cast.
        
       | rob74 wrote:
       | This trend is not really new, and it actually goes both ways:
       | when you want a darker tone, you desaturate the colors and go for
       | a "colder" color palette, when you want to get all warm and fuzzy
       | (think romance movies, soap operas etc.) you use a "warmer"
       | palette and crank up the saturation a bit. But this already
       | annoyed me back in the early 2000s: CSI New York had a "cold"
       | color palette, CSI Miami a warmer one, although (or more likely
       | because) they were both mostly filmed in and around L.A.
        
         | Joker_vD wrote:
         | Also, everything in Mexico has yellowish tint.
        
           | nwatson wrote:
           | The great film "Traffic" (explores drug use and trafficking
           | and implications from many angles) used a similar strategy
           | ... US scenes brightly colored and clear, Latin America
           | scenes washed out and grainy.
        
             | rconti wrote:
             | The US scenes were more than just brightly colored and
             | clear, they also had a very blueish tint to them. It all
             | felt very clean, clinical, sanitized, to the yellows of
             | Mexico and further south.
        
         | mabub24 wrote:
         | I like to see a return to technicolor vibrancy in some media
         | IP. Some directors, like PTA, still use it to great effect, but
         | when you watch some old Powell and Pressburger films, or _Bad
         | Day at Blackrock_ , or even _Purple Noon_ , you see these
         | beautiful colours that don't assault your eyes in neon
         | brightness; instead, you get these beautiful rich tones that
         | seem solid and deep. It seems like now a lot of colourists just
         | go for overwrought colourgrading, insanely crushed blacks, or
         | slamming a movie into blue-orange land.
        
           | pavlov wrote:
           | HBO's brand new "Station Eleven" makes excellent use of color
           | IMO. Lots of beautiful nature shots, no conspicuously digital
           | color correction. Color is an important narrative element
           | through cinematography and production design rather than
           | "let's slather blue here in post to make it dramatic".
           | (Excellent acting too. Really love this show.)
        
           | pjc50 wrote:
           | _Bad Day at Blackrock_ is just a tremendous film. A social
           | justice Western from 1955 starring Spencer Tracey?
           | 
           | For more technicolour scenery (albeit mostly painted!) I
           | enjoyed Black Narcissus https://www.imdb.com/video/vi32104781
           | 05?playlistId=tt0039192...
        
           | jl6 wrote:
           | Disney animation is now the home of color, where every frame
           | has every color and a good chance of featuring a literal
           | rainbow.
        
         | varelse wrote:
         | Decades before that I used to be able to tell whether a show
         | was on NBC, ABC, or CBS by the brightness and color balance.
         | Now everything is murky because the networks don't really have
         | their signature looks anymore and there are so many of them.
        
       | LargoLasskhyfv wrote:
       | Yawn. Prior rant from 2010 which circulated at the time:
       | 
       | [1] https://theabyssgazes.blogspot.com/2010/03/teal-and-
       | orange-h...
        
       | hbn wrote:
       | I had just watched a video the other day that claimed the
       | Matrix's famous green color grading wasn't actually a thing until
       | 10 years later in the Bluray remaster.
        
         | onlyrealcuzzo wrote:
         | But most of the sets had green wallpapers and green tinted
         | everything (in the Matrix). It was all grey in reality.
         | 
         | It didn't need to fake it with color grading.
        
       | adam0c wrote:
       | I think this can be pretty much summed up along the lines of: way
       | back when colour was introduced into film people wanted to show
       | it off more, it was something magical whereas now everyone wants
       | to be all edgy and gritty.
       | 
       | Or.... it's the lizard people controlling the world and making
       | everyone miserable by using only dark grim colours?!
        
       | mwattsun wrote:
       | The video embedded in the Vox article is worth watching. I didn't
       | realize the sepia tones in O' Brother, Where Art Thou were a
       | digital effect using techniques that were very new at the time.
       | The film was digitized, color altered and then printed back to
       | film for distribution.
       | 
       | I've uploaded a before and after shot of the baptism scene here:
       | https://imgur.com/a/yAugAV0
       | 
       | Painting With Pixels (O' Brother, Where Art Thou)
       | 
       | https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pla_pd1uatg
       | 
       | Description: This short video about the Coen brother's film 'O
       | Brother, Where Art Thou', the first feature film to employ a full
       | digital colour grade.
        
       | rasz wrote:
       | Good old Piss Filter, also popular with games. From 'Ross's Game
       | Dungeon: Deus Ex - Human Revolution'
       | https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vYLEuQrvND0&t=350s conclusion -
       | art directors are Lizard People.
       | 
       | >The first movie to use digital color manipulation in the way
       | we'd think of it today -- i.e., shifting the colors within a film
       | image to meet a digitally achieved palette -- is generally
       | considered to be the 2000 Coen brothers' Great Depression
       | picaresque O Brother, Where Art Thou?
       | 
       | and not 1999 green tint Matrix?
        
         | FreeFull wrote:
         | The first Matrix originally only used practical effects for the
         | green tint (including physically green-washing all clothes).
        
       | jdofaz wrote:
       | Kevin Can F*k Himself makes this really noticeable. The show
       | alternates between cheesy sitcom with happy music and bright
       | colors to dark drama with muted colors.
       | 
       | It's been interesting to see the same room go from one style to
       | the other, really highlights how much influence these things
       | have.
        
         | singlow wrote:
         | Haven't seen that, but another example is Dancer in the Dark,
         | which contrasts not just with color. It has primary narrative
         | sequences that are cinema-verite style with dull colors, spoken
         | dialog, handheld cameras and no background music. Then it has
         | musical sequences that gradually transition from that style
         | into choreographed, boom-camera, saturated color. The
         | transformations are very well done and the contrast is really
         | effective.
        
       | etempleton wrote:
       | Darker scenes can save on CG budget and time as well as set
       | design. It can also be a stylistic choice.
       | 
       | Sometimes it works, sometimes it does not. The last season of GoT
       | was particularly agregious as was The Justice League movie.
        
       | twic wrote:
       | There's a strange but wonderful little film called Avalon [0],
       | directed by Mamoru Oshii of Ghost in the Shell fame, for which i
       | will now give spoilers.
       | 
       | The film concerns a virtual-reality game, with scenes shot in
       | both the real world and the game. The game world is absolutely
       | drenched in what that article calls "intangible sludge" -
       | everything is a murky brown, and settings are usually fairly
       | spartan, containing little other than the player characters and
       | enemies. The real world, on the other hand, looks naturalistic,
       | albeit shabby, given that this is set in crapsack cyberpunk
       | Eastern European city.
       | 
       | Or at least, you think it is. Until the final act of the film,
       | when the protagonist gains access to a "Class Special A" level in
       | the game - which is simply modern-day Warsaw, shot straight, like
       | a documentary, and as such is crammed with life and colour. After
       | an hour and a half of the various shades of beige in the earlier
       | levels and the real world, your brain has recalibrated itself to
       | that, and so this perfectly normal scene assaults you with its
       | hyperreality. It's a trick, and a simple trick, but it's
       | amazingly effective!
       | 
       | [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Avalon_(2001_film)
        
         | maxhq wrote:
         | I've been fascinated by this film for years now and highly
         | recommend it for anyone who likes artistic and a bit surreal
         | sci-fi films. It's one of the few films that somehow deeply
         | touches me, where I can fully immerse.
        
       | hprotagonist wrote:
       | The relentless post-GoT grimdark is at least part of why new
       | media shows more or less don't appeal to me.
       | 
       | I have enough of that in my daily life, lately; i don't need
       | more.
        
         | [deleted]
        
         | egeozcan wrote:
         | I find it ironic that Game of Thrones was one of the shows with
         | the biggest budgets, and still, especially in the last season,
         | they mostly showed black screens.
         | 
         | Add to that, how your typical flat display fails to create any
         | contrast in dark scenes and the bad streaming quality... Ouch.
        
           | andrepd wrote:
           | It's really amazing that GoT didn't go from "okay" to
           | "terrible", or from "outstanding" to "meh", which is the most
           | common thing. No, it really went from "outstanding" to
           | "terrible".
        
             | baud147258 wrote:
             | Personally I feel like the decline was more progressive,
             | starting with season 5 rather than just the last seasons
             | falling off a cliff
        
               | bzzzt wrote:
               | Isn't that about where the showrunners began te write the
               | story instead of GRRM?
               | 
               | Seemed to me they ran out of characters to kill, made
               | some filler to get to the last season and then rushed a
               | bunch of stuff badly.
        
             | jl6 wrote:
             | I find it beyond hilarious that there is an active
             | subreddit dedicated to complaining about this decline which
             | still gets dozens of posts a day.
        
             | afavour wrote:
             | IMO just an example of what happens when a crutch is taken
             | away. I've never read the books but you could tell the
             | early seasons told a deeply thought out and plotted story.
             | The show creators were great at adopting that work. But
             | once they were left to do their own thing... turns out they
             | couldn't do that well at all.
             | 
             | Of course the books _still_ aren't done so if they waited
             | we'd still not have anything to watch. IMO from what I've
             | read _about_ the books it sounds like they could have cut
             | out less and made the early seasons last longer without it
             | dragging too much.
        
               | delecti wrote:
               | In addition to losing the crutch, they allegedly were
               | also in a rush to wrap things up so they could get to the
               | Star Wars property they were set to work on. But
               | seemingly in the process they did so badly at their
               | rushed ending that they lost that too.
        
               | afavour wrote:
               | Also their ill-fated Confederate show. From a purely
               | outsider perspective it felt like they got bored of
               | GoT... I don't really blame them for that, they'd been
               | working on it for many years. But much better to hand off
               | to some new showrunners if you're feeling that way.
        
               | galangalalgol wrote:
               | I think they mostly cut the right stuff, lady stoneheart
               | excepted. The books aren't among my favorites, but the
               | show took all the good and left the filler. But
               | recognizing the good bits is a different skillset than
               | being able to create more.
        
             | Loughla wrote:
             | GoT is my case study in why I just simply cannot stand 99%
             | of action movies. They're all so very formulaic.
             | 
             | In the first seasons, working off of GRRM's writing, the
             | seasons literally subverted expectations, just as the
             | books. Then Hollywood had to get involved, because source
             | material didn't exist, yet. At that point, 'subverting
             | expectations' became the meme it is today.
             | 
             | (Nearly) Every action movie seems just so formulaic. Action
             | movie - hero doesn't want to be the hero for (insert
             | dark/dramatic reason 1). Hero soon finds that being the
             | hero is better for the world than not, regardless of
             | personal consequence. World warps around hero to make sure
             | s/he doesn't die. Bonus points for cool car chase, gun
             | fight, or explosion. Nudity that doesn't move the story
             | forward except to show that Hero likes to have sex isn't
             | required, but will add to the box office, because people
             | like boobies and butts.
        
               | Renaud wrote:
               | "the hero's journey, is the common template of stories
               | that involve a hero who goes on an adventure, is
               | victorious in a decisive crisis, and comes home changed
               | or transformed."
               | 
               | Hero stories have been following the same template since
               | the dawn of mankind.
               | 
               | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hero%27s_journey
        
               | simiones wrote:
               | The Hero's journey is a quite infamous concept between
               | more serious literary scholars, particularly folklorists,
               | as the Wikipedia article mentions. Its grand claims of
               | psychological universality are built out of cherry
               | picking. Its huge applicability is also built out of very
               | vague concepts and quite manual fitting.
               | 
               | For an example, try to fit the Epic of Gilgamesh (as an
               | extremely old conserved folklore tale) or Don Quixote (as
               | one of the oldest and most famous literary works) to this
               | framework - you will either fail or need to contort them
               | quite a bit, or ignore large chunks.
        
               | egeozcan wrote:
               | Everyone reacts badly to this when they first hear of the
               | concept. Then at some point you realize, that you
               | actually _don 't_ like the scripts that won't fit too
               | well to this. It's like a fashion sense, hard to describe
               | the thing.
               | 
               | A friend of mine, when he heard about this in the class,
               | argued "but I want to create something unique that
               | doesn't fit to this or anything else, like... the
               | Matrix!". The professor was speechless for a moment but
               | could keep his calm :)
        
               | palebluedot wrote:
               | I think a good example of a subversion of the classic
               | "hero's journey" is Blade Runner 2049. (I won't go into
               | exactly why to avoid spoilers)
        
               | jimmydorry wrote:
               | 2020/21 has had quite a few movies that ended with the
               | hero dying or negatively impacted. They follow the
               | "hero's journey trope" and then subvert. I guess they
               | match the pandemic mood. I'm not sure if I was just made
               | more aware of this due to COVID, or there really just has
               | been a glut of them.
               | 
               | The two most recent off the top of my head:
               | 
               | * Don't look up
               | 
               | * James Bond No Time to Die
        
               | egeozcan wrote:
               | Thanks for the insight, I really appreciate it but it'd
               | be nice for others if you don't give unexpected spoilers
               | :)
        
             | dorchadas wrote:
             | It's truly interesting. Think of how much it dominated
             | cultural talk for a decade, then just dropped off the face
             | of the earth after Season 8. Man D&D really screwed it up.
        
               | awhow wrote:
               | Like Lost
        
         | LegitShady wrote:
         | I dropped Netflix because everything on there it suggests seems
         | to be 'dystopian dark sci fi/fantasy' to the point where I
         | wonder if they even understand that not everyone wants to see
         | this as 'entertainment'.
         | 
         | I didn't watch a bunch of dystopian stuff so why is it pushing
         | on me? Because that's the movies they made/bought.
         | 
         | There doesn't seem to be any interesting non grim dark stuff
         | left I haven't seen already.
        
       | 1970-01-01 wrote:
       | Mel Brooks made Young Frankenstein in black and white because he
       | wanted to pay tribute to the original picture. It was a complete
       | success, and he had to fight to get his way. Modern directors are
       | pulling the same stunt, however their movies don't have a special
       | reason to do it. The end result is experience detraction instead
       | of additional charm.
       | 
       | https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z2RpZBP_vyg&t=2860s
       | 
       | https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PQUqK_RJz9c&t=105s
        
       | Sunspark wrote:
       | Interesting article, and all this time I've been blaming the
       | streaming services for their incompetence with transcoding making
       | everything dull, muddy, washed out with the wrong gamma, etc.
       | 
       | And it turns out it was actually the incompetent movie/tv
       | producers themselves the whole time? WOW.
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2022-01-13 23:01 UTC)