Vintage Lenses // Digital Sensors

Posted on by

Home Forums Camera Vintage Lenses // Digital Sensors

  • Creator
    Topic
  • #216862
    neeraj.jain
    Participant

      There’s obviously been so much discourse over the years of using vintage lenses to take the “edge off” with digital sensors. Of course there’s a lot of characteristics with lenses, how they render bokeh, chromatic aberrations, flaring, etc. But I wanted to specifically ask a question in relation to when certain cinematographers talk about “lower contrast” with certain vintage lenses.

      If you’re not originating on film and doing a photochemical finish, does it really matter? Or is that level of contrast adjustment adjustable within the DI/color grading process?

      I ask mostly because conversation around CONTRAST or “the Cooke look” seems like a moot point in context of modern cinematography and potentially more marketing strategy along the lines of what Steve Yedlin proved through some of his research about camera sensors.

    Viewing 3 replies - 1 through 3 (of 3 total)
    • Author
      Replies
    • #216863
      dmullenasc
      Participant

        There may be a very slight advantage with a lower contrast lens in terms of preserving shadow detail in a high contrast situation, but on the other hand, it’s also harder to fix an image from a low-contrast lens with a lot of flaring in a situation where there is too much lens flare and contrast loss – plus there may be resolution loss too in that situation that is harder to fix.

        So I tend to agree that a lens with a softer contrast isn’t absolutely necessary if you want to get that look in digital. On the other hand, if the lens gives you the look you want “out of the box” without any adjustments to the LUT, etc. then some cinematographers will prefer that. To me, contrast is a bit down the list of priorities since it can be adjusted in color-correction, as opposed to sharpness, the flare characteristics or the shape of the bokeh – though it all may be tied together. If one wants a softer image from an older lens, it may be that the contrast loss is just something that is part of the equation that the cinematographer accepts as a way of avoiding diffusion filters.

        And the problem with post-diffusion is that if the soft look isn’t baked into the original, or at least baked into dailies, it leaves the door open for the studio to change their minds against the will of the director and cinematographer.

        • This reply was modified 3 weeks, 1 day ago by dmullenasc.
        #216867
        pbwinters
        Participant

          As a filmmaker who started when there was no digital format available (only film), I have seen the evolution of the digital image to what it is now – very large and very detailed and clean and sharp. So much so, that the pendulum is now swinging the other way to make images less digital.

          Lenses are certainly a way to take the “edge off” as you say.

          Arri has added the texture feature to the assets available when you shoot with the Alexa 35. I’m sure you all know that the texture feature allows the cinematographer to bake in a look. What are anyone’s thoughts of this option? I’m about to try a texture on an upcoming film I will be shooting. At first, I was a little scared to try it because I’m not one who like filters, but I am looking on this as if the texture is allowing me to kind of step back in time for more of a grainy, film look while still being able to take advantage of the wonderful digital world that is available now.

          It seems like the technology of cameras and color science and formats is evolving so quickly now.

          I’m interested to know what others think.

          #216868
          Tyler F
          Participant

            <p style=”text-align: right;”>I personally think it’s less of a marketing strategy more so it is a ‘trend’.</p>
            Just as it is shooting wide-open for the sake of shallow depth of field or anamorphic because people think 2.40 is more “movie-like”.

            And I don’t say that in a negative way, I think everyone has their own tastes and what they believe looks best to them.

            Take Roger, he’s not attempting to shoot on  vintage optics because (and I think this is to quote him), “it’s how my eyes see — and I think I have pretty good vision”.

            Cooke look (I believe) is an image sharp in the center and gradually falls off towards the corners There is a video floating around somewhere of a Cooke specialist describe the characteristic. I’ll attempt to find it.. but it was less so about the contrast of the lenses themselves.

            • This reply was modified 3 weeks, 1 day ago by Tyler F.
          Viewing 3 replies - 1 through 3 (of 3 total)
          • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.