Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Approved Cameras

partnerhelp.netflixstudios.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

161–170 of 315 posts

Re: Approved Cameras

#161

Post by xuhu »

galago wrote: post #131
chrisseaton wrote: post #122

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Cinematographers almost always want part of the image blurred - an entire image in sharp focus would make it difficult to perceive depth and would take away the ability to direct the gaze of the audience.

In this case the OOF points of light are actually vertically oriented ovals. The idea being its reminiscent of "1974" style anamorphic lenses. Its an affectation not unlike digital retro photo filters, except that its the physical lens. Its not unlike musicians who use vintage equipment because they want to reproduce something as it was done in the past. Its gets a bit dissonant if the movie is set in the present tho…

I just imagined sitting for a photography course test and the first question is "why do anamorphic lenses not produce round out-of-focus points of light, since the in-focus parts are not stretched". Naturally the course material didn't cover any of this.

Re: Approved Cameras

#162

Post by germinalphrase »

dylan604 wrote: post #148
germinalphrase wrote: post #145

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This may not be universal, but when I was a 2nd AC/Loader - the 1st AC didn’t log anything. Always 2nd AC along with keeping the slate.

"depending on size of crew" To get to 2nd AC, you had a good sized crew

I suppose, but we’re talking about Netflix here. DP, Operator, 1st AC, 2nd AC, and a loader is pretty standard on even sub-10 mil budgets (which is nothing).

Re: Approved Cameras

#163

Post by docflabby »

They probably do better to put more work into writing a guide for approved writers.

So many (many) shows with great actors completely let down by terrible scripts....

Re: Approved Cameras

#164

Post by rbanffy »

eropple wrote: post #106
chrisseaton wrote: post #96

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If wonder if instead of a separate mix, 5.1 could be modified to include hints for how to better down-mix a given production.

It can. That's part of the Blu-ray spec. But it's not standardized in streaming video AFAIK (not that Netflix has to care about that, they have their own player) and, even if the feature exists, somebody still has to go do it.

A speech recognition model can give you a reading on how understandable the speech is and use that information to guide the channel volume in the mixing.

OTOH, a lot of the models end up trained on features that are very different from what humans hear.

Re: Approved Cameras

#165

Post by pbhjpbhj »

Grakel wrote: post #123
chrisseaton wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How else would you mix the dialogue except to come out of both speakers though?

You mix the dialog louder for the entire piece, and every other sound in the middle. No extreme highs, no extreme lows. General compression with dialog forward choices.

I don't know why compression isn't built in to consumer media devices, it's so often called for (and closely followed by volume normalisation ... but I guess the advertisers veto that).

Re: Approved Cameras

#166

Post by JimTheMan »

antisthenes wrote: post #68

It's too bad they don't screen their actual content with the same rigor as they do their technical side. I don't doubt their technical side is excellent. Most of Netflix is utterly mindless garbage content for background consumption. I struggle to name even 5 of their originals over the years that you could call good "TV" or Cinema. Black Mirror is the only one that really comes to mind.

If you can name some things you like, I'll try to name some Netflix originals that might match?

I think you could be pleasantly surprised

Re: Approved Cameras

#167

Post by xuhu »

mdoms wrote: post #38
OliverJones wrote: post #15

This means Netflix operates as a production and post studio for their many and talented film-makers. The stuff with the red N on the poster -- some of it is REALLY good -- uses Netflix-operated handling. Any video production goes through a lot of steps from raw studio footage to edited, finished product. This web site says that Netflix processes and people handle a lot of that. Also it looks like 4K is their minimum…

> The stuff with the red N on the poster -- some of it is REALLY good An overwhelming majority of it is total garbage. It's such a bad ratio that I treat the red N as a negative signal when I'm choosing something.

Most stuff on Github is garbage as well, but all the best projects are there.

Re: Approved Cameras

#168

Post by WalterBright »

docflabby wrote: post #163

They probably do better to put more work into writing a guide for approved writers. So many (many) shows with great actors completely let down by terrible scripts....

Let's just add some explosions! That'll fix a terrible script.

The king of witless, trite scripts has got to be the recent "La Brea" series. There's such a lack of creativity that the characters recycle each others lines.

Re: Approved Cameras

#169

Post by WalterBright »

kaczordon wrote: post #109
OliverJones wrote: post #15

This means Netflix operates as a production and post studio for their many and talented film-makers. The stuff with the red N on the poster -- some of it is REALLY good -- uses Netflix-operated handling. Any video production goes through a lot of steps from raw studio footage to edited, finished product. This web site says that Netflix processes and people handle a lot of that. Also it looks like 4K is their minimum…

> Also it looks like 4K is their minimum standard now. I bet the higher resolution makes it easier, with big*ss GPUs to clean up the raw footage. Resolution is far less important than bit color depth. We barely need 4K(Alexa used to be 2K) much less 8K footage for something to look good on a tv.

> Resolution is far less important than bit color depth.

I discovered this playing with my scanner, looking for the best settings. It surprised me.

Re: Approved Cameras

#170

Post by xuhu »

livinginfear wrote: post #147

I'd like to see their guidelines for the social content of their productions. Every Netflix production I've seen seems to feature commonly themed social commentary, in some cases more subtle than others.

It would be like asking to see Facebook's algorithm for the news feed.
Post reply on HN