Grain Haters: why?

[ni9ht_5ta1k3r]

dunno why people are bitching about it since grain is the result of light hitting the emulsion on the filmstrip. film is meant to entertain and suspend your disbelief and not be a 100% accurate representation of reality. if you got a problem with grain go bitch to the companies that make the rolls of film.

[Mandrake]

The relative appeal of grain depends on the content of the film. Nature documentaries tend to look better as sharp as possible, whereas a psychodrama might benefit from the look of film grain.
Since film is slowly becoming more of an option (vs. digital,) grain can be used as a stylistic choice of the cinematographer.

[Dark Lord Greg]

Originally Posted by ni9ht_5ta1k3r

dunno why people are bitching about it since grain is the result of light hitting the emulsion on the filmstrip. film is meant to entertain and suspend your disbelief and not be a 100% accurate representation of reality. if you got a problem with grain go bitch to the companies that make the rolls of film.

I thought grain was in movies because it just was and there was no way to avoid it but now that movie can be shot digitally in HD we should have a higher standard for movies to look as clean and sharp as possible unless the director really wants grain

[Sim_Mat]

Digital HD certainly is not a grain-free medium - it has the same problems shooting in low light as film does, and in fact is possibly less suitable for the task. That said they are improving digital cinema all the time, but I do think some filmmakers were too-early adopters of the format. A lot of the early cameras only captured 1080p (35mm film is scanned at 4K res typically, though you technically you can get away with something like 3K and still represent all the information the film contains, but that is still significantly higher resolution than 2K/1080p) so take Star Wars Eps 2 and 3, shot at 1080p res, they look pretty good on DVD upconverted and will probably look jaw dropping on BD but I seem to remember they were a bit soft looking in the theatre, possibly due to the lower resolution. But in dark scenes they certainly did not escape some pretty heavy grain-like noise in the image, particularly in Episode 2. Also digital cinema can look smeary and indistinct at times, Michael Mann's Collateral and Miami Vice did not look visually appealing at all, given the large number of night scenes, which in the early days of digial cinema were a definite no-no. That said, I like digital cinema in general, its just a different look and feel entirely and I like the razor sharpness that can be achieved. But I certainly would hate to see the day come when film is never used again, because choice of film stock is part of the art of the cinema.

[skycracksopen]

Originally Posted by Philnerd

Well it must suck for you to watch movies then The strobes caused by camera pans and moving objects at 24fps is completely unrealistic. Lens flares? Yeah, we don't see those either.

his original statement was "Interested to know why some people hate any level of film grain?"

i never said i hated film grain

i'm pretty indifferent to it, unless it's really over the top

[skycracksopen]

although the flashes, or strobes as you call them, i do find really annoying.

i think that's more of an effect of digitizing film though, because i've never noticed it in a movie theater.

[twonunpackmule]

Originally Posted by ni9ht_5ta1k3r

grain is awesome: it adds effect to historical dramas like in Band of Brothers. For those grain haters: if you don't want grain....shoot in HD!

Umm, HD is pretty bad with highlights...though, it's gotten much better. Night scenes are still a weakness. You'll see gain (yes, I said gain) if not lit properly.

[Mackie_002]

Grain = Good

It depends on the type of film as well, I mean without grain in films like The Godfather or Gone Baby Gone; it just doesn't feel right.

Oh, I think Shoot Em' Up looks stunning, and a perfect example of how grain can make a film looks authentic and raw.

But with films like I, Robot, grain is not suitable for that type of film.

So it really depends on the type of film. What I hate the most is DNR, now that's how you destroy films, what they've done with Patton is almost criminal, making humans look like wax, geez I would never ever buy a DNR title like that, that's why I won't buy Gladiator until they fix the PQ.

The PQ on BD should be the true representation of the film. So for the titles that grain are intended, they should respect the director's intentions and give us the true representation of those particular titles.

[Sim_Mat]

I've seen some Gladiator screenshots and it does look pretty horrible, though I do appreciate that a screenshot isn't the best way to assess PQ but it can give one an indication of what a transfer is like. I don't know why they had to do the transfer like that though, I don't remember the film as being particularly grainy anyway when I saw it theatrically. A Ridley Scott film deserves better given the cinematography is such a key part of all of his films.

[greenman342]

Any gain haters can simply remove most of it with their TV settings so I no tears for them. But you cannot remove DNR.

On the plus side the studios are leaning towards leaving the film grain in.

[Leterface]

I finally watched my HD DVD "An American Werewolf In London". Finally I felt ready to see all the grain in the film. And I was absolutely astounded; in the beginning I could not stand the grain in this particular movie compared to the much more polished DVD. But finally I see the point - when you grow and see many older grainier films you want the grain. I guess I have grown to be a grain lover.

[CaptainArcher]

Originally Posted by skycracksopen

because it's not realistic.

if you were actually there, experiencing the events of the film in person, your eyes wouldn't see grain.

it can be distracting, and remind you that what you're watching isn't real.

some people like to be swept up in the cinematic experience and feel like they are part of the movie, and film grain takes away from that.

This is how I feel. I liken grain to 'LP' record pop.. if you were in the recording studio with the group you wouldn't hear it, it's a distraction. I don't want a picture artificially smoothed, but on the other hand I don't want to see something that appears to be digital noise. (Fargo......ugh)

Battlestar Galactica is a great a example, it may be 'artistic' but to me it's still a hindrance. At the VERY end of the series it briefly, for story purposes, gets cleaned up and it hurts me to think I could/should have been able to see this beautiful CLARITY for the full 4 seasons. If the series could look as clean as King Kong I would rebuy it. Creators should use set color palettes and design to create mood not distorted images.

I am a grain hater, and I'm not ashamed to admit it. I hate the complete inconsistancy of purchases as well.. is my new $20 movie going to look pristine or like a pixelated/digital mess? If it were just one way or the other maybe it would be easier to adapt.

[Sim_Mat]

Originally Posted by CaptainArcher

This is how I feel. I liken grain to 'LP' record pop.. if you were in the recording studio with the group you wouldn't hear it, it's a distraction.

Creators should use set color palettes and design to create mood not distorted images.

I am a grain hater, and I'm not ashamed to admit it.

Expecting all movies to be totally grain free is like demanding that artists only use smooth paper to do their work on. Deciding to use a grainy film stock to achieve a certain artistic goal in a movie is the same as a painter choosing a roughly textured canvas to achieve their artistic vision.

As for digital noise, well, one can *always* tell the difference between natural film grain an digital noise in hi def.

[Josh Z]

Originally Posted by Leterface

I finally watched my HD DVD "An American Werewolf In London". Finally I felt ready to see all the grain in the film. And I was absolutely astounded; in the beginning I could not stand the grain in this particular movie compared to the much more polished DVD.

I also watched American Werewolf last night. The problem with that disc isn't just grain. It's that the studio applied a fair amount of artificial sharpening, which makes the edges of the grain particles stand out and gives the entire picture a very noisy appearance. The picture would look a lot better if not for that.

[ragebot]

Originally Posted by CaptainArcher

Battlestar Galactica is a great a example, it may be 'artistic' but to me it's still a hindrance. At the VERY end of the series it briefly, for story purposes, gets cleaned up and it hurts me to think I could/should have been able to see this beautiful CLARITY for the full 4 seasons.

I actually thought the grain-less moments in the finale looked quite flat and DVish, while the rest of the series proper had wonderful film-ish attributes.