|
|
Post by nucleusofswarm on Oct 20, 2018 0:04:38 GMT
A common point I've seen come up in discussion of Eccleston's era in recent years is saying that his episodes all have this soft, diffused look to the picture. Some compare it to a dream, other just say 'looks like they rubbed vaseline on the lense'.
How does everyone feel about the aesthetic of Series 1, in retrospect?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 20, 2018 1:04:32 GMT
It looks like 2005. I can’t explain it any differently.
|
|
shutupbanks
Castellan
There’s a horror movie called Alien? That’s really offensive. No wonder everyone keeps invading you.
Likes: 5,677 
Member is Online
|
Post by shutupbanks on Oct 20, 2018 1:56:24 GMT
Can it be explained by people being used to everything being shot in HD now?
I was shocked when I first saw it - it looked like money had been spent on it.
|
|
|
|
Post by dasmaniac on Oct 20, 2018 3:07:26 GMT
I love the aesthetic but shooting on video tape was a mistake.
|
|
|
|
Post by Hieronymus on Oct 20, 2018 3:51:44 GMT
Re-using any single unusual camera technique over and over is like writing the same unusual cliche over and over. It dulls the impact and draws attention to the stagecraft, thereby pulling the audience out of the story and into the mechanics.
|
|
|
|
Post by nucleusofswarm on Oct 20, 2018 10:13:15 GMT
I love the aesthetic but shooting on video tape was a mistake. Considering how much of a nightmare S1 was to make, I'm just impressed they managed to stick tape inside the cameras at all without a fight. |
|
|
|
Post by thethirddoctor on Oct 20, 2018 12:13:39 GMT
I thought it was John Barrowmans make up!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 20, 2018 14:13:13 GMT
Interesting. I’ve not seen this mentioned anywhere for Series 1; The Web Planet, yes! When I saw the title of the thread I thought, surely Season 2? And only the Web Planet... Back on topic, I think it does date the series, much as 1990's Red Dwarf suffered from too much Videotape filtering for location work, which kind of restricts what may be achieved in terms of upscaling, in my view at least. When you look at how clear 1970's and 1980's videotaped serials look today, the 1990's - mid 2000's prior to HD do suffer from tinkering, like wide lapels in the suits people wore back then - it seemed the fashion at the time. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 21, 2018 8:24:04 GMT
Interesting. I’ve not seen this mentioned anywhere for Series 1; The Web Planet, yes! When I saw the title of the thread I thought, surely Season 2? And only the Web Planet... Back on topic, I think it does date the series, much as 1990's Red Dwarf suffered from too much Videotape filtering for location work, which kind of restricts what may be achieved in terms of upscaling, in my view at least. When you look at how clear 1970's and 1980's videotaped serials look today, the 1990's - mid 2000's prior to HD do suffer from tinkering, like wide lapels in the suits people wore back then - it seemed the fashion at the time. Yeah, it's like how for part of the very late 1990s/early 2000s we had this MTV aesthetic with jagged slow motion and shaky cam in Hollywood films for a time. Colour scaling has also come leaps and bounds in near-fifteen years. Compare the contrasting tones in something like Blade Runner 2049 (2017) to the flat green of The Matrix (1999) and you'll see what I mean. The more lighting you can shoot in-camera, the better it tends to look once aged, but some productions just don't have the money/time for it. In terms of Series 1 specifically, I think it's aged rather well. The worst it gets is: "Ah, I see you've left your soft focus on." |
|
|
|
Post by constonks on Oct 22, 2018 14:40:56 GMT
It looks like 2005. I can’t explain it any differently. So true. I've tried to pinpoint it before and I always end up back at that as the only descriptor. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 22, 2018 20:33:52 GMT
Now that I am in to Blu-rays and have a good TV I find anything not in HD looks poor... I didn't notice it in 2005 but when you're used to pictures - be it Doctor Who or movies - looking sharp and defined, anything less looks horrible.
|
|
|
|
Post by mrperson on Oct 22, 2018 22:25:07 GMT
A common point I've seen come up in discussion of Eccleston's era in recent years is saying that his episodes all have this soft, diffused look to the picture. Some compare it to a dream, other just say 'looks like they rubbed vaseline on the lense'.
How does everyone feel about the aesthetic of Series 1, in retrospect?
I rewatched S1 not long ago. I wasn't bothered.
If someone who likes watching classic episodes is bothered by S1's looks, I'm rather confused by that person's perspective. (Not aimed at you personally). I mean, we're used to wobbling sets and Daleks bumping into the camera, so what's a less-than-HD look matter?
|
|
|
|
Post by mrperson on Oct 22, 2018 22:26:49 GMT
Can it be explained by people being used to everything being shot in HD now? I was shocked when I first saw it - it looked like money had been spent on it. That's probably it. Just about each year, the look seems to improve. That's inevitable with technological progress. |
|
