There is no A24 look. People telling people how to achieve that "look" are just trying to market to the filmmaking audience. A24 is just a distribution company and doesn't have a say a on the look of the film. Thats the director/cinematographer of the films job. A24 usually gives directors a ton of creative freedom on their movies which contributes to the films looking different than most studio system hollywood films.
That’s not entirely true. A24 is a production company as well as distribution. And their producers very much have a hand in establishing mood, tone, and overall creation of a project. That’s not to say that they don’t allow their filmmakers room to play, they very much do. But they’re also directly responsible much of the time for who is hired and how they work.
Sure. But it is possible to identify general trends, even when there is a lot of variation around them. Like there's no universal _"80s film look"_ vs _"90s film look"_ or _"comedy look"_ vs _"drama look"._ But we could pick out some common patterns.
THANK YOU! It's nice to call out these "influentographers" from time to time. When they do "how to do a24" "How to shoot like Wong Kar Wai" and they do just a little research and poorely recreate some shots and then make a tutorial for the audience with the same old "so guys, my secret sauce is... BACKLIGHT!"
You probably know, but for those that don't, Zone of interest was shot with hidden cameras so that the actors would be the least aware of their presence. Also bright day light was preferred. There is a great interview with the DOP somewhere that I don't remember, but worth looking for.
Thank you for the perspective, Mitch! A24’s whole appeal is that it (at early stages of their company,) was just buying so much at festival circuits and focusing on the films that resonated with an audience, so inherently they’ve built their own audience by catering to what people find intriguing/provoking/original. I think what people come to associate as the ‘look’ is just more auteur driver work, which is more tonal than visual - on some level, it speaks to an exoticism to a mainstream American audience, where films are expected to ‘look’ a certain way. Humans are creatures of habit, and compartmentalising is a comforting way to process and accept novelty for us. The A24 phenomenon is really a product of aggressive branding on their part, as their direct competitors - NEON, Annapurna, FilmNation - boast a repertoire equally as indie, but don’t market their films as aggressively.
I think emulation is GREAT when you're starting and learning the technical ins and outs of produciton. But I totally agree that if your plan is to create an original work and possibly your calling card as a filmmaker, be original. The trick is learning how it's done, but not turning it into your comfort zone.
Nice video! Many filmmakers (and really humans in general) like to try to quantify and categorize what the process and steps are necessary to recreate something that's desirable. While fair, sometimes it could lead a cycle that is not necessarily bad, but not always a great thing as well. Like you said, it's up to studying the films you like and from conceptualization, to experimentation, and finally to actualization, creating your own look!
Finally, someone said this, I thought I was the only one who felt this way about those videos. Usually, I'm on the fence because I love a good pastiche, but it's usually inaccurate and simplified.
Hey man! Just discovered your channel and I really love your content! I’ve been seeing this aspect ratio more often, definitely gonna use it. It gives a really nice result :) I’m trying to start my career as a DP
A very insightful review of the "A24-look-trend". I think we can all agree that critical thinking with ones own motivated vision for the scene at hand is the priority - not to emulate, as you said.
Do you have any recommendations to making an action camera look at cinematic as possible? I know they're usually for extreme sports and things of that nature, but I'm trying to get the A24 aesthetic out of it. (DJI OSMO ACTION 5 PRO) So if we're talking just in the filming stage, not colour, grading and stuff - maybe some filters would be useful? And the filter, maybe a black mist filter? Kind of thing
This is actually super interesting., My experience with a lot of action camera stuff is usually splicing it in with the main camera footage, whether it be crash cam stuff or what not. When it comes to cameras, I would say capture as much information as possible. There isn't anything you can't do if you can get the information. You can make digital look exactly like film if you have captured the information and have the know how to achieve that look in post. With that said, not every camera has the ability to capture the level of information that something like an ARRI can, and here were talking about action cameras. That doesn't mean you are screwed. You just have a smaller canvas which can be hard when trying to paint big pictures. I don't know the specs of the OSMO, but let's say you have 10 stops of dynamic range (which I think is the most important thing in a camera.). Its going to be a bit harder to get a moody, contrasty shot of someone sitting by a window where you have good light on them while still retaining the info outside. It is very easy on an Alexa 35 with 17 stops of DR because you will see everything inside in the shadows and everything outside. It is already lit. When you only have 10 stops of DR, either the outside is far too bright that it's a clipped white blob, or the inside (and character) is a blob of darkness. You have to find a way to get the light levels closer together so that you can see both, so maybe push light into the room so that its closer to the level of light outside, then add a light to get that shape and directionality of a light coming in the window onto the subject. If you can do that then the camera will have the visual information and you'll be able to push those colors in post whether it be changing the exposure, contrast, etc. There isn't any magic camera setting. I prefer 172.8/24fps when I shoot. I tend to always lean towards 4300K for anything that involves tungsten lighting at night, and 6000K for sunny exteriors, but that's just my workflow. If your camera has some sort of LOG and you check False Color and exposure, as long as you have the info there it's all going to be lighting. And looking at something like Zone of Interest where there are many shots that are just high sun exterior, the composition and blocking and choice of where to put the camera/move the camera does miles for making the images "feel" cinematic. If you can't control your lighting, and it isn't looking how you want it to look you can always find some really interesting way to frame the shot or move the camera. What would be a really unique perspective to put the viewer in? With an action camera that becomes very easy. I think a lot of the cinematography we see in these indie films approach the shot with that mentality and it leads to really stand out composition. TLDR: Not really a magic setting for an OSMO. If you have log, just focus on lighting it well or making the shot sick as fuuuuuuuuuuuu
like others have said in the comments A24's reputation is garnered mostly through aggressive marketing I have to say I kinda roll my eyes whenever someone attributes a film's quality to the studio themselves cause I'm like really? at the end of the day a24 is only a studio that lets the artists do what they want if they are even producing it themselves, a decent amount of times they just acquire the rights Like I've seen so many people say "omg A24's done it again" with Aftersun and Zone of Interest when neither of those films were even produced directly by A24, they only acquired them at Cannes
I think people are basing the “look” on their more popular or mainstream films & shows. F.e. Euphoria & Waves both use rgb lighting for subtext. They use colored lights tell a story even when there’s nothing in the scene that motivates the light. I do agree though that this is not the majority of their films. People just haven’t dug deep enough. Mid 90’s literally looks it was shot on a high end camcorder at best, with no artificial lighting at all.
Mitchell, I know this was a bunch of work, and well done, but the mindless repetition of that insanely bad-boring-energetically offensive music loop finally threw me off the train at 3:18. While your video message is progressing from start to finish, your repetitive music is spinning endlessly in the street, looking for (and not finding) a parking place. If you re-posted this, I’d be all over it.
bro we all know what we mean by a24 look lol creating nuance doesn't add to this discussion, you should just assume it's the whole contrast and coloring excess and talk about that, lol you literally made a pointless video
There is no A24 look. People telling people how to achieve that "look" are just trying to market to the filmmaking audience. A24 is just a distribution company and doesn't have a say a on the look of the film. Thats the director/cinematographer of the films job. A24 usually gives directors a ton of creative freedom on their movies which contributes to the films looking different than most studio system hollywood films.
Yes, exactly
That’s not entirely true. A24 is a production company as well as distribution. And their producers very much have a hand in establishing mood, tone, and overall creation of a project. That’s not to say that they don’t allow their filmmakers room to play, they very much do. But they’re also directly responsible much of the time for who is hired and how they work.
This is a great point that I wished I touched on.
I agree. All A24 movies look like any other movie. If it’s shot well then it’s shot well. Not an A24 trademark.
Sure. But it is possible to identify general trends, even when there is a lot of variation around them. Like there's no universal _"80s film look"_ vs _"90s film look"_ or _"comedy look"_ vs _"drama look"._ But we could pick out some common patterns.
THANK YOU!
It's nice to call out these "influentographers" from time to time. When they do "how to do a24" "How to shoot like Wong Kar Wai" and they do
just a little research and poorely recreate some shots and then make a tutorial for the audience with the same old "so guys, my secret sauce is... BACKLIGHT!"
I think it's pointless and misleading to claim that they "poorly" recreate some shots. Many of these guys do it exceptionally well.
Sweet! Loved the video Mitchell. Digging the perspectives.
Great rant! I watched this partially because when I saw the title, I immediately wanted to say everything you ended up saying. LOL!!!
You probably know, but for those that don't, Zone of interest was shot with hidden cameras so that the actors would be the least aware of their presence. Also bright day light was preferred. There is a great interview with the DOP somewhere that I don't remember, but worth looking for.
Thank you for the perspective, Mitch! A24’s whole appeal is that it (at early stages of their company,) was just buying so much at festival circuits and focusing on the films that resonated with an audience, so inherently they’ve built their own audience by catering to what people find intriguing/provoking/original. I think what people come to associate as the ‘look’ is just more auteur driver work, which is more tonal than visual - on some level, it speaks to an exoticism to a mainstream American audience, where films are expected to ‘look’ a certain way. Humans are creatures of habit, and compartmentalising is a comforting way to process and accept novelty for us. The A24 phenomenon is really a product of aggressive branding on their part, as their direct competitors - NEON, Annapurna, FilmNation - boast a repertoire equally as indie, but don’t market their films as aggressively.
wow! you've done done your homework!) excellent thoughts
yeah! the first thing that comes to my mind about a24 - it's not a particular cinematography style, but overall - just very stylish cinematography.
This is great. I have a scene in this short that I'm making that I tried to do the a24 euphoria lighting. a24 is really making the best stuff now.
I think the moral of the story is, if you think something looks cool, watch the credits and see who did it and see what else they've done.
What people are picturing in their mind's eye when they say the "A24 look" is basically just 2001's Amélie.
I think emulation is GREAT when you're starting and learning the technical ins and outs of produciton. But I totally agree that if your plan is to create an original work and possibly your calling card as a filmmaker, be original. The trick is learning how it's done, but not turning it into your comfort zone.
Nice video! Many filmmakers (and really humans in general) like to try to quantify and categorize what the process and steps are necessary to recreate something that's desirable. While fair, sometimes it could lead a cycle that is not necessarily bad, but not always a great thing as well.
Like you said, it's up to studying the films you like and from conceptualization, to experimentation, and finally to actualization, creating your own look!
A24 look or otherwise known as follow your heart
Finally, someone said this, I thought I was the only one who felt this way about those videos. Usually, I'm on the fence because I love a good pastiche, but it's usually inaccurate and simplified.
Hey man! Just discovered your channel and I really love your content! I’ve been seeing this aspect ratio more often, definitely gonna use it. It gives a really nice result :) I’m trying to start my career as a DP
Well said, sir.
A very insightful review of the "A24-look-trend". I think we can all agree that critical thinking with ones own motivated vision for the scene at hand is the priority - not to emulate, as you said.
Agreed. There's no specific A24 look, if you look at the list of A24 there's a wide range of looks/styles.
Great thoughts, very true
Do you have any recommendations to making an action camera look at cinematic as possible?
I know they're usually for extreme sports and things of that nature, but I'm trying to get the A24 aesthetic out of it. (DJI OSMO ACTION 5 PRO)
So if we're talking just in the filming stage, not colour, grading and stuff - maybe some filters would be useful? And the filter, maybe a black mist filter? Kind of thing
This is actually super interesting., My experience with a lot of action camera stuff is usually splicing it in with the main camera footage, whether it be crash cam stuff or what not.
When it comes to cameras, I would say capture as much information as possible. There isn't anything you can't do if you can get the information. You can make digital look exactly like film if you have captured the information and have the know how to achieve that look in post. With that said, not every camera has the ability to capture the level of information that something like an ARRI can, and here were talking about action cameras. That doesn't mean you are screwed. You just have a smaller canvas which can be hard when trying to paint big pictures.
I don't know the specs of the OSMO, but let's say you have 10 stops of dynamic range (which I think is the most important thing in a camera.). Its going to be a bit harder to get a moody, contrasty shot of someone sitting by a window where you have good light on them while still retaining the info outside. It is very easy on an Alexa 35 with 17 stops of DR because you will see everything inside in the shadows and everything outside. It is already lit. When you only have 10 stops of DR, either the outside is far too bright that it's a clipped white blob, or the inside (and character) is a blob of darkness. You have to find a way to get the light levels closer together so that you can see both, so maybe push light into the room so that its closer to the level of light outside, then add a light to get that shape and directionality of a light coming in the window onto the subject. If you can do that then the camera will have the visual information and you'll be able to push those colors in post whether it be changing the exposure, contrast, etc.
There isn't any magic camera setting. I prefer 172.8/24fps when I shoot. I tend to always lean towards 4300K for anything that involves tungsten lighting at night, and 6000K for sunny exteriors, but that's just my workflow. If your camera has some sort of LOG and you check False Color and exposure, as long as you have the info there it's all going to be lighting.
And looking at something like Zone of Interest where there are many shots that are just high sun exterior, the composition and blocking and choice of where to put the camera/move the camera does miles for making the images "feel" cinematic. If you can't control your lighting, and it isn't looking how you want it to look you can always find some really interesting way to frame the shot or move the camera. What would be a really unique perspective to put the viewer in? With an action camera that becomes very easy. I think a lot of the cinematography we see in these indie films approach the shot with that mentality and it leads to really stand out composition.
TLDR: Not really a magic setting for an OSMO. If you have log, just focus on lighting it well or making the shot sick as fuuuuuuuuuuuu
Couldn't agree more!
wow perfectly said !!!
Love the video Mitchell! Where did you get those metal shelves for gear in the back!?
The shelves are the bror shelves from ikea. I’ve actually been trying to sell two of them if you’re an LA local!
I am in San Diego but good to know. I will check them out. Thanks man!@@mitchellbrinkerdp
"Don't look up a24 look, especially if it is my title. There is no a24 look unless it is uniquely an a24 look".
People searching to figure out how to do the A24 look to find me going, “Hey stop that! Cut it out!”
like others have said in the comments A24's reputation is garnered mostly through aggressive marketing
I have to say I kinda roll my eyes whenever someone attributes a film's quality to the studio themselves cause I'm like really? at the end of the day a24 is only a studio that lets the artists do what they want if they are even producing it themselves, a decent amount of times they just acquire the rights
Like I've seen so many people say "omg A24's done it again" with Aftersun and Zone of Interest when neither of those films were even produced directly by A24, they only acquired them at Cannes
love these videos ✨
I think people are basing the “look” on their more popular or mainstream films & shows. F.e. Euphoria & Waves both use rgb lighting for subtext. They use colored lights tell a story even when there’s nothing in the scene that motivates the light. I do agree though that this is not the majority of their films. People just haven’t dug deep enough. Mid 90’s literally looks it was shot on a high end camcorder at best, with no artificial lighting at all.
great!
Interesting perspective, thanks!
Yup, well said bud
It's definitely not trendy UA-camrs tutorials...
one another i observe that A24 have dense colors
If I see A24 in a UA-cam title again I’m gonna delete both my channels I stg
well said
People are confusing the 'A24' look with the death of cinematography because A24 is the flagbearer of the descent.
There is no A24 look.
Spoiler alert
Mitchell, I know this was a bunch of work, and well done, but the mindless repetition of that insanely bad-boring-energetically offensive music loop finally threw me off the train at 3:18. While your video message is progressing from start to finish, your repetitive music is spinning endlessly in the street, looking for (and not finding) a parking place. If you re-posted this, I’d be all over it.
They look the same to me .
bro we all know what we mean by a24 look lol creating nuance doesn't add to this discussion, you should just assume it's the whole contrast and coloring excess and talk about that, lol you literally made a pointless video
lol this is literally a pointless comment lol lol lol lol
@@SamanthaGarzon04 so is yours
@@KAIZORIANEMPIRE womp womp