Is it me, or does most every production currently airing on Netflix look indistinguishable from one another?
Though some show modest variations in exposure, tone and color, each one seems to have been processed through the same algorithm. Even legacy films that we’re all familiar with exhibit similar qualities. I suspect that HDR tech has something to do with it, but I can’t say to what extent. This trend has been in place for quite some time, so it’s appropriate to take note.
ABC, CBS and NBC have a long history of enforcing proprietary veneers upon their content, but the current Netflix texture – dense shadows, low contrast and separation through color rather than lighting – is in a class by itself. It doesn’t matter if it’s a film or digital origination. A standardizing wash has been thrown over everything. I’m not saying it looks bad. I’m just curious about the thinking behind the uniformity that has been set in place.
At the very least, it serves as a reminder that cinematographers need to pay close attention to the handling of their work right through to the point of delivery. I’ve had my own experiences in which a director and myself signed off on a look at the end of the DI process only have some broadcast engineer twist a knob and destroy everything we’d done just before air time. Of course, the Netflix approach is institutionalized and much more sophisticated than that, but it’s no less concerning.
Any thoughts on this, or am I totally off base?
I’m not so sure that Netflix, or any of the streamers, are applying a wash over the final look of their programs. I put it down more to trends- people (directors, producers, DPs, etc) see what’s popular out there and tend to emulate what they see. Therefore a homogenization of the looks occurs. Trends of dark, barely visible scenes which are made too easily possible with the ‘latest and greatest’ digital technology encourages what I see as storytelling without regard to what the story is saying, just making it look cool or trendy or …
Finally someone has said it.
The Netflix look. One really sees it while serving in a judging panel.
Best,
Peter Wunstorf.
Richard,
You’ve brought up a very interesting subject, and it’s tough to figure out.
I suspect, as you noted that HDR could be a factor.
Having some experience with Netflix, their capture and post speciations for original content can be quite daunting and sometimes constricting.
There are narrow margins for any deviation within those specs.
Subjectively of course, there is much to be be discussed!
Thanks.
I think you are on to something Richard but it’s difficult to pin down. Reminds me of a couple things. Conrad Hall telling me that he was the first Cinematographer to not get fired for having a lens flare in Cool Hand Luke. The Netflix guy at the clubhouse telling us they demanded 4K because the legal department commanded it. Fighting the “No Letterbox “ Mantra of Studios and Networks in the 80s and 90s. People get into power and it takes time to unravel bad decisions.
It seems like “quality control “ has been turned over to the algorithm.
Living in a cinema deprived part of the world, I’ve become more despondent about how much the Streamers are resembling the broadcast networks …. There is such a deluge of ‘product’ the it seems difficult to find an engaging show that entertains and enlightens – let alone looks good!
Last week we traveled up north and saw 3 good films that each looked different and fantastic. MI7 in IMAX 4K Laser projection (10 hr drive – each way!) followed by Barbenheimer in a regular digital multiplex. Seeing three great (and great looking) films in as many days was a treat and reinvigorated my hope for cinema- I’m pretty certain the filmmakers had the ‘last word’ in how those films looked!
I agree there is something to all this that is worth noting. To the above points I’ll add that the ever new tools and capabilities are allowing this “look” or “feeling” of these shows. It seems they keep pushing the envelop to darkness. Is it a chicken and egg situation? The taste of the times or the technology playground, a bit of both. Who knows, but the point is well taken.
Netflix has an outsized influence on the industry. Many producer want their films on Netflix, so they are happy to compromise. I have no experience dealing with Netflix, it’s just a feeling. One recent exception to the “Netflix look”, though is Our Planet II. Wow! Only four episodes this time. Half the size of the first Our Planet.
I just stumbled on this thread again and since I responded last summer. Having re read them (including my somewhat incoherent rambling), I agree with Roberto’s and the other comments about using technology for technology’s sake vs the sake of the story. In retrospect, lately I’m finding Netfix to be fairly consistent with their presentations in comparison to some shows on AppleTV. I think we are in the era of trial and error with the different flavors of HDR….
A blunt quote from Janusz Kamiński:
“When Philippe Rousselot (Dangerous Liaisons) shot dark scenes, he knew what he was doing with China Balls. Now everyone shoots dark, and anybody could have shot it. Pictures are so murky you need to crank up the TV to see it. People think they are artists [by shooting dark] but they are not. They just don’t know how to light.”
Continuing, he adds: “The first thing that drives me crazy is the way they look. Because they’re shooting digitally they’re just lit terribly. I can’t stand the darkness, the bounced light. They all look the same”.
Peter – In so many cases today, Janusz is right on the money!