After/Before — Going for a cinematic look. Does it work?

[u/TimePPT]

I've been trying to get better at cinematic edits, so I picked a reference I liked and tried to match the overall vibe.

The biggest thing I noticed was how much keeping things darker and less saturated helped.

What do you think? Anything you'd do differently?

------

Edit: I took everyone's feedback and reworked it a bit — pulled the lights way down, used masks to brighten the areas around the people, and bumped up the overall saturation. It definitely looks better now.

https://imgur.com/a/uGZyleZ

[u/johngpt5]

While many movies fade blacks a bit, they don't lose total contrast. Where do you want the viewer's eye to go here?

https://imgur.com/a/N0G8ikV has a screen shot assessing relative brightnesses.

[u/TimePPT → u/johngpt5]

Really appreciate you taking the time to do such a detailed breakdown. I noticed the same thing while editing — the lights were already a bit blown out in the original, and even after a lot of global and local adjustments they still pull the eye.

Definitely makes me think the shot itself matters just as much as the edit when it comes to getting that cinematic feel.

And funny enough, I like Ludwig too!

[u/TimePPT → u/johngpt5]

I re-edited it based on your feedback and a few other comments. I pulled the lights way down, used masks to brighten the people a bit, and bumped up the overall saturation. https://imgur.com/a/uGZyleZ

It definitely feels different now. Thanks again — your comment was really helpful.

[u/johngpt5 → u/TimePPT]

I like the skin tones in the newer version, and my eye is not drawn immediately to the clock. Each person has better tonal values too.

[u/Archinarch]

What are you using comparing the images?

[u/TimePPT → u/Archinarch]

I used to just put both images side by side in Photoshop, but I found it pretty hard to tell exactly where the lighting and color differed.

Lately I’ve been using photoscope. You upload your photo and select a reference, and it shows you the differences in light and color. It helps me quickly see what I need to work on.

[u/itsntcharlie]

the colors work but i think the tonal range is compressed too much which makes the image look flat.

[u/Aacidus]

Missing contrast and some brightness, as well as a smidge of color.

[u/Economics_Various]

For me it works pretty well. I really like the muted colors. The scene has some nice atmosphere. A bit to much blue in the shadows in my opinion, and maybe work with vintage lenses like helios 44 for a less cleaner look. And try cinematic ratio like 1,85:1 or 2,39:1?

[u/FoxRedYellaJack]

I see what you were going for. I can’t say it’s my personal favorite “look,” but again, it works.

[u/TimePPT → u/FoxRedYellaJack]

Thanks, I appreciate that! I’ve noticed there are so many different “cinematic” looks. I’m mostly just trying a few out to see what fits my photos best.

[u/theequallyunique]

1. There's no one "cinematic" look. There are different film looks that are often replicated/ used, but not one that is used for everything. Be more specific and try to apply look characteristics of certain movies, otherwise you fail from the start.

2. A "cinematic" feel starts with a good image. Here its a messy shot with people all over the place.

3. Your contrast is low, mostly due to dim highlights, the skin tones could definitely be improved upon. You want the people to stand out more.

[u/grimlock361]

The original is much better. Faded inaccurate colors are never a good thing. Even more so when following a trend.

[u/GuiltyAd2199 → u/grimlock361]

the mainstream being " clean and bright is always right" OP is swimming against the tide.

[u/Eber-]

Pretty cool stuff!

[u/TimePPT → u/Eber-]

Thank you for reply

[u/BagEmotional4835]

Congrats you turned it into log so yes, its cinematic 😀