Dating TV and Movies Simply by Sight

[Kavik]

I can usually guess within a two year range when a TV show or movie was made simply by the film or video texture (? not sure the word for it), even without the aid of seeing cars or hairstyles; although, those can help narrow it down when in doubt. The quality of audio can help also. 

This just struck me as something neat. I presume most people can do this, but I have friends who see things from the '90s and think they are from the '80s or vise versa, which are rather distinct to me.

Are you able to do this with reasonable accuracy?

Also, is it weird to anyone else that TV from 2007 and 2008 is starting to look old now?

[tp4tissue]

I couldn't do that , certainly not for movies before 2000. 

It'll also skew depending on what version you watch also,  if you watch a Bluray or even 4K UHD version of an old movie, You'd think it's newer than it was, because they go in and do digital cleanup and color-grade.  There would be colors that did not exist in the older versions, and of course the contrast was never possible on older presentation formats.

[pixelpusher]

I can usually guess within a two year range when a TV show or movie was made simply by the film or video texture (? not sure the word for it), even without the aid of seeing cars or hairstyles; although, those can help narrow it down when in doubt. The quality of audio can help also. 

This just struck me as something neat. I presume most people can do this, but I have friends who see things from the '90s and think they are from the '80s or vise versa, which are rather distinct to me.

Are you able to do this with reasonable accuracy?

Also, is it weird to anyone else that TV from 2007 and 2008 is starting to look old now?

Was watching some old episodes of It's Always Sunny in Philidelphia and I was shocked how old it looked. 

[Darthbaggins]

It's easier to tell within Animation series, well I should say on the US based side.

[Kavik]

I couldn't do that , certainly not for movies before 2000. 

It'll also skew depending on what version you watch also,  if you watch a Bluray or even 4K UHD version of an old movie, You'd think it's newer than it was, because they go in and do digital cleanup and color-grade.  There would be colors that did not exist in the older versions, and of course the contrast was never possible on older presentation formats.

Oh, that's a really good point. I hadn't considered remastered editions.

I can usually guess within a two year range when a TV show or movie was made simply by the film or video texture (? not sure the word for it), even without the aid of seeing cars or hairstyles; although, those can help narrow it down when in doubt. The quality of audio can help also. 

This just struck me as something neat. I presume most people can do this, but I have friends who see things from the '90s and think they are from the '80s or vise versa, which are rather distinct to me.

Are you able to do this with reasonable accuracy?

Also, is it weird to anyone else that TV from 2007 and 2008 is starting to look old now?

Was watching some old episodes of It's Always Sunny in Philidelphia and I was shocked how old it looked. 

I always want to watch that show but can never find it. I may just have to arg, matey. I saw a clip from some dumb reality show from 2007 a while back and it blew me away. Watching the first season or two of The Office or Scrubs produces a similar effect.

[noisyturtle]

I think it's much much more difficult to do this with modern films, especially from the last decade. People are filming **** on Super 8 and 8mm grainy old film, using hipster microphones that some transatlantic snakoil salesman used to announce Preakness Races during the Roaring '20s and ****. The '70s gonzo vibe has made a huge return in modern horror and some films it's difficult to even tell when it was made because they do such a great job with the details. Just watched Berberian Sound Studio last night and I think if I hadn't known it could have been filmed in the '70s and remastered.

[Leslieann]

While it's possible to do to an extent it can't be done down to a year or two just based on the film, color and audio, you need other factors. Combine those with filming methods, genre and other things it can be narrowed further without looking a clothing music and vehicles. You have the right idea, just not enough factors and only because the technology didn't/doesn't move quite that fast.  If nothing else, CGI will date a movie quicker than anything.

I agree with Noisyturtle as well, more modern stuff is a bit more difficult to nail down however you can usually find something to give it away. Too much clarity, for example in his example the use old old microphones, sure it sounds old, but it was processed through modern equipment and if you listen long enough you'll pick up on ques that it just isn't actually very old. It's too good and too consistent and consistently bad in repetition, for example static starts sounding too consistent, film grain looks too consistent or clean however you wouldn't really catch some of that without looking for it.

Unfortunately once you start seeing some of this, you can't miss it. I can't miss hearing a Wilhelm scream, which has definitely jumped the shark or being able to easily spot Adobe CGI fire. Not every film has a big budget, but when you see a big budget film use it and not properly color match to the scene it makes me start looking for other budget cuts. These days there's movies I won't even bother with because just from a quick preview, and sometimes just looking at who made it and stars in it, I know they spent 90% of their budget on one actor to carry it. Bohemian Rhapsody (the movie) was a great example of this, the story was HORRIBLE, the CGI was even worse.

[Kavik]

While it's possible to do to an extent it can't be done down to a year or two just based on the film, color and audio, you need other factors. Combine those with filming methods, genre and other things it can be narrowed further without looking a clothing music and vehicles. You have the right idea, just not enough factors and only because the technology didn't/doesn't move quite that fast.  If nothing else, CGI will date a movie quicker than anything.

I agree with Noisyturtle as well, more modern stuff is a bit more difficult to nail down however you can usually find something to give it away. Too much clarity, for example in his example the use old old microphones, sure it sounds old, but it was processed through modern equipment and if you listen long enough you'll pick up on ques that it just isn't actually very old. It's too good and too consistent and consistently bad in repetition, for example static starts sounding too consistent, film grain looks too consistent or clean however you wouldn't really catch some of that without looking for it.

Unfortunately once you start seeing some of this, you can't miss it. I can't miss hearing a Wilhelm scream, which has definitely jumped the shark or being able to easily spot Adobe CGI fire. Not every film has a big budget, but when you see a big budget film use it and not properly color match to the scene it makes me start looking for other budget cuts. These days there's movies I won't even bother with because just from a quick preview, and sometimes just looking at who made it and stars in it, I know they spent 90% of their budget on one actor to carry it. Bohemian Rhapsody (the movie) was a great example of this, the story was HORRIBLE, the CGI was even worse.

You are probably right. Other factors probably help me without my realizing it. With just the film alone, it's may be closer to 5-7 year range.

Regarding new films imitating old styles accurately, this is what I think is neat about this idea. The differences are very subtle, but we pick up on them even if we can't articulate what it is that's off. And it's all man-made stuff specific to one era, i.e., it's not something about nature that we are programmed to notice (outside of general pattern recognition). I suppose that makes it all the more impressive when someone pulls it off.