-
Search Results
-
Perhaps a no brainer question but as someone growing up using DSLR cameras with smaller sensors than full frame I was wondering what’s the “standard” when referring to focal lengths. In the podcast and even interviews Roger refers to different focal lengths and how they might affect the experience of the viewer. This is always referring to the focal length as experienced on a full frame sensor?
On DSLR’s and even the Alexa Mini the sensors are Super 35 or smaller which comes with a crop factor so it doesn’t really translate. A 35mm lens on a Full Frame camera is around 27,5mm on a Super 35. So basically when you hear Roger or other cinematographers talking about lens choice, is it always referring to the lens in relation to a full frame camera?
In reply to: Lighting Distance Formulas
The general consensus is –
Buy a light, a diffuser, a reflector and play around with it for a few years (or days) and, you’ll get the hang of it.
The alternative is to hire a gaffer with said above experience (preferable to young cinematographers).
The alternative is to give high-school geometry another crack – your understanding of a camera, power and so forth is far greater in complexity than most of the equations applicable.
It’s just taking the time, maybe downloading python, and exploring that aspect of it. In my head that’s the only alternative to real world practice. Equations are useful as you build them you learn and see patterns in light propagation. Therefore on-set you can make judgement calls just based of that knowing – you don’t need to whip out the calculator unless the time to rig and test greatly outweighs the 10-30 minutes it’d take to calculate it.
G
Infinityvision.tv
Gabriel Devereux - EngineerIn reply to: Lighting Distance Formulas
Here is the calculator I wrote on the subject
I’d recommend having a bit of a read on a few other topics in this forum.
I find you can assume most laws of light with a firm understanding of the inverse square, basic geometry and a few orthogonal laws (lamberts cosine). As you introduce different levels of reflectivity and specularity of reflectors (very non-Lambertian), it gets increasingly more challenging – silver stipple and gold stipple being an ultimate pain, but typical soft reflectors – Ultrabounce, Muslin falls into the realm of Lambertian-‘enough’ and Mirrors fall into the world of the exact opposite (just basic geometry).
Re-Inverse Square Law, it’s a statement of proportionality, not absolute magnitude. By that, I mean the whole double the distance half the output is an assumption that the energy distribution is proportionate to the above ratio. In optical far-field and such, the above statement applies. Still, people’s common misconception about Fresnels, Ellipsoidal Spots and Lasers and that they don’t conform to the inverse square is untrue.
However, one thing I will say. As an industry, a craft, we have somewhat limited our technical understanding of what we do, using the subjectivity and preference of the term. Some say some aspects of light calculation are impossible, and so forth.
That’s just all categorically untrue. It’s just that the education around our industry doesn’t represent this. EMF calculations exist for RF propagation, and the same laws apply.
As an example of my rant – we say one camera has a ‘superior’ colour science to another while not understanding the fundamentals that all are an approximation of an HVS response. A manufacturer takes artistic liberty in its CMF OETF. The Alexa doesn’t have ‘superior’ colour science to another; it just looks nicer, it may have spectral primaries that are more indicative of its look concerning RED Monstro spectral primaries, but one can achieve the same result – blah, blah.
Infinityvision.tv
Gabriel Devereux - EngineerIn reply to: Do you use post stabilization?
In reply to: Empire of Light @ Rio de Janeiro
Hello Team Deakins,
Rio de Janeiro International Film Festival just announced “Empire of Light” as its opening film.
Even though the session will most likely be for guests only, I was wondering if you guys would be in town for promotion, interviews… Hoping so!
Best Regards.
In reply to: Forum Problem
Thankyou James,
I am so relieved it didn’t crash so it should be fully recoverable within time.
I imagined poor Robert operating the computer wearing his snorkel and mask! Even so conditions in Florida look really bad with 23 deaths, floods and devastation everywhere even highways are closed, communications cut.
Hope Robert and his family are safe and well.
In reply to: New Forum
I do believe I also had a post in Stills Section – that had photos – it successfully posted, but now doesn’t show up. Perhaps this is what you mentioned in an earlier post about requiring approval?
Thanks for your hard work James! I know this must be a mad scramble. But it’s Greatly Appreciated.
In reply to: Welcome to the new Lighting Forum
First off I wanted to thank you both for graciously staying two hours late at your recent book signing in Santa Monica to speak to those of us at the very back of the line.
As a gaffer I would say my biggest lighting challenge to date was a short film that was a 9 minute oner with 8 lighting cues I had to trigger via DMX. The stage was a white cyc with a very nice built in softbox using litetile and magic cloth already wired for DMX.
However, as you likely know the issue with fading up most any LED fixture is that the jump from 0-1% is quite noticeable so I had to hide the moments fading up from black within the steadicam moves. I thought I had my timing with the fades dialed after a few flawless takes until the actors changed some minor blocking which I had been using to anticipate the camera tilting up so I was a second late on fading up the softbox. The director didn’t even notice but I was bummed as they wanted to use that take potentially. Thankfully we got 6-7 takes with no issues. It was stressful but a fun challenge.
However, my most frequent lighting challenge is the small white box of a location. People often don’t understand how essential production design is to the image.
Dear Roger,
I am specifically wondering about 1917, and whether you used digital stabilizing in post to remove or reduce the movement of, say, the trinity rig. I notice that a lot of the time that movement–the slight swaying that you often see with steadicams–is present, where some directors really don’t like that and try to remove it in post. Did you ever use software to create a smoother shot in 1917 or any of your other films or was it all accomplished 100% in camera?
In reply to: New Forum
In reply to: Camera Starter Question
Using a modern zoom lens is more convenient and certainly much faster imo.
These new zooms now available are quite exceptional with their light weight barrels and extremely fast glass are now in more demand than ever.
Rental houses are selling off many of their primes and buying these smaller zooms as the market is now adapting to the influx of younger DPs who demand smaller and lighter equipment.Mike
In reply to: New Forum
In reply to: Andrew Dominik ‘Blonde’
I forgot to write something. There are some point of view shots in this movie. particularly while she’s having abortions. There is vagina pov. I’m still not sure if this is meant to represent the point of view anything. I don’t think it’s necessary shots.
I would like to see Rogerdeakins version ‘Blodne’. But it’s not possible!. I am sure your version will be very unique and good. If you were shot on blonde i am pretty sure there is no more pov unwanted shots. You have to watch’Blonde’
In reply to: Andrew Dominik ‘Blonde’
Yes I did watched ‘blonde’. Its very sentimental and humanness movie. But the screenplay getting bored at some point. At first I was not familiar with Marilyn Monroe’s life. I never thought that Marilyn Monroe’s film career would be filled with so much sadness. If I knew Marlin Monroe biopic fully then may be i enjoyed the entire film. I would like to discuss with you generally about the film cinematography. The story happen around with Marlin Monroe. But the filmmakers didn’t shot her perspective the film much. Generally when we going to do biopic what kind of things must consider and what things don’t consider. There are some wide angle and body rig shots in this movie. I would like to ask your opinion about wide lenses used and body rigs shots after you watched. I felt one thing. If I am wrong please teach me. The movie should be shot on Marlin monroe perspective. For instance ‘Happening’ french film. Would you agree?
CBE, ASC, BSC
