Search Results for 'no'

[orsini1138]

Hi there Roger, love the podcast and really appreciate the forums, thanks for everything.

Reading through the ‘looking at lighting’ for Empire of Light, you write that for the boardwalk scene at night, you installed some light fixtures and set the nearest lamp to a cool temp whereas the rest, as well as the building in the distance/back of the shot, are all warm. I’m curious why this was, and I’m guessing it was probably instinctual. But was there a purpose? What I came to was that it keeps the shot from being entirely darkness and warm tones, it puts a subtle variety of colors into the frame, but again- very curious to know what you thought. Thanks to anyone who answers!

[Abraham]

Hello everyone,

Today, writer, director, and actor Sarah Polley joins us on the latest episode of the Team Deakins Podcast. You likely know her from her work on films such as WOMEN TALKING and THE SWEET HEREAFTER.

Please feel free to discuss the episode with each other below!

[HHFischer]

Hi all,

I’m a young DP and I’ve recently made some connections in the commercial world and wanted to get some advice on returning to the basics, so here’s something I’ve always struggled with a bit. How do you get that bright white high-key look? I see it constantly in commercials and comedies and don’t feel I’ve ever gotten it 100% right.

So my first issue is how do I get a source to look totally invisible? I try to make my source as large as possible but this is only so effective in small spaces. In this past project, (We were in a very tight room, maybe 4m x 8m) I sent an Aputure 1200d through 216 (we needed a big light to balance out an open door) then bounced off the corner of the far wall/ceiling. I still ended up with a pretty visible shadow on the shelves behind my talent. So I tried filling with another hard source bounced off the ceiling closer to the subject and this helped but it still didn’t get to a nice even fill around the space. I placed a tube up high behind the subjects, again bouncing off the ceiling and again this helped but wasn’t enough to push enough light to fill in the subject. When we turned around I had to add a fourth light bouncing off the ceiling in the exact direction of talent’s face to fill in a shadow left by the other three. This feels like just blindly throwing up lights and made for a lot of dancing the frame around to avoid them all.

So now I know what kinda works but isn’t clean at all and only gets 60-70% of the way. So, what’s the formula? What do I need to put in my rental package? Is the secret lots of strong lights? If so panel lights or hard sources (open face/lensed)? What kinds of bounce/diffusion are you using? How deep focus do those of you who shoot comedy/commercials typically look for when lighting like this since I think that’s another essential part of the look? How are you balancing out windows or doors with direct or indirect sunlight?

I know that that is a plethora of questions, but I’m looking for some true mastery of the basics as I’m looking to move up/branch out and my typical style for narrative has been very contrasty and directional. Thank you in advance!

[bradvir]

Appreciate your response Mr. Mullen! I think velcro definitely would be a good option.

For anyone wondering, these hooks  (https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B09PFW8WRQ/ref=ppx_yo_dt_b_asin_title_o02_s00?ie=UTF8&psc=1) worked incredibly well with the Astera eyebolts and were hardly noticeable with the lights out of focus in the background. The nice thing about rigging from the eyebolts was that I could easily rotate the lights to aim them as needed.

[Stip]

I think in the situations you describe, key is what you said, to discuss more dramatic changes in exposure with the director and/or DP. Because sometimes things are really intended not to be seen. I had this issue a few times, where the colorist pushed the (low-key) image so that the viewer could better see what’s happening. But the intended purpose was to force the viewer to guess, not see, which was much more powerful.

[Fedor Dokuchaev – Colorist]

This is a very interesting topic. I do not think that adjusting exposure to the middle gray is a necessary step in the pipeline. I work in DaVinci Resolve.

If I work with different cameras, I convert them to DaVinci Wide Gamut / Davinci Intermediate, so middle gray of each Log is correctly remapped.

That said, I do change exposure and sometimes rather dramatically – but only after I discuss this change with the director. It happens with student films a lot, because students sometimes try to create all look in-camera and do not do it correctly.

Recently I had a film with heavily underexposed dark scenes and overexposed bright ones. I had to use noise reduction and change exposure rather dramatically, so the viewers can just see and understand what is happening in the first minutes. If these scenes were shot with correct exposure, I could have easily lower exposure in post, getting clean looking shadows and a lot of details.

The second reason for changing exposure in post is look creation. Usually look for the film is built around middle gray or midtones. We keep healthy contrast in midtones and add roll-offs and split toning in the highs and the lows of the image.

So, if an image is overexposed and is pushed in the highs, color contrast of the look dissapears. To avoid that, I sometimes increase contrast of the image by using Lift, so some part of it ended up in the lower region. And changing exposure also helps with getting the image “look-ready”.

[halfgrain]

I know this is a super late response, but have you checked out music videos? I think this is a genre where you might find more simple and cheaper lighting setups as well as maybe more bts footage. Just my guess…

[Abraham]

Hello everyone,

This week’s episode of the podcast features writer and director Santiago Mitre. His latest film, ARGENTINA, 1985, was recently nominated for the Best International Feature Film Oscar.

Please feel free to discuss the episode with each other below after it releases!

[dmullenasc]

There are no standards or rules for focal lengths for establishing wide shots or master shots. If you are outdoors in open space, you can pick the focal length based on the expansion/compression effect you want on objects and the working distance / subject size you want, and the affect on motion, whether lateral or forward/reverse.

Indoors, there may be space restrictions that keep you from using longer focal lengths to create a wide shot, if that’s what you wanted to do. Kurosawa, for example, liked longer lenses so would design the set, whether on stage or on location, to have a removable wall to allow him to back up the camera.

If you are shooting an interior movie on location, you might want to scout with a lens app to figure out what focal lengths you can use to get wide shots and work from there, maybe that gets incorporated into the style of the film if you have to work in smallish rooms in the 18mm to 35mm range (in Super-35) for most wide to medium shots.

[Abraham]

Hi everyone,

Earlier this week, we released the latest episode of the Team Deakins Podcast featuring actor Paul Mescal of AFTERSUN and NORMAL PEOPLE fame.

Please feel free to discuss the episode with each other below!

[quijotesco24]

I’ve never understood how someone can read anything, a script or a novel, and not visualise it in their minds. I think visualisation is inherent to any human when we read, so, imagine someone who has devoted his/her life to create images!

I think the lesson here is not to not visualise but to not force any preconceived ideas when you read something, at least, be open to other interpretations, mix your own visualisation with others’, a film is a creative process by a bunch of people so create it together.

Even if I heard it before few times I always find hard to believe DPs come to director meetings without a visualisation after they have read the script. One thing is to have a visualisation and not force it or try to sell it right away and the other is not having one at all. Actually if you as the DP have been invited to the meeting is because someone thought your visualisation of the script is somehow worth to listen, so have one.

This goes hand in hand with some previous discussions here about each person own style and work methods. You, whatever like it or not, have one and if you are there is because of it.

[dmullenasc]

I think the trick for most cinematographers is actually to NOT visualize a script while reading it for the first time!

[Stip]

He answers most (or maybe all?) of these questions in the latest Q&A video on their YouTube channel, e.g. he does not visualize much of a script before having talked to the director about his/her vision.

[rama lingam]

Thank you Roger. I have watched ‘Laura’ couple of weeks ago. Laura lensing seems wide lenses. But I don’t know what focal length they used. I like the way the camera moves very reasonable. What’s your opinion about that film.

[Roger Deakins]

I don’t remember saying that. I like using wide’ish lenses when I want to be close to a character and if the story is primarily from one character’s point of view, but by wide I am not generally talking about anything as wide as used in ‘Touch of Evil’, for example. Which was a great use of wide lenses BTW.