Front lit shots – how to deal with

[Max A.]

Hello Mr Deakins and all the forum members. As always, first of all, I hope you Mr. Deakins, and Mrs. James are well.
If possible, I would like to ask you (Mr. Deakins but also everyone who wants to join in this topic) a question about your approach to “front-lit shots”.

As a layman, I believe that in the photographic imagination of a cinematographer, these are (along with narrow spaces with white walls) a tough nut to crack, and when possible, in my not numerous experiences, I always tried and try to avoid them by suggesting a staging to the director ( in relationship with the camera) that stays away from this type of shot.
But in the narrative world sometimes we can’t “escape” from these shots, and sometimes, these are essential to tell the story with the image.

My main “concerns” with these kinds of shots are:

1. Creating the “right” shapes and contrast between foreground and background and balancing light to avoid being totally flat (obviously depends on the visual result we are after)

2. casting the shadow of the camera and operator on subjects, especially when a dolly-in movement is involved.

Starting from the assumption that there is never just one formula, I would like to ask you how your approach to these shots, I attach some examples below that I found in some movies that you shot that seem to me to be “natural” but also “shaped” and of course without moving shadows on subjects.

In a very low-budget feature film that I shot 2 years ago, I faced a front-lit shot, I basically tried to shape the image with diffusion frames and negative fill, but I was not very happy with the result (as always).

As always I want to thank you for your time and your availability. I hope to learn another lesson from this topic.
I apologize for my bad English.

I wish you a peaceful day.
Max.

Ps. I will add a reply to the topic with other stills cause the forum can’t allow me to upload more than 2 images.

Topic

[Max A.]

[BHGoddard]

Hi Max,

I can offer a few suggestions but I don’t know how insightful they’ll be;

The first is to angle your light higher than your subject in relation to the camera. A lot of the frames you’ve shared have Roger’s camera placement at eye level or below the actor, with what seems like the light being situated above both (if only slightly). Having the light above the camera will also eliminate the issue of shadows caused by the camera, but a really soft source helps negate it as well. Although a lot of cinematography nowadays tend to avoid front lighting subjects because of the flatness that can result, this lighting setup is used a lot for “beauty” lighting as it can offer pleasing shadows on the face, albeit in a more commercial/stylized way, if that’s something you’re going for.

The second suggestion is to place your subject further from the background – this adds three dimensionality to the frame as you can see from Roger’s examples where there is a space that recedes behind the actors but it also adds separation between the intensity of the light on the actor and it’s falloff onto the background, increasing the contrast ratio and making the focus of the frame very clear.

Related to that is the choice of the size of your light source which is dependent on what is motivating said source (all of these frames seem to be light from windows) and spatial restrictions; a smaller light closer to your subject will have more abrupt falloff and add more “shape” to the contours of the face  (an actor holding a candle as an example) while a larger source further away (in the case of a window) will diminish those features but feel more natural, and additionally a window frame naturally cuts the light coming through it, offering a little bit of control over the spill and shape of the light (sheers/curtains are a quick and easier way to modulate that).

 

[Max A.]

Hello BH Goddard!

Thank you very much for your reply, I love dialogue and confrontation so your reply makes much sense to me.

Thank you for your explanation, I agree with all of your points, very interesting.

If I can add a thought, camera height and position should depend on the story and the narrative point we would like to achieve, but probably sometimes technical (and spacial) reasons can beat this to achieve a shot “photographically right”.

Thank you again for your suggestions!
Apologize for my bad English.

Have a nice Sunday.
Max.

[BHGoddard]

Of course!

I agree completely, and I think that goes without saying – I didn’t want to imply the opposite, I was just pointing out the commonality in the references you pulled.

Nonetheless it does touch on the idea that if you find yourself lighting an actor for a scene and you aren’t aesthetically happy with the frame, but the staging and lighting is what’s right for the story, there are subtle ways to cheat the position of the light to give slightly more dimension while still convincing the viewer of where the source is being motivated from.

Cheers Max.

[Max A.]

Of course, mine was just a shared thought, I was reflecting on the fact that sometimes perhaps the technical aspects can guide the staging and the positions of the characters and, in some way, deliver a certain narrative point to the audience.

Your suggestions and advice are very relevant and I hope to be able to bring them out at the right time, when I am dealing with a situation similar to the one described in the post 😁.

Thanks again for your response and advice BH Goddard.

I wish you a peaceful day
Max.

[Roger Deakins]

Yes, when dealing with front light it is crucial top consider what fall-off you are looking for. Do you want the background to fall into shadow or for teh shot to be evenly lit from front to back?

[Author]

Replies