Revolutionary Road – Lighting a subject in an akward position

[Max A.]

Hello Mr Deakins and all the members of the forum. First of all, I hope you Mr. Deakins, and Mrs. James are well!
I would like to ask you, if it is possible, a question about lighting in this scene of ‘Revolutionary Road’ (Stills attached below).

Probably in the “old forum” that was lost (so sad, I still don’t believe that), this was already discussed (I remember something but I’m not sure), and it seems to me that the scene is primarily lit from the outside ( did you use ultrabounce frames and HMI’s?).
The question is about the light position and angle that you used to reach ‘Frank’ who is looking into the mirror.
In the wide OTS, he has no angle for receiving “daylight” in the face and he has no direct light in the face indeed.
In the medium close-up of him in the mirror, he has a natural side light; my concern, in this case, would be to light him to not result in “fakely lit”. For example, a bounce source into the angle of the room that the right of ‘Frank’ just outside the frame probably brings up the level on his face but I’m afraid that it would result in an obvious light source that seems outside the mood and outside “the story”.

What technique did you use to light the subject placed in an awkward position but at the same time make the lighting look so natural? (I know it was a long time ago)

I apologize for my bad English, I always try to do my best to reduce words and go straight to the main question.
As always I want to thank you for your time and your patience.

I wish you a peaceful day,
Max.

Topic

[Roger Deakins]

Interesting, the discrepancy between the wide and the mid shot. I remember this as a very difficult second floor location and that we rigged large reflectors outside the windows on scissors lifts or cranes – I can’t remember which. I was trying to minimize the risk of sunlight hitting the windows, or the natural daylight changing during our shoot, so that is why I went for bounce sources. I remember I used no additional lighting inside the room so the variation between the two shots is because I must have asked Leo to stand a little further away from the mirror.

I love that we crossed the line between the shots. Another thing I remember doing quite consciously.

[Max A.]

Thank you very much for your reply Mr. Deakins! I think this kind of “discrepancy” in the shots are absolutely normal, only when you break down shot by shot (like me in this case to study for example) you can notice the subtle differences but the audience never saw this kind of light “discontinuity” in my opinion.

As you say, maybe just two feet away from the wall and the mirror can make the difference as the character has a small vertical window on his right side so in that case the light can hit his face and his body.
In these difficult circumstances (second floor, scissor lift-crane-condor) to light and control natural daylight how complex is to “balance” light shot-by-shot?
I mean, to create shapes and form shadows in relationship to the character’s and camera position shot-by-shot, do you ask your electric crew to spot or flood lamps (or maybe rotate the lamp’s heads and angle) to “throw” the light where you want based on the shots? If so, I think in this location’s scenario it would be complex and stressful (in my case, as a Nobody, probably the AD would come to me to ask to be quick and therefore I would have to accept some compromise).

Regarding the line crossing, was it a necessity in order to get the shot of the two characters and the mirror or was it a Narrative choice for the audience and so you asked for the art department to position furniture and mirror right there to obtain this kind of shot?

I apologize for my bad English, I hope the message has a logical thread 😅.

Thank you again for your reply and your availability.

I wish you a peaceful Sunday,
Max.

[Roger Deakins]

The line cross made sense for the composition but the reflection shot of Leo led to the character’s eye lines being ‘correct’.

As I remember it, we lit the set and little changed shot to shot. As you say, sometimes expediency is the best policy.

[Gregg]

Dear Roger,

Just out of interest, for these shots did you decide on the camera position?

Wonderful example of crossing the line…

Much appreciated

Kind regards

Gregg

[Frank]

To me the line cross works because there’s a change in subjectivity between the shots, first you’re seeing him as the girl on the bed sees him, and then you’re seeing him as he sees himself in the mirror. Switching his screen position removes the sense of the girl looking at him and makes it entirely about him looking at himself, a private moment away from her. Their orientation toward each other is also retained in the mirror, the point of focus within the shot, which contributes toward not making it feel disruptive. In both shots she’s still “to his left” on a 2D plane.

[Roger Deakins]

Exactly!

The shots in Rev Road were always worked out between Sam and I after a blocking rehearsal. Always after Sam had finished his morning rehearsal.

[Max A.]

Exciting narrative key and brilliant shifting of point of view in the visual language.

Thank you very much for explaining Mr. Deakins, and thank you Frank for your interpretation.

I wish you a peaceful day.
I always learn from this fantastic forum.
Max.

[Author]

Replies