Forum Replies Created
-
Replies
-
Hopefully, I’m not putting words in his mouth by saying this. I recall a podcast where he explained that he shot an entire film with filtration and regretted it.
Also, in the “old” forum, there was a great discussion where David ( @dmullenasc ) and Roger talked about filters. I think it’s safe to say Roger is willing to use filters but highly selective about it.
In the “Looking at lighting” section of the site (Members > Looking At Lighting), Roger breaks down scenes from ‘BR 2049’. He mentions filters, what he selected, why, etc.
Since we’re talking about how still photography concepts compare to filmmaking, is there a rule like the Sunny 16 rule for how powerful a light you need in more common filmmaking scenarios indoors and outdoors?
For example, let’s say I’m shooting 35mm stills. If I walk outside on a sunny, cloudless day, I’ll probably want to overexpose by two stops for a backlit portrait. What’s our rule of thumb for the power in watts that I’d need to fill in an actor’s face in that same scenario?
We tried shooting some test scenes with a lone actress outdoors at golden hour with an Aputure P60c (60-watt) LED panel. I had no idea how much power we would need because I’d never done it before. We had zero budget, so we tried the most affordable, portable rental option possible. I learned that power was not enough for what we were trying to accomplish.
That same P60c was perfect later that night when we tried filming a test scene backlit by street lights and shops but poorly lit from the front.
Do you get to a point where you can “intuit” the minimum amount of light power you’d need to handle a given scene? Or do you math it out or test it most of the time?
