Forum Replies Created
-
Replies
-
Fantastic discussion between two giants of Cinematography. In my dreams, I would like to talk every day for 24 hours with people like you who have so many things to share and learn from.
It was really interesting the comparison that Mr. Lachman made about the differences of color contamination between Analog and Digital.
I wish you a peaceful day.❤
Max.
Hello Benja and Mr. Deakins, I wonder If I can ask you some other questions about this shot.
Specifically, I would like to ask you if these kinds of shots (like glass reflections) are something storyboarded in pre-production or something that comes from you (or maybe from Sam Mendes on this movie) on the day during the shooting of a scene.
In my poor experience, I’m a very meticulous guy about pre-production and shot-list but on set sometimes things call my attention in framing so with the script “in mind” I let some inspiration come to life and present those to the director.
I write this because this kind of shot, since you don’t light it with an artificial point source, is something that I think has to be planned to have the sun in that specific position to create this kind of quality in her face but also in the building behind.
Even if I think it is a noon light, this is something that (if storyboarded and planned) has a little window of time to set up and shoot, considering also the other shots of the scene (since it is not a single shot like part of a montage but the end of a previous scene), so in a quite big set with great actors, etc. this can sound “scary” for a cinematographer to miss the moment.I apologize for my bad English. I wish you a nice day.
Max.Thank you so much even just for taking the time to read the various points of the question Mr.Deakins! I really apologize, I actually got too carried away with the curiosities related to this sequence that I adore.
Your light “cheating”, in my opinion, is brilliantly embedded in the story. The viewer will never be able to perceive the changes because they are all micro changes brilliantly connected to the mood of the scene (the most difficult thing in my opinion), so those changes are essential for lighting characters and only if we analyze and study cut by cut the lighting (angle-pattern etc.) we can see those and admire how brilliantly are matched in the whole sequence.
As I said in another topic some days ago, the difficult thing is to cheat but maintain the mood of the scene, the sequence, and even the whole movie in a set that runs fast and sometimes can be very distracting and put a lot of pressure.
At home, in front of my/our pc’s, it seems “easy” to think about an inch more left or right, but I think it is not easy on the day (especially at the end of a day when tiredness is very present).Now is the time to stop to write for me 😁
Thank you very very much again Mr. Deakins.
I wish you a peaceful day.
Max.Last part of questions (I cut some questions otherwise it would have been incredibly too much, but the curiosity is really great).
For the medium and close-ups, do you maintain the same positions of the characters where they stay in the “wide” or did you cheat by moving to another nearby spot? I do this question because it seems to me that Josh Brolin’s character does not have so much space behind him (since the two are in a sort of trench) but when the camera is looking at him he seems to have more space behind him. The background is brilliantly dimly lit on the top to create depth and pattern (probably with a fresnel lamp as I see a “hot spot” in the center and warm soft fall-off around).
In her close-up, I better “see” the two gold bounce sources in the reflections of her eyes. I suppose those bounce sources lit also the rocks behind her (I love the fall-off along the rock line).
The car is greatly placed to create a dark area in the middle top but also highlights in the headlamps and back-side (probably hitting by a small lamp), together with the light on the far rock wall is pure art of photography (composition and lighting) in my opinion.
I really apologize for this amount of long questions, since it was a long time since I didn’t write in the forum I really wanted to study and analyze this incredible sequence once it comes out on the forum topic😁
I want to thank you in advance for your availability and your time. But over everything I want to thank you for your art and experience that always triggers me and (I think all of us) to study and admire your incredible works.
I apologize for my bad English which can make questions less clear.
I wish you a peaceful day.
Max.2) For this Wide shot that “prepares” the audience for the close-ups dialogue (the one in the first question of the topic), I love the alternation of lights and shadows from the background to the foreground of course, that light that “wash” the foreground come from right frame (in the close-ups there is a little cheat of angle) and has a different color temperature (warmer and brown-ish, probably you achieved it dimming the tungsten lamp/s) that give depth to the shot in my opinion.
Is that light achieved with the same 2 gold bounce that you mentioned to use for the close-ups?
For her medium Close Up, I suppose you move the bounce sources a bit closer and angle those to 45° to see the highlights in “her eyes” and have depth.
What I notice is that, as you often mention, is like the “farthest” bounce source is more “directional” to better shape the facial feature and the closest is more “soft” to gently wrap her and go into the shadows gradually (but probably is just one 4×4 bounce and I’m overthinking).
I apologize for my bad English and for the long questions, the next reply will be the last of the series. Thank you very much for your patience.
Hello Mr. Deakins and Au, if I can ask more questions on this topic and analyze this night sequence with you Mr. Deakins, and all the people on this fantastic forum I would like to understand some processes about these dark night shots that always amaze me in terms of lighting results.
I can’t write and attach everything in one reply (I don’t know why the website doesn’t allow me to do this) so I try to do my best to compress words and replies.
Of course, if these questions will bore you Mr. Deakins I apologize and totally understand if you don’t answer.If I remember well (but unfortunately I can’t find the topic where you Mr. Deakins talk about it), for the wide shots you used tungsten lamps to “argument” the headlights of the cars, this can seem “easy” to say but the placement and the “patterns” of light and shadows that you achieve are outstanding in my opinion.
I attach some frames to show the reference for the question better.1) In this wide shot (Dolly-In) characters walk toward the camera, into the background there is a “strong” light hitting the rocks (with moving casting shadow that I love), on the characters, there is a soft directional side light that reaches faces and body, but when they come in the foreground and the camera pan to compose the group shot there is nothing (I maybe think that there is some 8X8 bounce) over the cars to light those.
Another amazing thing (in my opinion) is that cars are perfectly in the darkness, so the light doesn’t come from there (I guess). At this point, I can only suppose that the light is the result of the ground sand bounce of the “big” light that hit the background rocks. Am I right about this, or is there another process behind it?
Ps. I love the fact that you and the director positioned the cars in a way you can “always” argument the headlights for every shot even when the camera looks in another direction.
*, unfortunately, I can’t edit the post, I wanted to mean ‘sweat’ and not ‘swear’.
Thank you for your reply Mr. Mullen, it’s interesting this kind of tip. Of course, a big framing change can help to “cheat” the light. As I said, my “fear” is always to add something that “destroys” the original mood of the scene (as a light that can wash a wall that before was dimly lit), and of course often (this happened to me in my little experience) the “set” is more “impatient” when you are moving things inside a scene shot by shot. Is like the AD or Producer wants just to move the camera and “let’s start rolling”..
In my “vision” (if I can really talk about a vision, as I consider myself a Mr. nobody), I often search for “natural” effects in lighting (obviously the story is decisive in choosing the style of the image) so I try to think about “build” an atmosphere in which characters can stay and move, but often happen that when I move the camera the light is “off” so I have to adjust things, and doing it in the “natural” way that I was looking for often seems tricky to me.
Sorry for boring you with my long message 😅. I apologize for my bad English.
I wish you a peaceful day,
Max.Thank you very much for your reply Mr. Deakins! It’s always fantastic for me read your words.
It’s interesting (and also a bit funny) how calm you are when you write “I probably raised the level of the overhead rig as it was important to see the character’s reaction at this moment“- I probably would swear to understand how I can bring a bit more light to the subject in a short amount of time and probably take the wrong decision to add a light from the ground and “destroy” the lighting world that is in the scene (starting also to fighting with cast shadow on the back wall).
Your words really calm me down very much, as when a master gives you the “tips” to think better. I will try to bring with me this kind of “calm” when I’m in “trouble” as if you Mr. Deakins are standing by me and we talk each other to facing the tricky situation 😁 this can sound weird I know but I think that often is a matter of staying calm and thinking well, as the set often starts to become frenetic and unfortunately losing mental clarity is very easy (at least for me). Especially when so many people start talking about the shot.
Luca, the short is not available yet because is in the editing process. Maybe when is ready I can give you the link to watch it. Maybe I can share the link in private cause I don’t want to appear as a “spammer” 😅.
I often suffer from impostor syndrome, so I can’t share calmly when I do something, it seems like I want to show off, but actually, I accept criticism if it’s constructive much more than any compliment (to which I don’t really know how to respond). I warn you, however, that, as always, I am not fully satisfied with my work – I have often understood it to be a question of “reaction” as well as “preparation” and I am not always able to make the correct decision. After calmly at home I think I would have I could have done differently but… it’s too late then.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.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.
