Posted on by

Forum Replies Created

Viewing 15 replies - 46 through 60 (of 61 total)
  • Author
  • in reply to: ‘1917’ church and flares #178192

      You can do few things to avoid a flare, this is not all but few ideas:

      -use a mattebox

      -tilt/pan/move the camera/change framing.

      -A filter can exagerate the flare, remove it.

      -dirt and grease on a lens or a filter can exagerate a flare too.

      -some lenses do flare more than others. Better Lens coatings means better flare protection. Roger use a lot of new Arri Zeiss lenses. Those coatings fight a lot of flares for you.

      -block the light hitting the lens, cinefoil is good for working at lamp level.

      in reply to: Short, slow push ins/pull outs. Example films? #177385


        You are welcome.

        Films with slow and short dolly moves? Watch David Fincher recent movies. He use that quite often for example. But when you dig these movies you will realize how these movements are made.
        Have a nice day.

        in reply to: Short, slow push ins/pull outs. Example films? #177379

          I don’t know. All sliders and skate dollies I tried could pan and tilt. You put your tripod head on them and you are set.

          My concern with a motorized slider is when you pan or tilt your are applying a force to do such movement that’s how a fluid tripod head works. Will the motor be able to move the camera smoothly and also support that force you are doing to pan or tilt? Maybe I’m wrong but I don’t think so.

          Still all sliders motorized or not  have same problem not pedestal moves possible. To me that’s crucial.

          Also as I said doing slow movements with a slider  is extremely difficult, basically impossible if you want it nice and smoothly and constant speed.
          Thats why I said a slider to me is more for general views, b-roll or not main camera footage.

          For me the big difference between big and small productions is camera movement. That’s why most of the small productions are shot hand held or have not moving framing. Nowadays any camera looks nice if you have some knowledge, if you have time you can choose best moments to shoot and only use the sun and some reflectors or negative fill for lighting and 2/3 Led lights are cheap and easy to use. But camera movement? There is no cheap substitute for a Chapman or a Technocrane.

          Rent one slider and try by yourself. A Dana dolly is quite cheap and all rentals should have few of them.


          in reply to: Short, slow push ins/pull outs. Example films? #177306

            In my experience you can use a skater dolly or slider when there is no physical space for tracks or a big dolly.
            But all skater dollies I’ve tried are pretty hard to work when you need very slow moves as push-ins or push out. The whole thing, even with big camera packages (14/15kg) is too light. You can not finesse the slow movement.
            All sliders I’ve tried are the same. Normal speed movements are fine, slow push-in? Very disappointed.

            There is a reason why a full Fisher or Chapman dolly weights what it weights. You need that mass to create that slow movement in my opinion. And even then there is a limit about how slow you can go.

            Also let’s not forget a slider or skate dolly is useless when you need to pedestal the camera. Big reason to choose a full dolly or even a steadicam op.

            I don’t know the slider you mention. It seems one with electronic motors right?
            If it’s silent, motor speed is fully tuneable and holds you desired camera weight why not. You can give it a try.

            I think it’s more for cutaways, scenery footage o general views. It’s something you don’t want to use to cover a scene in my opinion. How would you adjust the camera tilt and pan while it’s moving? You moving behind with it?

            I won’t be popular to say this, but if you really need super slow push in just zoom in post. A push-in dolly movement and a zoom in post are completely different things yes. But you will get at the same place. And as I said, in my experience there is a limit how slow you can get with a dolly. It all depends the budget you are managing and the time. As everything that happens in set. Still if the change of framing is not huge between A and B I would tell post to zoom in. If it’s long movement with big frame changing there is no alternative. Lay track and use a dolly.

            in reply to: A cinematographer without a ‘signature’ #176851

              <p style=”text-align: left;”>Style is usually define by personal taste. Artists from all ages and genres have always attached themselves to specific techniques, themes and how they see the world. That’s their own style.
              Artist styles also have evolved as we humans also constantly evolve as sole individuals but also as society. That’s why some artists get to the same conclusions around same time and same place in history. I guess.
              I don’t think there is nothing wrong to be attached to one style or another in my opinion. At the end it’s your taste, and that is never wrong. When the result and conclusions are genuine and not forced they are always right, at least to me. The other side is what David exposed, to search for a particular style to forced something into you, that’s the real problem and that always feels fake and soul less.</p>

              in reply to: A cinematographer without a ‘signature’ #176772

                I do think Roger has a very clear style. It’s not as flashy as other DPs in the sense his approach is very naturalistic.
                But after watching lots of his works you can tell where he likes to put a camera, his approach to cover a scene is pretty solid and similar between lots of his films. You can also tell also what lighting he likes to use. Again very natural lighting and a clear use of soft lighting. Even the way he exposes a scene and the lighting ratios used and their interpretation for characters types and moments are very similar in lots of his films too.
                Technically the use of dolly and technocranes and very stabilized and heavy-feel camera movements. Since digital he is also always using same camera, same lenses and almost same color grading.
                When you think about it Roger must be the DP out there with the most defined and clear style of all of them in my opinion.


                in reply to: ARRI Sharpness & Detail #176406

                  What debate?
                  Micro contrast is how contrasty or not are the edges between different tones. At higher micro contrast more apparent sharpness. At lower micro contrast less apparent global sharpness.
                  Lenses also produce this effect more or less but it’s called acutance.
                  At least this is how it was taught 20 years ago.


                  in reply to: Raw compressed format – RED patent #176267

                    Blackmagic didn’t pay Red, they found a work around, debayering on camera. Same as Arri or Sony who also found other workarounds to implement RAW recording on their cameras.

                    Compressed Raw patent shouldn’t have been granted to Red in my opinion. But it is what it is.

                    When the patent runs out I guess every camera will be able to shoot compressed raw. As it’s the obvious best choice.



                    in reply to: Shooting a Short on 16mm #173926

                      Thank you. Do you have a standard process then, when exposing film, like taking multiple readings around the set and setting the lens to an average of those, depending on what you would like? Would I expose skin tones similarity to how I would digitally? Or should I mostly stick to slightly overexposing?

                      Before thinking about exposure you need to test your meters, making sure they are not off. So test camera, lenses, light meters and check the results from the lab and then recalibrate your meter accordingly. On reversal when something is 1/3 off you can tell. So also make sure even the iris on each lens is not off.
                      But I haven’t shot reversal for 20 years and even then I tried to run away from it. But once you know all your available dynamic range after testing you will be able to determine how to expose and to where put faces, windows, shadows, etc for your liking.

                      in reply to: Shooting a Short on 16mm #173775

                        First time film and you going with reversal?
                        You are a brave man that’s for sure.

                        Also test all equipment thoroughly, as you have been told, reversal has no latitude. So any error mechanical or human will be hard on your final images.


                        in reply to: Avoiding the “digital motion” look #173374

                          Check the term “Motion Cadence”.

                          I don’t know it it’s what you mean.

                          All I can say is some people is more prone to see the intra movement of frames than others.
                          We did a little experiment among some friends checking different frame rates. Being shoot with 3 different cameras. From 24 to 240 on a high refresh monitor.
                          We also check 24fps with different shutter angles. We try to use different screens and projectors and different viewing programs.

                          It’s really a can of worms as there are lots of variables. Camera, camera motion, the motion inside the frame, monitor or TV, all the settings you can choose in each of them. It’s endless. And in top of that some people can see more differences than others.

                          You can really get lost on it or simply use what you feel is the best and focus on more important issues.

                          But remember that the camera and the viewing monitor/tv/projector are as much as important when checking. And no matter what you do people will experience it different than you because their viewing device is not the same as yours.

                          in reply to: Sensor size & Focal Length + Depth of field #173331

                            IMO to understand lensing you have to understand the effect each lens has to you and by definition the effect you want the audience to feel.

                            I know it sounds pedantic but it’s the reality. At least to me.

                            You don’t start choosing lenses by choosing the lens itself. You choose first where to put the camera relatively to the action or the thing you want to shoot.

                            The variables here are the distance to your subject and the angle you shoot from.

                            Then you choose which focal length to use for your desire framing in that position.

                            Position, angle (no lens related) and framing (lens related).

                            Photographers and cinematographers who have been shooting for long time develop their own style because their approach and reaction to compose an image is usually always the same. It’s their vocabulary. Other great ones force themselves to vary project to project.

                            Study photography, look for the camera position relatively to the action. Look what they want to say and how. Look around and see what lenses they used if you like.

                            But their language and approach to create an image is way more important than to know exactly what focal lengths they used.

                            If you know this then no matter the format or sensor size you will be able to adapt it on your own work.


                            in reply to: Advice for lighting. #170407

                              Not Roger neither.

                              I would choose carefully the exact time of day for you to get the shots you need to see the exterior.
                              If you plan carefully timing the sun and what light levels you get on the background you still can bounce light inside the room from the exterior by using bounces outside the frame.
                              Fastest quick option is to embrace silhouette when windows are on the frame.

                              For the rest of the shots ask to shoot along the windows and light as usual. No need for you to put sheers on windows actually IMO.

                              in reply to: The bare minimum for making a whorthwhile film? #170406

                                A film is usually a collaborative process.

                                It embraces lots of different languages and it’s hard for just someone to manage all of them in a deep and creative way. At least at the beginning.

                                Focus on one aspect and master it. Maybe it’s writing what you really like? Maybe it’s cinematography? Maybe it’s the recreation of a world (art department)?

                                It‘s true a director needs to know a bit of everything but still most of them just focus on one aspect mainly and delegate the rest to their teams.

                                If you focus on one aspect you will find the resources you need to develop your craft, as specific courses, specific books, specific advice by professionals even specific competitions and awards. The 1-man do it all doesn’t exist on a professional level.

                                Also, this is a forum on Roger Deakins website so most people here would have a clear tendency on focus their creativity to the creation of moving images.


                                in reply to: The bare minimum for making a whorthwhile film? #170304

                                  You are trying to build the house from the roof.

                                  First and foremost you need a story.

                                  No story, no movie.

                                  It will be the story that answers all of your questions: how many actors? How many  Sets? How big of a Crew? Which  Camera? What Grip needed?

                                  What you need to prioritize?
                                  The story.


                                Viewing 15 replies - 46 through 60 (of 61 total)