Forum Replies Created
-
Replies
-
The third category – inspire and suggest emotions without looking for meaning – is that not what film can do at its best? I think that understanding should be your approach to where top put the camera or how to compose the shot. It’s what you feel it should be.
I am at a loss as to why a meter is not advantageous. It frees you from the monitor and all the complexities of false color, the LUT, etc.. One reading of the light and off you go. When you have practiced with a meter long enough you will find you don’t even need it. Your eye will tell you everything. That gives you real freedom.
I have often used mirrors to lengthen the distance between a light and a set but, as David says, there are always practical limitations. In one example, the distance between the set windows and the stage wall was around 10′. That was all the production designer could give me based on the director’s desire for the size of the set and the stage space available. The mirrors I used were 6′ x 4′. The lights (20K Fresnel lamps) sat on turtles on the studio floor and the mirrors were hung high against the backing above the windows. This all allowed for a semi-sharp pattern of light to reach the interior of the set but as the windows were quite wide and tall, the effect was not ideal. But when could we call anything we do ideal?
As I said, the space was restricted and I needed the bounce to cover the entire window. The light bounced off Silver Stipple would have been uneven.
It was similar for both sets. On Hudsucker I used a series of 10Ks bounced of silver stipple to give a more directional source. It was still soft simply because of the multiple sources and size of the reflector. For the penthouse on BR 2049 I used white as the distance between the reflector and the set was restricted and I needed to cover a deep and wide window area.
You might use a light diffusion closer to the shot to soften the light on a character or a specific object, while letting that emitted from the initial, heavier diffusion reach the background.
Conversely, you could use a light diffusion to spread light more evenly across a second, heavier, diffusion, which is placed nearer the subject. A light diffusion used in this way, such as a brush silk, would not substantially lower the amount of light overall, whereas to use a heavier one in the same place would.
Again, you might allow light to spill around a diffusion. The result would be a hard light surrounding a softer area.
I would often adjust the distance between a lamp and a large diffusion to find the placement that gave me the right (right to my eye) combination of hard and soft. The diffusion might be twelve feet square but the actual light source only seven feet square.
There is a balance between shooting only the shots you feel are right for a scene and allowing some flexibility in the edit. It annoys me when shots are used in the edit simply because they exist. But it also annoys me when a performance seems weak because there is a lack of a close shot or another angle. Sometimes an editor needs alternatives to build a performance.
I hesitate to recommend any particular camera. I use a Leica M9 because I like a simple camera but most professionals I know use other brands. Even zoom lenses!
Some expressions are conceptual, the banana taped to the wall or Oldenburg’s sculpture of everyday objects. Some things are spiritual, like the ponds in Stalker. And I’m not talking about god here, although you could take it that way if you want.
As David says, ganged lanterns have a higher profile than a ring light. I would say teh light from paper lanterns would be softer, and maybe not always in a good way. I often control a ring light by surrounding it with silver foil. Harder to do with an 18″ lantern.
I can’t say there is one specifically, no. Its usually teh other way around. I am trying for a deeper stop and more depth of field.
