Forum Replies Created
-
Replies
-
Both scenes were shot on set and I was balancing to tungsten sources. The flashlight was a warm LED bulb and the bunker was lit using dimmed down 500 watt tungsten globes that registers at around 2200K. Setting the camera at 3,000 ‘ish gave me the final color I was after for the final grade.
Brushed silk will stretch the light directly perpendicular to the striations in the gel. I use this effect to widen a source, in effect softening that source, in one direction.
On those HMIs it stretched the light across the landscape without loss of too much light. I was working with very little latitude in that situation.
If a lamp can only be rigged too close to a bounce source it can help, as in that kitchen.
Well, we did add a very light smoke haze and back lit this with lamps below the parapet. We had rigged the festoon lights along the promenade (the town had them in the past and most seaside towns have them now) and this was the main source that allowed the separation between the characters silhouettes and the background. Our lamps enhanced the effect. Of course, without the festoon, the smoke and the lamps there would have been little separation.
A monitor is just a guide, an aid to the discussion between a cinematographer and director. In terms of what I do technically, it is only a reassurance. It wouldn’t make any sense to adjust its brightness or color to match its surroundings.
On a Coen Brother’s film most of those basic decisions are made during pre production. I think the ability to move the camera, as we do with the combination of a remote head and a jib arm, influences what we might choose to do. On the other hand, No Country for Old Men, was shot with less camera movement than many of their films. The style of the camera is guided by the story and the way the director wishes to interpret it. True Grit was more of a ‘fairy tale’ than No Country, which was set in a more harsh reality.
I believe the camera was level in that yellow room. Maybe a mistake! I really compose instinctively. On ‘Kundun’ I was aware that Marty wanted the shots to be quite formal, and I have conversations about the overall approach with any director, but, for the most part, the composition is usually arrived at instinctively on the day.
The weight of a simple fluid head is an advantage outside when moving around difficult terrain. I do prefer operating with a fluid head for long lens shots when I am panning with uncertain action, for instance.
I have very rarely used a scrim overhead and rather choose a time of day. If you have a background it always seems odd that a character is standing in a different light.
I find the gear head is a great tool when working on a set with very specific camera moves. I prefer a fluid head when I am shooting on an exterior location and, specifically, on longer lenses.
I have not used diffusion on the lens for many many years. For the shot you reference I did nothing on the lens or in terms of an additional bounce source. I did little for the opening sequence of NCFOM either. Certainly nothing in front of the lens. In both cases I wanted the light to appear as harsh as it was.
I don’t see why simple camera angles like those you describe can’t be shot in a moving car. I am pretty sure they would have been for Taste of Cherry.
I would not like to recommend one manufacturer over another. I know cinematographers swear by one lamp over the other but I really don’t have a preference. Besides cost and availability also play a role in making a choice.
I have a box of around 40 filters of various kinds; fog filters, diffusions, black and white pro mists, even a series of stockings. The last time I opened the box to use one on a film was in the 1980s and I regretted doing so later.
