Forum Replies Created
-
Replies
-
The color is always justified in some way. I certainly don’t use color to ‘look good’. In BR2049 I wanted the interior of the Wallace Corporation to look as if it were sun lit. That was the reasoning there. Our Las Vegas was red as Denis thought it would contrast the cold look of LA., besides Sidney had just been enveloped in a red dust storm so it seemed it was part of our new reality.
I have no idea why you would not want to create the look you are after in camera. I’m sure your DIT friend means well but you are creating the images not them. The image you post were no doubt shot to be the way they are.
That shot again! Denis simply wanted that shot, something mysterious and that implied more than what you see. We looked at leaving the focus deep and at different compositions but the shot just felt right as you see it in the film. Is it what it means or what it makes you feel.
i have used double cameras on simple conversations when it is unscripted and I’ve used more than that on numerous scenes when it would be expensive to do a second take. So, I am not against multi camera just don’t think it helps for every scene.
Probably not since ‘The Village’. I thought the zooms in that film worked well. An interesting effect.
Plenty of repetition and many technical challenges. Remember I was shooting with an Eclair NPR 16mm camera. The biggest challenge for me was just being motivated to shoot after being on watch and wanting to collapse in my bunk.
That’s right. There is no right way.
The effect of a zoom could be likened to you focussing your attention on a part of your surroundings. As it involves seeing an object in more detail but from a greater distance, than if it were a dolly in, it does have a different feel but it is all about context.
OK! I’m confused. You work by eye but how can you ‘work by eye’ if you can’t judge what you are seeing in front of you? Either you need experience or you need a light meter. Using one will give you an understanding of exposure and contrast ratios. Then you can through it away.
There are photometric charts that you can study to find what light will give you the required foot candles and width of beam at any given distance. I would start by looking at the chart for an 18K HMI. To shoot at 2.8 and 800 ISO you need something like 12.5 foot candles depending on whether that is a back light or a front light.
When you steady a shot that has extreme sideways movement in post it can produce a very strange effect because it is not adjusting the foreground in relation to the background. You might just as well suggest the shot be made in AI rather than the real world.
Walking backwards on a flat gravel road should not be a problem for someone who is proficient using a hand held camera. Counter to what might seem logical, a heavier camera may well help you as it tends to ground the shot. Yes, you can use a stabilizing system, of which there are many efficient variations. The shot you mention was made using a stabilized camera rigged to the top of a pole that was being carried by two grips. The slight parallax movement of the characters to the background was a problem and was minimized by the way the grips walked, a kind of Groucho Marx step as is used by any hand-held camera operator. As far as I am aware, though some of the blends between shots were massaged in post none of the film was stabilized that way.
