about softness?

[Delorme Jean-Marie]

hello all

i'm preparing a short in 16mm for next month. the story take place in a casino and the actors will all be over their 60's. it's mostly heads talking over a game table.

 

I was asking myself : for lighting this table and the closups which of these 2 technics are the most apropriated :

soft tubes and kinos or large difused source?

 

i'd like a result in the style classy, soft , grainless and warm.

my first idea was to use a daylight stock to make all the practicals and slot macines verry warm but i'm concerned about the grain of the fuji 500D and i may go in the direction of a tungsten stock instead.

i'm interested buy your opinion

if you've ever filmed in a casino what do you think is the best stop(at 320 or 500) to render all the lights of the slot machines and typical accessories of a casino. i'll make the faces key to match with this best result.

i 'll scout there but before ordering the stock i doubt 'ill be authorized to make stills in the room.

[Werner Van Peppen]

Hi,

 

I knew there was an article about oceans 11 (which was shot in a casino and i've found it:) http://www.stevensoderbergh.net/articles/2...matographer.htm

 

Hope it helps a bit. At least you can see some of the effects he tried (not sure how succesful though) if you've got a copy of the film

 

Best of luck

 

Hi,

 

I knew there was an article about oceans 11 (which was shot in a casino and i've found it:) http://www.stevensoderbergh.net/articles/2...matographer.htm

 

Hope it helps a bit. At least you can see some of the effects he tried (not sure how succesful though) if you've got a copy of the film

 

Best of luck

 

My $.02 re lighting

 

You could also try to work with practicals in a 2/3 strip wagon rigged with practicals or photofloods above the actors with black skirting to fall off outside the table. Gives a nice soft warm light. If you really want to go warm use normal household bulbs.

[Delorme Jean-Marie]

thanks for replying my last 2 post werner :)

[Adam Frisch FSF]

There's an unfinished FAQ at the bottom of this forum that deals with what constitutes a soft and a hard light - the topic has also been covered many times in the forum.

 

But basically, to create a soft source you need to have a large source relative the object. Relative? Yes, it's actually quite unimportant what the source is and how big or small it is, as long as it's bigger RELATIVE (i.e. from where the camera or POV standpoint) to the object your lighting. Soft light is nothing but "wrap-around-ness". That means that the further you move away a source from the object it's lighting, the harder it gets (because it get's smaller relative to the object). This can be proved by the very easy experiment of trying to flag a source close to the lamp - doesn't work. But the further away you get from it, the more defined the shadow gets.

 

KinoFlo's are considered soft sources, for instance. But only when lighting objects smaller than itself (relative,of course) - move a Kino 20ft away and it's not a soft source at all. You can turn this argument around - use the same light and don't move it but decrease the size of the object your lighting and you'll see that the smaller the object becomes the softer the light becomes.

 

I tend to bounce and reflect light into big butterflies or polyboards when I want a soft source for, say, a medium shot or close-up. I love Kino's for their convenience, but I consciously try to stay away from them on some shoots because I don't like the laziness that comes with them - you tend to use them if you have them. Sometimes it's better to force yourself to solve your lighting in other ways.

 

In your case I'd probably go for a couple of Rifa-lights on dimmers. Or an old fashioned chicken coop top light. Maybe augmented with a china ball or pancake-light to bring the top lower down and fill the eyes slightly, if and when needed. But Kino's work fine in that situation, too. Do whatever saves you most time, is easiest and achieves what you want.