Commercial shoot

[Albert Smith]

Thanks for the reply, I looked up fall off, it makes alot of sense, smaller light sources fall off faster then larger light sources....so for a big open space if you want even lighting you want a large out put light rather then a lot of smaller sources...right?....also read alot of stuff on kinos, which I have never used. seem like they can be a very useful tool as sometimes a quick fall off can be good. Your theory on figuring out how to light room first then the talent is very interesting to me, simply because generally people are taught 3 pt lighting and then they say oh well yea there's 4pt to and the 4 light is the background light ahhaha. so no emphasis is put on the background light or the overall lighting of a room, which is kinda silly. I really like going at it that way though, especially because it allows you to figure out the overall look before going in and lighting the talent, although as you said, the the elements are not always light separately. anyways I dont even know if that made sense, but basically im saying I agree with you and thanks for the reply, ha. thanks.

 

 

-Jake

[Kevin Zanit]

Yep, you more or less seem to have the concept down.

 

I do agree with you about the 3 point lighting fundamental. The concept is not a bad one as a teaching tool; I just think it is unfortunate that most schools (in my experience) seem to stop there with the teaching of lighting. It is easy to forget to mention there is an art to this work.

 

They should also teach that you can have single point lighting, or two point, or 25 point. I am not opposed to teaching rules first, but they should also teach that these rules should be broken once you grasp the concept.

 

 

Kevin Zanit

[Allen Achterberg]

Yep, you more or less seem to have the concept down.

 

I do agree with you about the 3 point lighting fundamental. The concept is not a bad one as a teaching tool; I just think it is unfortunate that most schools (in my experience) seem to stop there with the teaching of lighting. It is easy to forget to mention there is an art to this work.

 

They should also teach that you can have single point lighting, or two point, or 25 point. I am not opposed to teaching rules first, but they should also teach that these rules should be broken once you grasp the concept.

Kevin Zanit

 

 

exactly, but the problem in teaching the 3 point light setup is that students think that there are rules to lighting. When this isn't the case. As you stated, they should be tought the concept, but it should be made clear that there are no rules, and light does not HAVE to be motivated.

 

All The Best

Allen Achterberg

[David Sweetman]

Looks great, thanks for the post Kevin! I read this when you first posted and it's cool seeing the result.

 

As far as the three-point discussion goes I think a true student of light will soon figure out by himself through experience the specific function of each of those three lights, and how and why to use them, if only he applies some critical thought to his own project. I can't even look at anything without thinking of how the light is hitting it anymore. And I love being so light-conscious, I think there's lessons in lighting being taught all around us by nature if only we pay attention, and nature doesn't really have any rules about lighting at all. I think that light-consciousness comes not once the student has "mastered" the rules of 3-point lighting and is ready to break them, (as I certainly have not!) but I think that light-consciousness is the beginning of the student's real learning about light.

Edited November 8, 2006 by David Sweetman

[Kevin Zanit]

Hi Dave,

 

I can't argue with what you say, it is something one figures out through trial and error.

 

I just feel that if schools would send their students in the "right" direction after going over the three point techniques it could save people a lot of confusion.

[Albert Smith]

I am currently In film school, Not really to learn about lighting (although I have much to learn), but since I have a few years expiernce I figured I would probably know just about everything talked about in an entry level class, never the less I am taking a grip/lighting class as it is a part of the set curiculum, and its interesting to see how they teach it. I never had any formal teaching on the subject I think I must have spent about a year playing with lights before someone even told me about 3pt lighting. Anyways in the class it has been pretty direct on three and four point lighting concepts, but the concepts haven't been driven into anyone. The teacher has also spent alot of time on explaing what light does, IE: a hard light just brushing someone from the side will reval alot more skin detail then a soft light from the front, I actually personally felt he hadnt spent enough time talking about motivated and natural lighting or reasons for putting lights places, on the opposite side I also felt he didnt spent much time explaining that yes, indeed this is an art form, but oh well its just a survey of a class, touching on everything. It seems like the class is taught so everyone will atleast know what the equipment is and wont break it, ha. I think they assume if this what you want to do you'll just go into the cinematography program the following year. And I fully agree about being "light conscious" this is something that has just begun to happen to me, but I notice lighting everywhere and can't not think about it, its almost subconscious. It deffinetly allows you to learn almost at a subconscious level at all times, seeing the way light intereacts with locations and people in diffrent ways will deffinetly effect the way I light scenes, I find myself thinking back to the way a certain room looked, and how and where the light sources were coming from and using that to figure out a setup, its really cool to be able to do that.

[Stuart Brereton]

I am currently In film school, Not really to learn about lighting (although I have much to learn), but since I have a few years expiernce I figured I would probably know just about everything talked about in an entry level class, never the less I am taking a grip/lighting class as it is a part of the set curiculum, and its interesting to see how they teach it. I never had any formal teaching on the subject I think I must have spent about a year playing with lights before someone even told me about 3pt lighting. Anyways in the class it has been pretty direct on three and four point lighting concepts, but the concepts haven't been driven into anyone. The teacher has also spent alot of time on explaing what light does, IE: a hard light just brushing someone from the side will reval alot more skin detail then a soft light from the front, I actually personally felt he hadnt spent enough time talking about motivated and natural lighting or reasons for putting lights places, on the opposite side I also felt he didnt spent much time explaining that yes, indeed this is an art form, but oh well its just a survey of a class, touching on everything. It seems like the class is taught so everyone will atleast know what the equipment is and wont break it, ha. I think they assume if this what you want to do you'll just go into the cinematography program the following year. And I fully agree about being "light conscious" this is something that has just begun to happen to me, but I notice lighting everywhere and can't not think about it, its almost subconscious. It deffinetly allows you to learn almost at a subconscious level at all times, seeing the way light intereacts with locations and people in diffrent ways will deffinetly effect the way I light scenes, I find myself thinking back to the way a certain room looked, and how and where the light sources were coming from and using that to figure out a setup, its really cool to be able to do that.

 

Paragraphs are great! Don't be afraid of them! ;)

 

(punctuation is cool, too...)

[Gavin Greenwalt]

Perhaps what they should teach is that 3 point lighting is a summary of 3 atomic purposes of light:

 

Model form.

Fill shadows.

Separate elements.

 

Instead of even treating it as a "lighting setup". "By the way here is a setup which is an example of all 3 of these uses in practice simultaneously."

 

And then make them all take a painting course ;)

Edited November 10, 2006 by Gavin Greenwalt

[Dave Hammond]

Perhaps what they should teach is that 3 point lighting is a summary of 3 atomic purposes of light:

 

Model form.

Fill shadows.

Separate elements.

 

 

And then make them all take a painting course ;)

 

That's one of the most aposite and concise statements I've read about the subject - the Zen of lighting. Wonderful topic by the way - stimulating stuff

[Kevin Zanit]

It is a very good point. In the defense of some of the books I have read, they do discuss lighting in those terms (not the norm, but in the better books).

 

I think a lot of the problems come from the professors not having a complete understanding of what a cinematographer does, after all most of the teachers are forced to be generalists, as they are also teaching some writing technique, producing, editing, sound, etc.