Jim Malone Posted March 5, 2005 Share Posted March 5, 2005 (edited) How can you light a scene so that there are visible beams of light? I know the conventional "smoky room" technique, but isn't there another way? I read a review of "Kodak Master Class Series: Shooting For Fantasy with Sacha Vierney and Denis Lenoir" that mentioned this video showed another method of doing just that. Any help would be appreciated. Thanks! Edited March 5, 2005 by Jim Malone Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jonathan Spear Posted March 5, 2005 Share Posted March 5, 2005 "Kodak Master Class Series: Shooting For Fantasy with Sacha Vierney and Denis Lenoir" Where can I get that video? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Premium Member Michael Nash Posted March 5, 2005 Premium Member Share Posted March 5, 2005 If you want shafts of light in the air to be visible, the light HAS to illuminate something. Smoke is usually the easiest way, but anything particulate like dust or rain can work also. It's also best if the particulate is backlit, or at least past 90 degrees from camera. Shafts of light show up best when there's a significant brightness difference bewteen the illuminated particulate (light hitting the smoke) and the background. So if you want shafts of light to be visible but don't want the room to appear smokey in general, try to keep the background dark, the light creating the shaft bright and coming toward the lens, and the smoke to a minimum. Oh, and a sharp edge to the beam will make it more distinguishable as well. If the shaft of light has to be coming from another angle that's less "into" the lens, the beam has to be a lot brighter or the smoke a lot more dense for the beam to be visible. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob Hayes Posted March 6, 2005 Share Posted March 6, 2005 I read a review of "Kodak Master Class Series: Shooting For Fantasy with Sacha Vierney and Denis Lenoir" that mentioned this video showed another method of doing just that. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> How did the master class say to do it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Morlan Posted March 10, 2005 Share Posted March 10, 2005 Go here for the Kodak workshop videos: http://www.firstlightvideo.com/Kodak_Cinematography.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Premium Member Jayson Crothers Posted March 10, 2005 Premium Member Share Posted March 10, 2005 Having recently shot a feature where we used smoke extensively for four weeks, I can also add that it's imperative to have a good FX crew that can keep a sharp eye on it for consistency - whatever you use to get this effect, keep in mind that the thicker it is, the more affect it will have on your lighting (it's lowering contrast the more you have in the room). If you're shooting a scene over multiple days and don't have good notes and consistency, you'll be most unhappy in dailies later on. Also give serious consideration to the saftey and health factor - most materials used to create this "shaft of light" look are tested for safety and you can find that information, but those tests are never done with consideration to 12+ hours of exposure over many days. I carry a gas mask (courtesy of Home Depot) in my gear bag just in case, and arrangements should be made for similar gear for the rest of the crew - this, of course, depends on the exposure to it - a few shots is probably fine, a week of inhaling that stuff is another matter altogether. Just my thoughts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kyle Geerkens Posted March 10, 2005 Share Posted March 10, 2005 I was shooting a spec beer commercial a couple weeks ago and used smoke pouring from a doorway to catch spilled HMI light from behind two beautiful ladies. This being to silhouette the girls and have a smoky streaky light behind them and emerging around them. It ended up looking spectacular!!!!!!!.......... until the fire alarm went off after 3 takes and the fire trucks showed up at the bar I was shooting at (while it was occupied on other floors)and I had to use some SERIOUS damage control techniques to finish the shoot! The smoke machine was pretty big (Red Devil it's called), but I suggest you be wary of that when using smoke indoors. I thought the artificial smoke didnt affect alarms.... Boy was I wrong... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Premium Member Glenn Hanns Posted March 10, 2005 Premium Member Share Posted March 10, 2005 "Kodak Master Class Series: Shooting For Fantasy with Sacha Vierney and Denis Lenoir" Where can I get that video? <{POST_SNAPBACK}> I have all of them, PAL though. included: Robby Muller peter James Allen Daviau Sacha Vierny Dean Semler John Seale Don Mcalpine Denis Lenoir Geoff Burton. Great Videos Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DavidSloan Posted March 10, 2005 Share Posted March 10, 2005 You actually paid $90 for a 28 min video...wanna buy a piece of the Brooklyn bridge? :lol: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mitch Lusas Posted April 22, 2005 Share Posted April 22, 2005 Hey for a safer alternative to a fog machine, check out "Diffusion in a Can" at http://store.yahoo.com/cinemasupplies/fogfluidspray.html Blessings Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dominic Case Posted April 22, 2005 Share Posted April 22, 2005 Robby MullerPeter James Allen Daviau Sacha Vierny Dean Semler John Seale Don Mcalpine Denis Lenoir Geoff Burton. And what a memorable treat it was to have all of them together in the same place at the same time, at the Australian Film TV & Radio School (AFTRS) - must be over ten years ago now - when they made these videos. 9 DoPs, but about twice as many accreditations (eg Peter James ACS, ASC, CSC). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
andyh Posted April 26, 2005 Share Posted April 26, 2005 Having recently shot a feature where we used smoke extensively for four weeks, I can also add that it's imperative to have a good FX crew that can keep a sharp eye on it for consistency - whatever you use to get this effect, keep in mind that the thicker it is, the more affect it will have on your lighting (it's lowering contrast the more you have in the room). If you're shooting a scene over multiple days and don't have good notes and consistency, you'll be most unhappy in dailies later on. Also give serious consideration to the saftey and health factor - most materials used to create this "shaft of light" look are tested for safety and you can find that information, but those tests are never done with consideration to 12+ hours of exposure over many days. I carry a gas mask (courtesy of Home Depot) in my gear bag just in case, and arrangements should be made for similar gear for the rest of the crew - this, of course, depends on the exposure to it - a few shots is probably fine, a week of inhaling that stuff is another matter altogether. Just my thoughts. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> hi jayson, i've found that a great way to get some shafts of light close to camera is to use 2 or 3 150w dedos at full spot, using the barn doors to determine the width of the beam. works a treat! it's so easy to get the precise angle etc.of course, you will need a fair amount of smoke/atmos going on. if the beams are angled towards the lens the effect increases. give it a go . andy h Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
not valid Posted April 27, 2005 Share Posted April 27, 2005 Try using dust instead of smoke. For low budget stuff use like an old blanket or something instead of the smoke machine. As a matter of fact i like that effect more then the smoke but i guess it depends on the effect you are looking for an old factorie or something the dust is great but for that beer ad i dont think it would have worked. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Premium Member Laurent Andrieux Posted April 27, 2005 Premium Member Share Posted April 27, 2005 I thought the artificial smoke didnt affect alarms.... Boy was I wrong... I have the same problem at my school... The thing is the smoke detectors use an infrared source and pickup so that they are affected by anything that affects light. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kyle Geerkens Posted July 19, 2005 Share Posted July 19, 2005 SO i wanted to folow up on this thread. Someone said I should use dust instead of smoke for low budget stuff. Is it possible to achieve what i tried to do with dust? www.rkto.com might be a dumb question, but i didnt think it would work. Keep in mind, that beacuse of the fire alarm, we only got one try at this shot. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Premium Member Chris Keth Posted July 19, 2005 Premium Member Share Posted July 19, 2005 SO i wanted to folow up on this thread. Someone said I should use dust instead of smoke for low budget stuff. Is it possible to achieve what i tried to do with dust? www.rkto.com might be a dumb question, but i didnt think it would work. Keep in mind, that beacuse of the fire alarm, we only got one try at this shot. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> I doubt what you did would have been the same with dust, it settle too quickly and you needed to have it build up quite a bit. You definately could have done something similar, but the air would have lit up quite the same without a lot of particles in the air like you did. Very nice work, by the way. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Premium Member David Mullen ASC Posted July 19, 2005 Premium Member Share Posted July 19, 2005 Dust (like Fuller's Earth) is even more hazardous to breathe than haze from a fogger, if it contains silica. Plus it doesn't hang well, and it can get into the camera. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now