Jump to content

Controlling the spill of Light


Recommended Posts

Hello,

 

I have recently shot two short films on 16mm and am reasonably pleased with the outcome considering my novice status.

 

My main problem is the flatness in my scenes due to my fears of underexposure. There are times when I would bounce a arri 650 open face off a bounce board and it would seem to completely dominate the whole scene.

 

When I meter and see things in the scene 1 or two stops under exposed I compensate with additional lights which once again blows out the scene. Should I expect this, or what is a good metric for fill. What I am trying to become comfortable with is the appropriate zones for exposure etc, and what instruments can I use to keep one light from completely killing the effects of the other lights.

 

My apologies for the convoluted question, but right not the photography is exposed but very flat with no distinction between my lights.

 

Thanks in advance.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Premium Member

You have to learn to control soft light with large black flags to reduce it spilling everywhere -- underexposure is NOT the solution because then you just get a flat but underexposed image. What you need is CONTRAST not underexposure.

 

If the key light is soft enough, you need less fill light (or none) because it wraps around enough into the shadows. You probably should avoid white rooms too.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Interesting, both shoots were shot in existing locations (i.e. lofts) with many white walls. I suppose the bounce from these walls possibly flattened my scenes.

 

In my next low budget shoot I will look for a friends place with painted walls, but unfortunately most apartments/places have white walls.

 

When I flag the soft sources, should I flag just to the left or right of the source, or more towards the position of the talent. I think I am own my way to eye judging the contrast better, with my key lights, the exposure is often times all over the place. If the talent moves two steps right or left, his exposure could vary +- 3 stops. Is it cool to have actors going in and out of light/exposure, or should I just open the barn doors up on the 1k fresnels and let the light rip.

 

thanks for the insight,

Marquette

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi,

 

Excuse my inexpererience if I'm off-base but as far as I can tell you seem to be going about it with the wrong approach. How do YOU want it to look. Once you've decided that then light it the way you want it. If you want it to be contrasty then make it look contrasty, if you want it to be flat then light it flat. Look at the Godfather - there's shadow all over the place - if you want shadow use shadow. There is no divine film law that says 'Thou shalt not create shadow two stops under exposure'. All moods can be achieved by using your Key and Fill at different ratios. As far as I remember with Vision stocks you have 4 stops underexposure and 4 stops overexposure so what you see by eye is almost what you will get. Don't be scared to take chances (...or test your stock!).

 

Cheers

Morgan

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks for all the input so far, I gained lots of valuable insight from reading the post on negative fill. Most of all, I can relax a little and trust my eye from now on. The scenes were looking great with the way I lit it, but then I decided to go in an mess it up because of my over dependence on the light meter at this point in my career. On my next project, I plan to just let it flow. The only drawback to this is the cost of film, I figure I could nail this experiment with about $20,000 worth of research capital (LOL).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Premium Member
On my next project, I plan to just let it flow.  The only drawback to this is the cost of film, I figure I could nail this experiment with about $20,000 worth of research capital (LOL).

You don't have to take an all-or-nothing approach to your education. Don't be a slave to your meter or abandon it completely just yet. It sounds like you need to learn the dynamic range and "look" of the film stock you're using, and a light meter is a good tool for that UNTIL you can learn to trust your eye. Give yourself a chance to develop that skill with some practice.

 

You don't have to spend big $$ on film for testing. You can shoot exposure tests with a 35mm still camera, on motion picture stock provided by RGB labs in Hollywood. They'll then print them on slides for you.

 

Figure that the "average" motion picture negative gives you a ballpark of + or - 4 stops before it goes completely black or white (give or take, depending on a lot of little variables). That means that if an actor walks into an area that's 2 stops below exposure, his face will be about "half way" down into the shadow; dark but still visible. Same thing for overexposure. Try this out and learn what it looks like, then you'll be less afraid to use contrast in your lighting.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks Mike,

 

One last question though, the focal length on my 35mm camera is approximately 2 times that of what I am shooting on 16mm?

 

So with my wide angle lens of 20mm, when I translate it back, I should imagine shooting at 10mm on 16mm film camera?

 

-Marquette

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Premium Member

Good cinematography is 50% good production design. White walls and cramped,

unstyled, small confined rooms never look nice, really. They can look "ugly" nice,

if you know what I mean, but rarely beautiful.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

White walls have been present in some of my short films mainly because we didnt have another location and no money. After some experience I shot two more short films in rooms with white walls. In the first short we wanted to get a dark atmosphere so I underexposed the walls 3 stops and exposed more in some areas where actors moved. In the second short I did the same and even pushed underexposure 4 stops with contrast to other exposed areas and it worked fine, both directors were really happy but it gets on the nerves, mainy because I didnt test (no money) I just did it on experience of other shoots but it was worth the risk. About underexposure I have a couple questions. Should I overexpose the whole seen 2/3 of a stop (keeping contrast with underxposure and well exposed areas) and after in the lab pull all down? is the outcome the same? In a scene with white-yellow walls the exposure went one stop under and in the transfer we pull it back again but all the underexposed areas turned to a white-green hue. Is this common? If some could explain it to me would be great. Thanks!

Miguel

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Premium Member

Hi,

 

Soft lights are OK so long as they're very dim soft lights. Some of the best stuff I've ever shot, which I have never received a copy of and probably never will (nngh!) was in a white-walled room which I countered by doing very high contrast lighting and exposing for the hilights. Since then I have held much less fear of light rooms, at least where I can get some equipment in overhead. In this situation I blasted a 650W arrilite straight down into a very dark brown table and let the reflection from that uplight the faces; the only other light was a backlight on the interrogatee. Of course this only works for harsh scenes - tricker to do a rom com!

 

Phil

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Premium Member
But if you want a contrast image, soft lights are not the good way... because they are very difficult to cut, and it takes a very long time to do

It doesn't have to take a long time if you start off the right way. It's true that a hard light is easier to flag, but if you start with a controlled soft source you can flag it easily, too. You usually end up with a deeper "box" or larger flags around the light source than you would with hard lights. It also helps to keep the light source more to the side or back so that the soft light doesn't spill onto the BG as much. You can also take advantage of soft light's ability to fall off quickly, rather than flagging. A single Kino tube (in a fixture) placed close to the subject may fall off quickly enough that you don't need to flag it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sorry I'm a bit late on this one, but on the subject of lighting a boring set, I gaffed a film set in a barber shop earlier this year. The script was a little off the wall, and gave the Dp and myself some room to get creative, and we ended up only throwing some corporate slashes on the walls --a couple 300s with the barn doors closed to a small slant -- and it came out really well in my opinion.

 

Of course, if absolute realism is your goal, this probably isn't the best way to liven up a room (we also keyed all lights from the floor instead of from slightly elevated).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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 account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...