Josh Bass

Howdy. How about this: using your fill light as an eyelight. Do we do this, ever? There's a shot from a short film I DP'd, back when I knew even less than I do now. It's a OTS/CU of a woman talking to her dude, and her face is very softly half-lit from the side. What we used to light her was a bedsheet with a 300w arri fresnel through it (maybe it was a 650. . . not important). At any rate, this created a little white glint in her eye that really helps the shot, though, like I said, total accident. So, I'm thinking: if you have a strongly directional key (hard or soft, doesn't matter), and you use a large soft source for fill, right on the camera/subject axis, can it double as an eyelight? Is this ever done? I did a test a while back where I lit me with a softbox from the size, and put a china ball with a low wattage bulb right over the lens, and looked toward it. I musta done some'n wrong, 'cause I got no eyelight whatsoever. Just seems like if you eyelit with your fill, could make life easier (and prettier).

Hi. Chiming in. Hollywood video censors too. Ever seen "Movie X (rated version)" written on the side of the box over there? Sure you have!

They might well be yon wimpy stands ye speak of, but they've worked for me (did I mention they were air cushioned? They won't collapse in half a second from being fully extended and shatter your bulb). Perform pretty well, as far as stability, until the final extensions are out. Then it's time to be careful. Yes, very lightweight, probably aluminum. I think in my quest to be uber cheap and low budget, I have probably bought a lot of crap meant for other purposes.

Ooooooooooooooooooh. Ok, C-Stands. Well, I actually don't have any of those. I have el cheapo stands from eBay $50, go up thirteen feet, little bit light for anything heavier than a $650 fresnel, when fully extended. Served me well, however. Too thick in most places to get one of those clamps around.

I guess you're saying you use the grip clip to secure the foamcore to the spud itself, and to one the legs on the light stand? That's the only way it makes sense in my head, unless your stand is super skinny (so you can clamp around the main body of the stand), which would mean the foamcore'll drag it down, without sandbags.

Everyone but the DP and director should be forced to wear a collar that would shock the ass out of them if they got anywhere near the monitors. Thank you for your time.

You are correct sir, but nevertheless, I would like to work "softer" a little more often than I have in the past. One more thing I thought of, regarding the booklight: Does anyone know approximately how much light, in terms of stops, you lose when using 216? 250? It occurred to me that your original source used for the booklight would take two "hits" to its level: one when it bounces off the foamcore, and the other as it goes through the diffusion material.

Ok, thanks. I wasn't trying to say that softlight is perfect for everything, but for me, at least, hard light is much easier to work with, in that it's far more controllable, and predictable. This is not to say, of course, that I've "mastered" hard light by any means, but I understand it much more than soft light, which has always been somewhat of a dark mystery to me--and therefore I need more help working with it. Also, to me, harder to do on a low budget with good results. Good results = slick looking.

Yes. . .if I had it to do over again, I probably get some open faced lights, instead of all fresnels. However, isn't a fresnel with the lens off (or the. . .um. . .er. . ."housing" open) kinda the same as open face? I know the parabolic reflector makes some difference, that open face lights are designed somewhat differently, but how different are they really? Is the difference in the softness between foamcore and beadboard severe, or barely noticable. Is there a way to "soften" the foamcore? What if you score the crap out of it with an exacto or something?

Yes. . .me likey book light. I have a problem with "clip it to a stand". How? I have spring clamps, and these weird things I bought from a photography store, made of plastic. They're clamps, and have two. . .uh. . .screw holes at 90 degrees from each other, to attach to a baby spud mount that also has a screw on it, but either way you screw it on, it oriented the wrong way (make any sense?) to attach to something like the booklight. Other than that, it sounds like a brilliant idea. Here's something that's always troubled me about bounce cards/boards/thingies: angle of incidence = angle of reflection, right? So, if your original light source (say, a fresnel) is at a low angle, bounced up into the booklight/foamcore, does the reflected light bounce "up" more than straight out? Or does it just go everywhere, regardless of the angle of the original source? Also, I'm assuming, when bouncing like this, you want to fill the entire surface of your bounce surface with light, i.e, make sure your fresnel or whatever's "spread" covers the entire board, not just one part of it? And which is better, or, which gives softer results, if using a fresnel: spot or flood? Does it matter?

I can post links to the movies, if y'all (yes, from Texas) want. They're not that "slick," but they're at least competent, I think especially for miniDV movies that I essentially lit/DPd alone while trying to direct and get everyone out of there as quickly as possible. The one that got the most acclaim is claymation, anyway, and flatly lit to give it "cartoony" look, rather than something Tim Burton-esque or something. Plus, I didn't know ass about lighting back then, so I figured flat and decent was better than attempted artful and crappy. As far as the cable outlets. . .any names, specifically? I think'd it be cool to say, "yeah, fool, my shizzle aired on cable," even if I don't get paid for it. Public access doesn't count--I was thinking maybe there were some networks/shows that showcased shorts that I may not be aware of 'cause I only get basic cable.

Yeah, that chick's totally hot. Looks high maintainance, though.

WARNING: Possible stupid question alert! Is there any other venue besides festivals for shorts? I have no plans to do a feature any time soon (or far). Not say I wouldn't like to, but I have no wish to direct other people's scripts, and I certainly don't have a story, right now, that's worth at least 90 minutes of screen time. So I make shorts, or try to. If one becomes soured towards the festival circuit, what is one to do with one's shorts? I've sent my stuff off to several festivals, so I'll put in my two cents. The first movie I did was a 5 minute claymation movie, universally loved by everyone who's seen it, for the most part. Sent it off to the Houston international Film Festival. BAM! rejected. Sent it to several other places. BAM! Rejected some more. Quite discouraged, be I. Months later, I get a call from Spike and Mike, who are apparently THE animation festival to get into. Guess what? I beat out 100 other entries and my movie got on a travelling festival that went to several major cities across the US this year, and was shown in regular theaters (I think they even transferred it to film; I feel quite special). So f$%$%$ you, Houston International Film Festival. Also won a few other awards. Now, one of the festivals I got into, that I attended, made some poor choices. First, they delayed the screening process by about half an hour to give an lifetime achievement award to Barry Corbin (I think that's his name. . .played an ex-astronaut on Northern Exposure), and then proceeded to show, as the first film of the screening (there was only one screening room, not like a festival where you buy tickets to each individual movie), an hour and half long piece of mindnumbing crap that drove half the audience out, and THEN followed it with all the much shorter pieces. Stupid, stupid move. What am I saying here? I don't know. Yes, a lot of weird crap tends to get into festivals, and also, I think anyone and his cousin can have a festival, and they do. I also don't think that highly of the people who program/run these things, due to the experience at the above mentioned festival. This is a pretty well-known one here in Texas, I think, so I would expect smarter choices. Don't get hung up on format though; that makes you sound arrogant. Ditto production values. . .I think unless they really suck (unintelligible sound, video too dark or shaky), Joe Blow is happy if he's entertained, regardless of how good it looks. So you could be right, you could be wrong, and I have no idea why I typed any of this. Just had a few ideas. Next time you send off, investigate the festival a little. Call 'em and see if they welcome your genre of movie. Also, what about www.triggerstreet.com? You could send in the first ten minutes of your film (I think they have to be under ten minutes). The site'll take ANYTHING, and show it, meaning that if you submit it, it goes up for screening. It's not a contest where only some stuff gets shown. Everything gets shown. Have I said the same thing enough times yet? You are then judged by complete strangers who have nothing to gain by blowing smoke up your ass.

Argggh. This is starting to sound expensive. I guess I was hoping there was some magical low budget solution I hadn't thought of. I forgot to mention I have some scrap duvetyne from a rental house (some large scraps, that is). Those might make good skirts for the lanterns or something. And while I'm here. . .if I was to have a scene that could be lit by a large, soft source and didn't need much control, do I remember reading, correctly, on this forum, that shower curtains make good diffusion, whereas bed sheets make better bounce/reflectors?

I've used the grid that fits a mole richardson 2k ziplight. Do those really make that much difference, the eggcrates? Seems like manufacturers try to make you think it does, but I don't see how it could, except for very little. Phil, now that I think about it, flos seem like a good idea. There are several problems, though. How do you power them? Don't you need a ballast? Aren't those pricey? Aren't there flicker issues with commercial ballasts (as opposed to kino flo ones)? As I said, I'm no engineer. This grip showed me how to build a socket and plug for the chinese lanterns, and that's the only wiring stuff I've done. I guess if the procedure was real simple, and not dangerous, I could do something, if the flos required it. Where'd you score those ones you got?

Yeah, that was one thing I forgot to mention. I bought some cheap "shop lights" at Home Depot as well, just 'cause I thought they might be useful. I've used 'em once or twice for little things, like enhancing or simlulating the light from a computer monitor (tiny fixtures here. . .maybe ten inches long). I've thought about bigger ones, but I've bought so much stuff that I'm loathe to buy more without a good reason. I'm no good at engineering stuff, that is, adapting this and that to fit so and so. I have a few ghetto methods for rigging things up, but rigging a stand for a commercial flourescent fixture feels beyond me. I guess you could control those to some degree by blackwrapping the crap out of it (in essence, creating barn doors--they'd have to be really long, though, to have much of an effect, no?).

Soft light is hard to do, in my experience, with a low budget (which means, for all intents and purposes, no budget, in this thread). Here are the things I so far have access too, and why they're okay, but not great, for soft light in a narrative storytelling context (as opposed to interview setups or something). 1. Reflectors/bounced light. You take your fixture, say a fresnel, and bounce it off some white foamcore, a bedsheet, whatever. Generally, on my silly personal no budget movies, I'm shooting in tiny places, and setting up a reflector large enough to create a soft light is tough, since I can't control the spill (no c-stands and 2x4 solids available, and probably not enough room for them if they were), and therefore get a flat look. 2. Chimera/softbox. I have a 2x3 foot box, and that's only soft when the subject is right nearby. What about for your wider shots? 3. hard light through diffusion panel. Mostly, same reasons as #1. 4. Chinese lanterns. I've had the best luck with these, as far as ease of use and controllability (sure, that's a word), but they're still kinda difficult. The most you can use in the sockets I have access to (bought from Home Depot, assembled myself) is a 300 watt household bulb, and it's probably best to use those in the bigger lanterns (2-3 foot diameter, I'd guess). Then you have this giant ball that's hard to keep out of the shot, sometimes. Also, not that much output unless you're real close. Also, super orange-ish light. You can say "but the make photofloods that are exactly 3200k, etc." Yes, but aren't those more expensive, with a life of like 6 hours? 5. Umbrellas. Decent for interviews or something with a very tight shot, kinda the same space and controllability problems for wider shots, in my opinion. Anyway, I think that's everything I've tried so far. So, pros, amateurs, whoever, throw some knowledge at me. Blow my mind. Anything you know of that I don't, for getting a soft light that doesn't spill everywhere? I don't mean flat light, something with more directinality to it that allows for modelling of the subject.

Curtains? Blinds?

Do you know something I don't? I don't even think 6 is out yet. 5 is, but I'm still using 4. They aren't that different, except for some new 3d features, and some audio stuff, I think. Nothing that made me want to upgrade. I can tell you Vegas is pretty powerful, and user friendly. . .very easy to learn, stupidly simple, even. I BELIEVE the only things it really lacks are perfect bin/media management, and I don't think it does real, honest-to-God EDLs. Other than that, it's on par with Premiere and things of that ilk. I guess maybe not ideal for long form projects because of the above-mentioned issues. Underrated and undermentioned, in my opinion. I've been known to accidentally spread misinformation before, so anyone jump in if something I said is wrong (and no silly "Vegas sucks, you suck" kind of crap, please. Lord knows, if someone likes something, someone else hates it.)

Zebras are funny things. I use 'em as guide lines, and do the rest by eye.

Ah, well, here's the thing. I have an NTSC monitor, a nice one. However, as I said, seems some DPs, video-using DPs, still use them, even if not on the shoot itself (before, for scouting, checking available light levels, etc.) I've been on HD shoots where they were being bandied about. At any rate, I talked to a local phtography store, and there are indeed el cheapo light meters, in the $40 range, but according to the clerk there, they only measure "ambient light." I don't know if that means it's a spot meter or an incident meter, but it's dimmed my light meter fire, since the cheapest ones that do both spot and incident are around $200, which I'm not willing to put out right now. So, any chance these $40 are worth my time? I think I've stated that I have no urgent need for one, but that using one might be a nice thing to learn to do.

Should be be either 1/60 (for 29.97 fps, or 30p), or 1/48, if you're using a 24p camera , no? Or one of them purty big numbers (1/500, whatever) if you're going for a "Saving Private Ryan thing" Right? Wrong?

I've thought about getting one, but even the cheap ones are expensive. So, if a light meter's a questionable item for me, a waveform monitor is that much more so.

Thanks! I'm going to go to a local camera shop and see what they have to say about the el cheapo meters. Seems the reason for getting them are several, while the reason for NOT getting one is the non-filminess of myself, and the cost. Hopefully, one of those won't be a factor.

Thanks. . .the kind of stuff I was looking for. I often hear "don't worry about using a lightmeter for video/your camera IS a (spot) light meter/if you have properly calibrated monitor, then what you see is what you get". And yet, all the pro guys I know, whether working in the video or film medium, seem to use them, so there must be something to it. Do they tend to help your "eye" develop, over time? Seems to me you'd start to be able to recognize certain lighting ratios just by seeing them, after a while, which could be useful. Any recommendations on the ultra cheap meters?