pkbissen

also the exposure on his face seems inconsistent between shots. i like to shoot an entire scene at the same f-stop unless i change the lighting for CUs. if i change lighting for the CU, i take careful notes on difference in footcandles and contrast to make sure i choose the appropriate f-stop to match.

i'd drop the blue from the background lighting. i would emphasize the color of the wood and candles and go for something warmer. it depends on the mood you are going for though. also the light on the actors face feels too hard and pink for simulated candle light. i'd drop the light on his face between 1/2-1 stop, soften it, and color balance to 1/2 CTB or whatever works to warm up the scene. i do like the background light expect for the blue.

looks great. i hope this sees a US theatrical distribution.

thanks again guys. i'll keep you updated if i pull the shot off. i wanted to cheat the shot and shoot it at my apartment with 12 foot ceiling and plenty of thick piping to rig the camera on, but the director is set on this location. renting more equipment is kind of out of the question because the budget is pretty much spent on 3 zeiss primes, film, and a HD transfer with a colorist.

thanks for the help guys. i'll be scouting the location in the next few days to see if i can pull this shot off cheaply and safely. i think i'll be looking at making Thomas' approach work with a wood support instead of the dolly track.

so i drew up an impossible shot that the director fell in love with and I'm trying to see if I can make it happen. I'll be trying to rig the thing on Tuesday to see if it'll work or not, but I'd like some suggestions on how to go about it. this is for a student short film shot on 16mm neg on an Eclair shooting 100 foot mags. I don't have much in terms of grip equipment or budget so please keep that in mind. the location is a small NYC apartment with 8-10 foot ceilings. the camera is meant to be looking straight down from the ceiling. is there any way i can build something to mount the camera to the ceiling? or mount the camera to something being supported by two c-stands? safety is obviously a concern here as well so any solution will need to be able to support the weight of the camera with a 100 foot mag. also the shot is a wide shot so keeping the rigging out of the frame is an issue.

DV Film has some good information on the cameras you are considering as well as how to set them up for the best image quality and for printing to film.

I'll be shooting a short documentary over the next few weeks on the DVX100A and I've never used the camera before. 2 of the locations are galleries with pretty flat tungsten light. the other, i haven't seen, but it is an artist's studio. the documentary is being shot as a spec and may be seen on european TV. i have read the set up tips on DVfilm.com for transfer to film, but I haven't been able to find much else. from what i've read, i should be shooting at 25P standard. correct? if anyone, has any advice on what settings they prefer for documentaries, let me know. i'm basically looking for a set-up to get a sharp image to play on PAL TVs.

i think what you're saying is you what a more shallow depth of field. stick some ND filters in front of the lens and this will knock down your DOF to give you more of a "film look." and there is nothing wrong with overcast days. ratcatcher, morvern callar, and clockwork orange have some gorgeous cinematography in overcast weather. it just depends on the mood you're going for.

David Thanks for posting your experiences shooting the film. Your posts have been an invaluable resource me and everyone else here on the forum. I think a personal website with articles would be a great idea. Is the book you co-wrote out yet? Pat.

there's no such thing as a bad question, but i think you're asking yourself the wrong questions. if you've only directed 2 student THEATRE productions, i think it's a little bit of a stretch of the imagination to think that you'll get your first film financed unless you're as brilliant as somebody like Orson Welles. i would concentrate on making shorts on 16, S16 or a pretty good video format. also, read about the industry and see how it works. i'm only saying that because you don't seem to have an great understanding of how film business works. i guarantee you, no one will give you the money to shoot a film on 35mm of any length with your lack of experience.

i'm AC/2nd unit DP on my friend's short next month and he's shooting with an XL-2 w/mini 35 adapter and 35mm zeiss primes. i'll post some stills when i get a chance. the DP said better optics=better image in relation to using 35mm lenses on the XL-2 and he can get an extra two stops of light.

Claudio, your reel is gorgeous.

nice idea. DVD special features are a great way to learn. The Man Who wasn't There has an interview with Roger Deakins that is excellent.

if you want to have a professional looking short spend your money on the image. camera, lenses, post, etc. and how long is your script? a 7 day shooting schedule should mean you're trying to shoot a 20-30 min short. i don't know what you're goal with this short is, but i might think about shortening it if you're want big production values. also, i would concentrate more on being able to tell a good story. nobody cares if you have a crane shot in your short.

you could stick a lamp or some other motivate light in the background to provide seperation if you don't want to put anymore light on the actor.

to me the light is too white on the table. in new cinematographers harris savides describes a technique for The Yards using bunches of three candles bounced off of curved showcard. this will give you the right color temp and a natural flicker. if you're interested do some research into what kind of candles will provide enough light. i think there should be some stage candles designed for theatre that'll do the trick. otherwise, i would use a chinese lantern or muslin ball dimmed or gelled to the right color temp. also, your actor is kind of getting lost in the darkness. i like the way the set is lit, but i'd like to see a little more light on his face and a little more seperation.

this is the best advice you'll get...don't do it. student filmmakers always try this shot beause they learn about in school and think it's cool. i've never seen it executed well by a student even with professional dollies. this technique is one of the flashiest and really calls attenion to itself. it's really hard to motivate a shot like this. you can look at goodfellas as stated early, jaws (obviously), and road to perdition (when jude law's character is introduced) for examples. again...i highly recommend not using this technique as it will make your student film look and feel like a student film. on the other hand, the dolly in zoom in works for me. check goodfellas (de niro in the phone booth hearing the news that pesci got wacked), boogies nights or magnolia.

great post. i'm pretty sure Hopper was an inspiration for the look of Road to Perdition. Check out the DVD special features for more on it. and the photos at World Press Photo are incredible.

think about the story, the arc of the film, the characters, the plot, and the lighting should come naturally. don't rely on cinematography to create tension alone, but use cinematography to compliment the other factors creating tension in the scene. a well framed static shot along with a good director and actors can work. if i wanted to get across tension i would hold a shot like this in a long take and let the actors' silence, movements, expressions, and mannerisms display tension, but that's just one style. you also place one character in light and let the other be in silhouette or put a character's face in shadows. shadows are your friend for tension. Think of using light and shadow as way to give and conceal information. if the audience wants to see or know something and you are concealing it in a well motivated way you can create tension in the audience without drawing attenion to your technique. or you can give the audience information that other characters in the film don't know that could affect them. bad example, but you could show a woman having an affair with another man and show the husband being completely clueless and madly in love with his wife. the audience wants to know if the husband will find out and what will happen if he does. two films that i would look at for using shadows to create tension are Night of the Hunter and The Man Who wasn't There. you can also read about how Hitchcock creates tension through giving and concealing information in VF Perkins' book Film as Film. Perkins also has a case study where he compares Preminger's style to Hitchcock's in terms of how they tell a story through different techniques, which is definately worth a read and would help you with how to develop tension effectively.

i shot a project for school that basically consisted of tests using primarily daylight. i shot quite a bit of footage at both sunrise at sunset. like others have said, daylight looks richer at the end of the day whether it is the blue hour or the golden hour the respective colors look richer than at sunrise. sunrise feels more intense to me and seems to bloom more. maybe because your eyes are adjusting from dark to bright vs. at night your eyes adjust from bright to dark. i also found sunrise to be shorter than sunset. these are my impressions based upon the tests i shot in wisconsin in the spring. also, sunrise and sunset change color temperature, intensity, etc. very quickly so be careful to pick the right time of day so that you have adequate time to work and get or cheat the look you are going for.

sorry for the 3 straight responses, but i keep thinking. one technique for working with available light on interiors i've used is mirrors. i got this technique from Nestor Almendros' book. Anyway, you can use daylight coming through a window by reflecting it off a mirror and bouncing it off the ceiling or a bounce card. The reason you would use this technique is that you don't need to use light fixtures to try to match daylight. you are using real daylight to light your scene!!! obviously, this technique has limit uses because of the logistics of a location, personal style, and if it will work dramatically. Anyway, if you interested in the possibilities of available light I would look at Nestor Almendros' book, "A Man with a Camera," and I think Kodak has a book on working with available light. I also recommend watching Days of Heaven. It's a pretty fascinating case study because Almendros DPed the film, but had to leave during production and Haskell Wexler took over as DP and claims to have shot over half the film. Almendros worked as much as possible with available light while Wexler relied more on artificial lighting. Personally, I can't tell who shot what with a few exceptions.

this is probably the best advice you'll get. almost any film instructor will say that the biggest problem with student films is story. hell, most professional filmmakers can't tell a story. once you've got your story nailed down, think about cinematography, wardrobe, locations, pacing, sound, etc. in relation to your story and characters. i find that everything falls into place once i know my characters and story inside out.

you can get a pretty good image with a pretty basic set up, but you need to know what you're doing. interiors will obviously require the most thought and preperation to get what you are looking for. i've had great success lighting with a couple of china lanterns, some practicals, c-stands, flags, diffusion, gels, filters, etc. but that's my style and it worked for the projects I was directing, DPing, operating, etc. like others have said, you need to pick up a book on lighting. think about how light looks naturally (it's color, quality, intensity, direction) and how light works dramatically with story. this should help you envision the look for your film. once you have a vision, we can help you.

"A Man with a Camera" by cinematographer Nestor Almendros is nice. He opens with how he got into film and how his theory on film and light develop. The rest of the book is a discussion of the films he worked on and techniques he used. It is OOP now, but is definately work a look if your into naturalism.