Jonathan Bruno

Ram, it's seems with 3 features and 200+ music videos, you've got enough experience to handle this situation. Good luck!!!! -JB

THANK YOU DAVID. I will show this to my producers so they will believe me. I have been saying it is not important to shoot 3 hrs away if all we are seeing is the side of a road and a sea of black. Thanks for the other tips as well. Perhaps I'll have them splurge for a musco light. ha.

Hey all. Here's the deal. My director wants to shoot the climax of the film we are working on on the side of a desert road in the dead of night. I'm not against this, but it's a student project and I don't see the possibility of making it look like the desert at night, or even to be able to seen anything at all unless we have a large budget with enormous lights and a relatively small space to light. I would love to have a few 12K HMIs at my disposal, but that simply won't happen. Right now I'm suggesting that we film the majority of it as it gets increasingly darker and do some colour timing to bring it down later. Any suggestions?

HVX is not HDV format. It's a totally different compressions scheme, i.e. DVC PRO HD

There are a lot of good examples of extreme changes in focus with a very wide aperture in Sunshine, shot by Alwin Kutchler. Check out the scene right after Kanaeda fixes the solar panels. Sorry I can't add a pic.

I wish there was more to add. David has got it. I would add that you should thoroughly clean the window before applying the gel. I made that mistake once, and it was definitely noticable compared to the other well-cleaned windows. Good Luck. -Jon

Think safety first. There are numerous ways to achieve a similar effect without using something you're unsure of. Why not get a 4x4 frame of 216 and just cut off the spill with floppies? You could even add a tiny make-shift grid if it suits your purposes. Then you're using simple stuff and not worrying about fire hazards! Good luck. If you attach photos, advice will be easier.

A Picture would be nice. Usually softboxes are designed to accomodate a certain size of light. So, look at the specs of the softbox. Is it a chimera brand? A little more investigation is required, but 500 watts is not a very high amount to worry too much about. Just make sure the equipment you're using is designed to work with you lighting fixture!

If he's a dark shell of a man, perhaps he should be in a darker place. Maybe we shouldn't identify with him as much on a human level. Definitely cut out any light that is working against you, like on the back walls. Just focus it on your characters and try to get rid of that nasty spill that's going everywhere. You could cut the light on the man's face, so that we can't see him clearly, as he doesn't see himself or his life clearly anymore. Or make the girl more menacing. The possiblities are endless in these darker stories. It really depends on who is the focus and what their state of mind is. The gun shot, I feel, should be a lot darker. What is the man thinking about? Is he empty at this moment too? Maybe it would be better to darken the executioner a little, or a lot. In general, emote with the light a little more. It does a lot a work for you if you control it. I agree with Fransisco. The key could definitely be softer and probably a lot darker. If you want a good look at emotive lighting, watch Blade Runner (shot by Jordan Cronenweth) or The Natural (shot by Caleb Deschanel) Good luck and keep experiementing. In the end, it is your creativity that makes the image interesting.

I would suggest finding a virtual ISO for the HDV camera. I don't know what the canons usually run at. that will help you gauge how much light you're using for the HDV. You will need a color chart and a waveform monitor of some kind. Just balance the 18% grey to 50% IRE on the waveform. Also, it wouldn't hurt to do a latitude test on the HDV by getting a reading and going up and down and see how many stops you got on the top and bottom. Unfortunatley, you'll most likely have to change you lighting ratios between the super8 and the HDV. Even though it's 8mm, it's still going to have more range than the HDV. I've never shot the Velvia in motion picture form, but it's pretty versitile in still form. It's exactly the same film, so you will have a lot to work with.

As always, Andrew has covered all the important steps. I was just going to add a side note that a big reason that people don't like the 500T - whether it be 18 or 19 - on 16mm is because they rate it at 500ASA. I have heard and seen by experience that 320 ASA is a really good place to start to tighten the grain. If you're shooting on 35mm, on the other hand, the difference is not as crucial. I know that for some of the darker scenes in I Am Legend, they reated at 1000 and didn't push or pull, and the grain still looks damn good. Basically, take a bunch a film and shoot a bunch of color charts, and similar lighting set ups at different ratings and see what you like. There isn't a right or wrong way to do it, but I would would agree with Jonathan that 2 stops is pushing it, pardon the pun. Good luck!

Some of them have their info online. You could always call the ASC Clubhouse and talk to the women there that organizes meetings with the guys. Unfortunately, I've forgotten her name, but she kicks butt for students. Where is your school located? That would help narrow it down. If you're near L.A. just go up the the clubhouse and strike up a conversation. Although, they're getting renovated right now.

Satsuki, Not all films that go through a DI have a heavy amount of grain reduction, so you can't base your assumptions on whether or not it went through a DI. In fact, most DIs default to using absolutely no grain reduction. However, I will agree with you that we can't be sure that what we're seeing is necessarily film grain, although the compression settings are blu-rays are pretty damn good. I would say we should all just be happy that this technology exists and that HD DVD is gone. It's silly to fight over issues of grain.

One big things that I still like about film is its organic nature. It's a different image every 24th of a second, whereas digital is an image that is being created on a stagnant matrix that does not move or shift at all. Also, you can do 8K scans of 35mm. It takes longer, but it's been done. And we should not forget about larger formats. Should I take pictures with a hasselblad digital or film? It's a matter of preference. The only people who are going to notice the difference is this small coloister of people who seem hell-bent on arguing over minutia. Light it well and tell a damn good story and people will love it. All those pixar films don't originate on film, and you can't tell me that people don't connect with those.

You have the basic idea. You meter something in order to find out where it lies on your greyscale. If you're shooting for a certain aperture to stay at throughout your shoot or your scene, you need to know how much detail you have in your shadows and your highlights, because you can't adjust that much in processing like you can with still photography. As far as what to look for when taking your readings, you will learn as you get prints of your film and learn how much latitude the stocks have. Everyone says that the new 19 stock from Kodak has tons of latitude, which it does, but you don't want to assume you have a safety net and let you highlights go nine stops over. It's all about finesse. Shoot some tests. Take extensive notes on your aperture, and the incident and reflected readings in the shot and you will be able to see how to control things better.