Robin R Probyn

Absolutely.. and they are rewarded accordingly... if they don't like what they are rewarded they have the freedom to move to greener pastures.. or open their own business.. and make their pasture greener... if they dare!

But your words are not the real world... guys are getting huge salaries and pay off,s for running companies into the ground... watch the news.. where is the risk in that.. easy job.. risk takers are small companies.. the big ones,that effect our lives are run by crooks..

I rest my case your honour

If you want to use the light from a practical and you don't like how hot the lamp itself gets, you can tape a small piece of diff to knock down the side of the bulb that is toward camera. A piece 6 or 7 inches long and 3 or 4 inches wide will do the trick. The aim is to knock the light down on the half of the lamp toward camera while letting it hit the talent full strength.

 

You can also let the lamp burn out some. I often find it pleasing.

I guess it depends on the lamp ofcourse.. a desk light you can cut off the light towards the camera totally... but a table lamp close to the subject for an interview is going to be very distracting.. unless its a look you are after.. IMHO.. but the ND is a good idea.. Ive done that for the whole bulb.. until I woke up and got a dimmer..!!!

Slicing into the lamp shade sounds fun too... an antique one should cut easily :)

Tanks

Glad I could help. If anything audio related isn't working on a Sony camera, it's almost always some obscure switch or menu setting.

Why channel 3 or 4... if its audio I would say 1 or 2 nes par?

No, it's not really true. Sometimes you just want to see a glow from a practical but have it not give out any real exposure, so you use a very low wattage bulb or dim it down. Other times, you want the practical to actually provide a large amount of the exposure on a face, so you use a higher wattage bulb. You need a variety of wattage bulbs, and you need to carry some dimmers too.

 

I often start out with 100w bulbs in most of my household lanterns. Sometimes I put in something even brighter, occasionally something smaller. Just depends. A practical in the far background may need to only put out a dim glow, other times, you want it to expose most of that wall. Also depends on how dense the shade is, and how far the practical is from the subject.

 

Unlike some DP's, I actually want the real lamps to do most of the lighting work in a scene, especially if an actor is sitting right next to one -- it looks more natural that way. Unless a too-bright practical looks distracting or is creating an unwanted flare.

 

I particularly like desk lamps that allow me to key the actor.

Hi

How do you avoid the lamp and shade from burning out/blowing out.... if you expose for the light... doesnt the face get too dark.. or do you have some special shades made up?

Thanks

I'm not sure that "there's a good amount of artificial lighting with the interiors." Malick does not like artificial light. Kind of like trying to put a cat in the bathtub. Let me dig out that old AC and re-read it.

Yes Badlands had no budget for lights at all !!! .. as Terry Malick thought the DP didnt use any... but that soon changed ..!!!

I'm shooting a dark room and I need a strong shaft of light coming through the window. I'm using a putt putt generator and I was wondering what would be the best HMI light for the job and also what would be a good hazer to get? Also I'm following someone down a long tunnel that has skylights but I wanted some fill on the face of my actor while in the shadows. Is there a good light for this, that is battery operated? Thanks!

You could try a Lite panel for your fill in the tunnel... they work off batteries , low power consumption .and can be handheld..

Wow great responses from everyone.

 

That makes complete sense about directing the eye. I remember the conference table scene where Daniel Craig apologizes, and as the other men leave the room as the camera moves closer to him, his face and also his shirt are very white, almost "glowing"....and it definitely directed my eyes. It actually reminded me of how a "black light" works.

 

I also agree, lighting doesn't have to be "natural", but, when I thought about how the exterior lighting in the locations seemed to me to be very undirected soft light, and then I see an interior shot where the character's seem to have unexpected highlights, that to me seems contradictory to the exterior visuals.

 

Interesting point about "suspension of disbelief" too.

 

I guess I can say, from a technique based perspective, I can appreciate Road to Perdition more now. Thanks for the responses.

Whats that story.. the DP is asked by the director.. when he put up a big HMI for a night ext... but where is that light coming from..DP answers.. same place as the music.. :)

Well....yah there was no fill in the indoor shots. so yes using a reflector could work.

 

the outdoor shots are pretty bright, mainly because of light at that time of the day. What you say?

One thing would be to shoot on a better camera,if thats possible.. a 2/3 inch chip camera,with a nice canon or Fujinon lens,is going to make things look better.A mattbox with an ND grad will help landscapes etc straight out of the box.. ofcourse these all cost money,but if they will make your pictures look better.

Personally I dont think you need fill on the first interiors ... will make it look pretty flat.. the shadow is nice in my option .. and ofcourse its up to your personal taste in the first place.. if you did have a small kino light I,d use it on the window /source side of the face on the CU if anything.

What about using a transformer? 220v to a 110v, when i lived in the UK, that's how all my stuff worked with no problem.

Just get some 240V/230V bulbs.. alot easier than lugging transformers around.. and some travel plugs ofcourse! Also 50hz so watch out for flicker from flories /tv screens if your not shooting 25p/25fps

Just had a thought.. I think Chimera do ND screens.. might not fit the windows exactly (maybe you could draw the curtains to hide edges) but they are built pretty tough and I dont think they crinkle up,and have velcro around the edges

Thanks Michael! sounds like a great idea!

 

and get some sleep mate :)

Now thats more like it :) !!

 

great tip, I haven't seen that one and going to grab it today. (although I'm not a big fan of Cameron crow)

 

Sorry for the cynicism in my reply. i know you meant to help but i felt a little bit like I'm being lectured about documentary film making when all i asked about was lighting the darn bus. B)

 

i know it will be impossible to achieve only 1.5 over exposed outside and i guess that giving that number was misleading. what i actually meant was that I'm looking for an overexposed look, but i want to retain as much detail as i can. i guess ND will be my solution. ill check it out the first few days and decide.

 

ill post some photos from the trip.

 

thanks again.

 

p.s. just spoke with the producers about the green screen but they couldn't fine a studio available for the entire month so we are flying anyway. :lol: :lol:

Yes see what you mean.. didnt mean to lecture ! keep us posted.. and good luck.

probably because i want to see better outside the bus. I'm not sure ND on the window will help me in situation when i drive through a city at night and want to get as much exposure possible from outside the bus.

 

 

 

Thank you for that tip. Being a "Lighting" section in a "Cinematography" forum I'm looking for more technical advice about the challenges I'll facing in those same areas (lighting and cinematography). The aspect of content and having 'great moments' is of course important for itself (probably much more than how to light a bus) but is not on debate here. it is how to get those moments better on camera when they happen. Also i believe that in this case it'll be important for those great moment to even be registered since the band will be responding to the outside world and it'll help to see what they respond to on the same shot.

 

 

 

Of course that during the shoot ill have to be light on my feet and quick to response, as always. I shot 5 feature length documentaries , and just finished a 6 episode TV series here in Israel so I have some experience with documentaries (also many shorts) . I know there will be little time for anything and there will be many moments with poor conditions ill have to swim through. but i believe there is nothing wrong in coming prepared as much as you can. even when doing documentaries. it always helped me and even saved my skin from a major screw-up many times (excuse my french).

 

Thank you for your help. and I also love the movies you mentioned.

 

 

 

No disrespect intended... just sort of thinking/writing out loud.. if you want the int of the bus to be 1 to 1.5 stop ratio you,ll need a feature film like lighting rig AND ND on the windows :).. or at least a hell of alot of Kinoflo,s and hope for some dark cloudy days.. Have you seen Almost Famous... (think that was the name) lots of inside bus footage.. maybe there is something in AC about that??

Pretty good film too.

 

Sorry if I offended you.. good luck with the shoot.. could shoot all the bus footage green screen... only joking..

Thank you all for the advice.

 

I'm weighing again the idea of using ND on the windows. Maybe placing them strategically will do the trick and give me the exposure I'm looking for without loosing the ambiance inside the bus. Only problem is that i need to find a modular way for installing them since at night time i will naturally want to take them off .

 

do you know of any kind of roll-down ND or anything similar that might do the trick?

Why take them off at night? it will be dark anyway.Alot of these tour buses have tinted windows anyway.You know really what is going to make this doc good or not,are the moments you catch,even if underexposed or a blown out background... I think your sound is going to much more important.. esp if you are doing it yourself.

Have you seen some of those early rock doc,s when they first had low profile mag,s on 16mm camera,s.. so they could actually walk through a door way!

Look back in anger.. an early one about Bob Dylan .. some early Rolling stones ones.. .. lots of underexposed and over exposed stuff, but great content.. In my experience.. except for 5min interview that you,ll wait 4 hrs to get.. you wont have any time to do much pre lighting at all.. you just have to think on your feet.. go for a silhouette if the back ground is burning out.. its more being in the right place at the right time..

This December I'm shooting a documentary in India. It's about an Israeli rock band going on tour all over India inside a big tour bus.

 

large part of the journey will be inside the bus, due to the long distances between the cities in India, and I've been toying with the idea of lighting the inside of the bus a bit.

 

i want to keep it as realistic as i can, and only raise the inside ambiance level so i could get better exposure of the outside of the bus.

im not looking for perfect exposure and it should stay overexposed outside, but not more than 1-1.5 stops i'd say.

 

I think that NDing the windows will be problematic. the band will be sitting at the rear of the bus on both sides and NDing both sides will bring the ambiance down too much.

 

any ideas? light recommendations ? other solutions you think off? any help will be great!

 

I'll be using sony EX3.

 

thank you.

 

 

If you have the money there are a some mini kinoflo sets,used alot for lighting the inside of cars.. or a good hardware/building supply shop will have the consumer version! but much cheaper.. some can be powered by consumer batteries which might be better than from bus(depends on what state the bus is in!) and even have magnetic backing.

 

If this is a famous group,then the bus should be ok.. but take care when taping/clamping the lights.. so they dont fall on their heads when they are all pissed off on a 12hr bus ride.. otherwise it could be a very short doco. !

 

You could also try a small LED lite panel mounted on the camera.. dimmed down low.. easy option but the lighting will be flat.. but all of this would only really be of use evening or night time..

 

Day time... in India.. I,d say try to avoid being straight onto the windows.. hopefully they have blinds/curtains anyway.. or bring your own muslin sheets/nets/diffusers that you might be able to rig up.

I mean it in the sense that there is an overall concept to which lighting adapts as well as everything else. The concept of an interview is very simple. Two people, in most cases, talk with each other (in most cases, but again I'm ironic). There is no further meaning around. (Now I'm serious.) With fiction the actors are manipulated. Everything can be manipulated. I'd never speak of dumb and smart face sides and the like in general terms. That would be mere technical dexterity. No, a technician contributes even more profoundly to the concept of a production than a prop manager. The cinematographer is probably the most important technician.

Ok yes see what you mean... Iam pretty much always doing doc,s with alot of interviews... only the subject on camera... where lighting from the dumb side is just done by beginners.. unless physically impossible.. or wanting an unorthodox look or framing for the subject matter..but IMHO.. purposely lighting from the dumb side and or having the empty frame space going the wrong way is not very clever.. just because its ..(edgy) ? or the latest vogue in music vids.. or the DP had too much Gin at lunch.... speaking of which even Chris Doyle doesnt do it :lol:

No, I'm not. In an interview I shouldn't give a person such an intense significance. The spoken word is most important there. The original question comes from the fictitional standpoint where a face, a CU, rather bares a single message like: FEAR or ANGER or DISAPPOINTMENT or CARE, and so on. Lighting a movie is setting the coherence.

How do you mean you wouldnt give a person such an intense significance in an interview... but I agree what they say is more important than the lighting at the end of the day.. but my job is make it look good/interesting/try to make someone not switch over to the simple life.. :P

Malik and everybody: For me light opens space(s). In the dark (of the cinema, finally) I feel closed in. That is probably the main theme with photography and cinematography. So, the key light might give the character her/his forward space or room to look in, to move, to talk. It's the sun. All life, all action on earth directs towards the sun, our key light, if you want. In artificial lighting we only imitate this primordial fact. The rest is reflections, bounce light, filling in, softening or spicing up for contrast. When you revert the natural relation between light and life, let me say, you give the scene a night twist. We humans master the fire and use it also in the night. I think we should keep this in mind for our pictorial light-dark concept. Of course, I'm speaking of the presented scenery in cinema and on television/video set, not of the light situation itself which is artificial: projection or back-lit displays.

So you are saying the dumb side looks crap in an interview,and the smart side is obviously the better choice.. :)

Anyone using this battery with the hdx900.. if so what have you been setting for full voltage in the bat settings menu..?

 

Thanks

I found out its same as Endura 10 settings

Anyone using this battery with the hdx900.. if so what have you been setting for full voltage in the bat settings menu..?

Thanks

I assisted Barry Ackroyd way back and there cant be a nicer guy to work with,also very open to tell all his tricks,idea,s ..

Badlands was shot by Brian Probyn BSC...

Thanks :rolleyes:

No mention of Chris Menges.... a fore runner in his day... and Barry Ackroyd now... United 93 , and all the recent Ken Loach films.

I agree with Dan and NOT rating some cinematographers over others, especially when they come from different time periods and have aimed to achieve different objectives.

Right now I'm into Sergei Urusevsky, for films such as Soy Cuba & The Cranes are Flying which has some really crafty B&W shots that after review are tricky to explain how it was actually shot. For example, in Soy Cuba towards the start of the film there is a rediculious long take starting on the roof of a hotel during a tropical modeling show/fiesta (seems like hand-held) as we are taken through the party than reaching the roof's edge the camera is lowered the entire hight of the building down to the pool deck. The camera continues to walk among the crowd and finally follows a hot babe into a large pool to end the shot with underwater photography. Absolutely amazing planning and they must have had intense rehersals with all of the actors and extras.

 

If you haven't seen either of these films I strongly suggest you check them out!!

Hi there

Dont see much talk of the new PDW700(think thats right) 2/3 inch XDCAM camera.

I know its not really out there yet,but any thoughts about this camera for the doco/corp world.Seems like a no brainer to me,provided it has variable frame rates,and presuming its an accepted format by BBC/Discovery/Nat geo etc

Thanks