Jump to content

Guillaume Cottin

Basic Member
  • Content Count

    120
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    2

Guillaume Cottin last won the day on July 22 2013

Guillaume Cottin had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

14 Good

1 Follower

About Guillaume Cottin

  • Rank

  • Birthday January 9

Profile Information

  • Occupation
    Gaffer
  • Location
    Toronto

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. Oh, he must be talking about the Rosco acrylic panels. Expensive! However, you don't necessarily need acrylic panels to do that. The concept stays the same: heavy ND. I did it twice, once as a gaffer and once as a DP on a short. I messed it up as a DP because I used ND and CTB filters, so now I can tell you the trick is to just use straight NDs and not color gels because underexposing saturates the colors, and the outside is already blue enough. Also, the gels need to somehow be mattified, otherwise they reflect all the lighting indoors like a mirror. Thats probably the superiority of the acrylic panel (or any scrim material). On the other shoot as a gaffer we used ND9, but a heavier ND like 1.2 or more would have been better. The DP then put a bunch of 4K HMIs outside shooting through the ND for moonlight.
  2. With the car window screen, I’d be wary of color problems. I would splurge on real ND gel, you can put it on the windows using Windex then remove bubbles with a squeegee. It will hold for a few hours. And it’s reusable!
  3. Honestly, I wouldn't touch that Amazon light with a 12ft pipe! For the same budget, same form factor, double the power, I would get this instead: https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1342001-REG/godox_sl150w_5600k_150w_led.html That light will take any Bowens mount softbox.
  4. Generally it is not desired for the ambient light outside to participate to the exposure too much because of continuity. That's why a classic way to do it would be indeed a combination of ND or nets on the windows and raising interior exposure by carrying the window light, either by bouncing an HMI into the ceiling near the windows, or using Kinos or now LEDs (SL1s are great for that use), or Joker soft tubes. However it's a challenge to keep things subtle and not ruin the beauty of light coming from the exterior and side, as said earlier. It's important to keep any light sources inside very controlled and have an eye on the sky to match your ambient level. Hopefully it will just have to be for the wide and medium shots and you can do whatever to match what you had in the master in the close-ups and coverage, where you can bounce lights directly into windows that are not in shot. But I find a modern approach would lean towards keeping the sources that are supposed to be outside, outside, as much as possible. That's also made possible by the wide dynamic range of the cameras. First, if the budget and location allow, you can put what is visible outside in the shade using a flyswatter or another rig. Then I agree that the best way is to bounce large HMIs (as big as possible, in fact) into a white fabric above the windows, at the lowest correct angle for camera. I've seen that technique used by a few people now, so I think it's trending! It doesn't raise the light level inside as efficiently as setting an HMI inside, but the quality is better because it is shaped by the actual windows, and the falloff is also more realistic if people move closer to the windows.
  5. Hard to find for obvious safety reasons but: https://www.etsy.com/ca/listing/550502536/e26e27-medium-edison-screw-to-e39e40
  6. Heres my assessment Kinoflo Diva 21 will have more throw and output but will look harder. They're different tools and if had both you'd use them both. Litemats do not have any pre-built effects or DMX or color, that's why as a first light purchase I'd suggest the Kinoflo by a narrow margin. If you go for a Litemat however, unless you have a good discount, try avoiding the S2 because you'll be disappointed by its output in any situation other than interior nights. Do get the dop choice snapgrid with it, because the plastic grid on Litemats is heavy and not the best optically.
  7. There is a bi-color 85w version of the bulb you are referencing. Maybe that's enough. Brute force but "passable" CRI: 100W: https://ledmyplace.ca/products/led-corn-bulb-100w?variant=36001232011 300W: https://www.ebay.ca/i/254384949174
  8. Luke, You’re pretty much describing my own struggles especially the “opening and closing a lot of apps” part. Great item on paper, but sometimes unreliable. Mine works most of the time now, to be fair, and when it does the signal is good, but would I trust it in a demanding situation? I don’t know. The moonlite won’t output wired DMX and CRMX at the same time. In my opinion that’s a big limitation. No progress on my side, like I said, it kinda works but it is clunky. Hoping for software updates!
  9. Sure. The moonlite almost always successfully connects to the CRMX app but not always to Luminair. I was told I have to disconnect from CRMX app in order to connect to Luminair. While annoying in itself (when you have to pair more lights in the middle of a shoot) this solution helped, but I still have issues connecting to Luminair. Sometimes the Moonlite doesn’t show up in the Bluetooth list in Luminair. Sometimes it shows up but does not output DMX. Also it shows up a signal strength of roughly 60% even when I am close to the unit. One time, my Moonlite got bricked (static red LED, unit won’t turn off) and the support told me to remove the battery... I am wondering basically if I have a defective unit or if that’s the same with all Moonlites.
  10. Hello, have any of you used the Moonlite by Lumenradio. It seems very glitchy (won’t connect, etc...). Was wondering if you someone had the same experience. g.
  11. Also worth mentioning Chris Fraser http://www.chrisfraserstudio.com/
  12. That is correct! We had a 800w redhead on a boom bounced on the ground. It was on a magic gadgets flicker box. The practical lights are real flames indeed, but they weren’t giving enough exposure. The light at the end of the tunnel is an HMI, probably a 1200 PAR, the stand is hidden behind a 6x6 or 8x8 silk or something. Half the bean on the silk and the other half hitting the tunnel. That tunnel was so long, and the shadows from this HMI were so long as well, that moving the light at the other end of the tunnel even very slightly would produce a really disorienting effect I’m proud to say, everything was fake. The lamps art department found were so dim that the light wouldn’t actually light much at all. The effect on the hands and faces and wall is all the redhead. Mei Lewis is the closest!
  13. Nothing will melt, but the optical quality is inferior on the zoom lenses. You will get more chromatic aberration and a little less output. If the beam is supposed to be visible on camera (for example to simulate a sun beam) not just used as a bounce for example, it is better choose the fixed lenses. By default, I would choose the fixed lenses.
  14. And to state the obvious, you can rent a Magic Gadgets flicker dimmer. The effect might be less realistic albeit more controllable.
  15. Hi everyone, How about we play a little game? You post a screenshot of one of your shots, and everyone must guess what was the lighting setup. Whoever has the closest guess wins one point. Let's see if this little game takes off! Let me start with something easy. Cheers!
×
×
  • Create New...