Jump to content

Duca Simon Luchini

Basic Member
  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Duca Simon Luchini

  1. Hi Landon, I don't like wild camera movs, as well, but even with a lock off Camera, in a battle, fighting or action scene, you have drastic movements of the Characters, or objects (i.e. props, weapons,etc....) in scene. In these cases shooting with a high frame should help to avoid undesirable motion blurs.
  2. Thanks guys, yes, anyway the focus was on Matchmvoing and not about all type of VFX. For slow motion effects, i.e. you need high frame rate. And I ask to me if maybe it a good idea to shoot again in high frame rate when you shot an action scene or a very electric commercial spot or music video-clip, all cases where you have to insert in post moving text, graphic, vfx like explosion, laser blaster, etcetera...
  3. Hallo everybody, I'd like to talk about shooting tech for Matchmoving and Motion tracking VFX. I mean: when we are sure the footage we're going to shoot will be used in post VFX for needs of Matchmoving and Motion tracking for needs of, should be shoot with 50, 60 or more fps? Should it help tracking and matchmoving even if we have e Lock-off camera and or e very slow camera movs (shortly, without motion blur)? And anyway, using more than 24, 25, 30 fps, (50, 60. 100 and more and more fps) how affect the visibility? I mean, after tracking, could I transform native high value fps in a standard 24, 25 or 30 fps so thatt can I visualize video in a "Normal" way, without any "ralenty" or slow/fast motion effects? Thanks for a reply! :D
  4. Hi David, First I ask if shutter speed must be twice the frame rate, because this I read... If shutter speed should be twice the frame rate value, then you should use 1/120th and not 1/30th... sorry, I am confused... :wacko: And of course, I don't wont blur... I mean. if you shot at 24 fps, (film Shutter angle 180 degree) you should set up shutter speed to 1/48th to have a "natural blur"; If increase frame rate, to 60fps, e.i., you should al least set up shutter speed to 1/120th, and you have still more frame per second (good form slow motion) but still remains a "natural blur". To remove much mor as possible this blur, what have you to do? For example, if you shoot at 60 fps and increase shutter speed to 1/1000 you should be remove more of the blur... of course you also underexpose, but you can add light ot change Aperture...
  5. Hallo everybody, more and more videos that we can see around, have a slow motion and fast motion applied (i thing i post). So we can see for example a drone above the city flying quickly, and slow down quickly to almost stop, then maybe resume flying quickly or at normal speed ... (three type of velocity in the same shoot!). This is something we can make entirely in post but my question is: how can we properly shoot this sequences on set, to avoid motion blur and to have enough FPS to make e believable extreme slow motion... (and for many other VFX needs, like Keynig, match-moving...)? Shortly, we should increase the shutter angle speed (and break the 180° shutter speed rule...) or augment as much as possible FPS (Depending on the camera's capabilities, of course)? Or maybe both, but in which proportion? i.e. I mean, the first idea could be to increase FPS to 50 or 60 fps (common DSRL in use). According with this frame rate, I should increase shutter speed to 100 or 120 to stay in the 180° shutter speed rule, if I'm right. The problem is when you increase extremely the shutter speed, to 1/1000 and many more... in these cases you cant increase your frame rate... so what happen? Of course, if you increase shutter speed, you underexpose and you have to compensate with Aperture or adding lighting. But without exposure problem, again, what happen if you increase shutter speed breaking 180° rule? P.S. My question is concerning DIGITAL SHOOTING, no FILM. Many thanks for a reply.
  6. Okay, I j I only thought that there was a tool in the House, as the vectorscope, Historgram, and other scopes, dedicated to color temperature ... that's all.
  7. Okay, David, but the "color monitor image" is a special 3d part monitor, or a function of the camera menu? Shortly, where I find it...? <_<
  8. Uhm, many thanks for your replies. Let me test all above said. :rolleyes:
  9. There are two very important problems: 1 - What you suggest can surely be useful but doesn't properly answer the questions I made... 2 - Internet is great but also full of poop infos, above all , about all about specific and technical arguments... Anyway thanks for your reply!
  10. I have a Canon 60D, but anyway, what is important is to know how is the DR of the camera are you going to use, to be sure to apply a good ISO for that camera.
  11. Thanks Igor and David, but for what above said, I should know how can I knew the camera used dynamic range, to apply our consideration... So two, questions: - how is the dynamic range of a camera (because many camera don't declare it in spec techs...)? Maybe a rough value, but usable... - at which ISO value can I establish that I have (almost) equal stop above and below the grey middle value? Sincerely I don't know how to answer to these questions..., but it crucial to test every used camera to know the specific dynamic range, and then apply the reasoning from Igor above. The same problem about measuring (on set) the dynamic range of the scene - I mean scene already illuminated -. How to make it? Many thanks for a reply!
  12. So David, great, I didn't know this relation between ISO value and overexposure clipping. Some considerations about it: 1 - if we shoot in Log, we already obtain a reasonable dynamic range even if we use a low ISO value..., and we can recover detail in the highlights in post production, but with a minimal noise impact. So, why increase ISO? 2 - there is tons of noise effects to add to a footage... but remove noise is a process many many more complicated, and it compromise always the footage quality. 3 - in my approach, as inexperienced cinematographer, I let me guide by "contrast" (I thing it's still the best school). It mean basically that, I have to decide what should be rightly exposed and what not, inside the image. I don't like recent low contrast "log" mood... s Shortly, I don't prefer have details in highlights (with a noised footage...) rather then having detail in a focused area which is important, and in which I don't need noise. Okay, we are talking about an aesthetic approach, where all should be possible, anyway, I tend to create a clear and contrasted images as general approach. If I need grain, I add it in post. Many thanks for your reply!
  13. HI Igor, thanks for your reply. yes, first, we have to test every single camera (sensor) in use to see how ISO value works, as David mentioned. Than we could also decide if we want use an high ISO even if shouldn't be necessary, to noise footage. Or stay in a pretty clean image situation, as you said, "...to make the indoors/night shots pristine clear so you light up the set to levels for say f4, ISO 100, 1/50...". Again, my was a general approach for DSRL Canon I used. A rough approach...
  14. Hi David, every camera of course has different sensor sensibility, my example was a general approach for DSRL, but yes, it to much rough. We should test every camera in use to see which are the ISO limits. My general consideration was that in outdoor daily scene we have always more light then in indoor scene, so there is not reason to push up the ISO value.
  15. Hi David, It want to be only a starting point to understand the concept. I mean: one could say the opposite, namely, being the light of the day made up of a multitude of color temperatures, there is no point even out the color temperature. In addition we should add another consideration: without a color meter is impossible to work taking into account all color temperatures. And most of indi cinematographer have not a color meter (really expensive). Anyway, to reach a superior step, you are completely right: we can have a rough approach to color temperature, but we should also take care about shading (i.e, stage costumes, stage furniture colors). It a very complex work...
  16. Hi guys, in internet is a huge mass of misinformation, often even completely wrong ... which is why I kindly ask if what I wrote is right, or not. A reply would be great contribution for everybody. Cheers and many thanks.
  17. Hi guys, in internet is a huge mass of misinformation, often even completely wrong ... which is why I kindly ask if what I wrote is right, or not. A reply would be great contribution for everybody. Cheers and many thanks.
  18. Ho David, reading again this very great post, I'd like to summarize what is important about white colour balance: first, we have to uniform all lighting sources on set (in outdoor scene with only the sun as lighting source, the light is already uniform, of course), using camera filter or gel on lighting source, to have the same color temperature for all lights. second, when all lighting source have the same color temperature, we can choose to let them so OR, we can change the global color temperature, setting on camera a desired color temperature (which could also very different). A typical example could be a indoor scene with mixed lighting source of popular offices: first, we decide to uniform all lighting source to 5600 kelvin , correcting with gel the other lighting sources as the very common florescent or tungsten lights; second, we decide to cooler the scene, setting white balance on camera to 4500 or 4000 kelvin. If this reasoning is correct, it should be valid for all lighting situations. as always, many thanks for a reply!
  19. Hallo everybody, this message posy is just little confused because it was not able to edit my replies.... For this reason, I still have some doubts that I would like to clarify. If I am right, in film stock you have maximal ISO 500 (!). In Digital, instead, I read the best "standard" setting for ISO should be: - outdoor, max 320 ISO; - indoor, max 800 ISO. That's to avoid to compromise image quality with a huge range of noise. The second consideration is that we normally shouldn't shoot in "wide open", to avoid frequent out of focus, but we should choose a "practical" aperture...: i.e I read the most used aperture in cinema are f/4 and f/5.6. Anyway, we should stay around a range from f/4 up to f/11 and more (Greg Toland deep focus approach...). Said that, I'd like to make a piratical example to understand if I got it... :unsure: : I have a Canon EF 17-55 with constant (fastest) aperture in f/2.8. Outdoor, day, we shouldn't have problem to stay on ISO in a range of 100 up to 320, using a least an f/4 as aperture. Shortly, if you have much light, the have the only problem to limit it... (ND filters closed aperture...) The problems come when we have low lights... - Indoor, day, only natural lighting from windows, doors, and similar. I start to set up the light meter to 800 ISO, 25fps, 180 as shutter angle: I have a f/1.4... so, it should mean I need to add 2 more stops of light, because I don't want to use open wide f/1.4 (even If I could have it) and because, of course I'd don't want an ISO value upper to 800. This reasoning is correct? Many thanks for a reply! :wub:
  20. Great, this is a good example of how to creatively use cinefade
  21. Yes, you are right, maybe we can use it only in special occasions, anyway it could be very creative: a new element to rich cinematography language.
  22. Hallo everybody, here I read today this big news (news for me...): http://nofilmschool.com/2016/08/rack-depth-of-field-with-cinefade-tool http://nofilmschool.com/2016/08/rack-depth-of-field-with-cinefade-tool It's a great thing. Anyone had any experiences about it?
  23. Of course, over exposed! (But the REAL problem here is I can not edit my messages... :unsure:)
  • Create New...