Jump to content

Albion Hockney

Basic Member
  • Posts

    618
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Albion Hockney

  1. Just use something nylon like griff or ultrabounce w/ black on one side. for sure a 12x black rag will get really heavy and soaked if its pouring rain on it.
  2. First I'd say the age of the scan and color correct makes a major impact. Also the format you watched them in. But I think mostly what you are reacting to is the style of the films. These are totally different projects. Tarantino likes the look of B-Films that use harsh lighting techniques and you can see that at play here. It was also 1994, so the large soft source lighting of the mid 2000's and 2010's was not popular yet. Lord of the rings for sure used softer more contemporary lighting techniques and had a DI color correct (early digital process where the film was scanned, color corrected digitally and re-printed to film) so the color is much more manipulated. the speed and size of the film negative really only impacts grain and neither of these projects show much grain at all. personally, I think Pulp fictions looks way more interesting and you are now seeing a return to some of the harsher 90's lighting techniques now in newer work.
  3. I dont think you have the lights to sell this in wide shots with complete control and all your own lights. I would shoot during the day and use natural ambiance from the windows then use the brightest light/s you have as an isolated direct beam of sunlight and then roll in light diffusion over it. shooting tighter will help.
  4. I'm sure this was shot on a sound stage, just because of practicality for a tv series. Often times sets are built with ceilings, but they can build in mounting points or in some cases even remove sections of the ceiling if needed for lighting a certain shot or scene. I just saw the trailer and its clear they are using a lot of practical lights, the DP probably worked closely with the art department. That said you can also see that there is lighting to manage contrast ratios and light the talent in some shots, its likely most of this is coming from the ceilings or units outside of frame from the ground on stands. All the techniques you mentioned are possible to use in different ways to create a similar look, but yea Litmats would be a popular choice for soft light motivated by lamps and to create low level soft fill light.
  5. If you start getting called for union gigs and have to permit in that is a good time. I feel like most DPs these days get an agent before they go 600 so that gives you an idea. depend on the type of work you do though
  6. Every AC works different. Not every high end AC uses a focus assist tool and those tools are only aids anyways ...some do like working off monitors. most veteran AC's have a 9 or 13' 1080 display these days.
  7. Both the techniques you mentioned along with a handful of others are regularly used for just this...very popular for the long lens b-camera side angle. it helps to have time to play with it on set and its easier on longer lenses. usually you just use vasaline for the filter thing, but it really does just blur the frame. sometimes people just to place a glass of water in the edge of the frame, that gives a similar effect to prisms. backlit helps with all of this sorta stuff usually. There is even some kit you can buy of prisms and various objects you can place right on the edge of frame
  8. I don't find this to be true. LED to HMI efficiency seems pretty similar. I find the 600d close to as bright as a joker 800 a 1200D is like an M18 bulbed with a 1200W bulb...again maybe a touch less?
  9. woah, so many good things in this thread. thanks! here is a long doc about bergman making on winters light: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UOebK7UTUgc
  10. to me it looks like the face is underexposed. You prob want to overexpose a portion of her face 1-2stops. also this is very much about make up and sheen. you want the lights to be reflected by her skin. your model is also white and white people don't really reflect light unless they have a lot of makeup/product on. Jennifer Lopez's complexion is also apart of the look.
  11. its going to be very expensive thats for sure. the stabilized head on moving vehicle wont be very clean or consistent unless you did it as a slow move on a very long lens so the car can maintain a speed and circle the vehicle easily...you'd also need a huge road with open space left/right of it. ...and even then that's just a super tough shot to operate. would need to be cineflex or shotover. and to do that safely too.... its basically a stunt in itself. the jib makes the most sense to me. some Russian arms could shoot this shot on the car....but if you need to mount that sorta setup to a normal car....I donno you could build track around the car and suspend it off the roof maybe with some sorta robotic dolly underslung. to get a clean look for a shot like this is a very large scale production...especially on 35.
  12. reverse sky panel bounces for fill? and some sorta very large source as moonlight frame right. Would love to see some breakdowns of setups on Filmlights.
  13. If you want to be a Gaffer/Truck owner I would buy industry standard fixtures like an M18 which people will request, though the 1000W plasma light which I have never heard of sounds interesting. Also at this size the vehicle and organization systems start to matter quiet a bit. You would ideally want a small cargo van fitted out with shelving and ideally a lift gate. Also Carts. If you can't afford that I'd scale back. I have seen some gaffers with ultra tiny packages work out of Mini Vans or Hatchbacks, but at that point you can really only fit enough gear for interviews or very small setups and with out a vehicle renting it out can be challenging.
  14. Hi Edith, your inspirations and approach are great but every project is different and the lights and gear needed do vary quiet a bit. If your interested in owning this size package w/ grip gear is your plan to work as a gaffer or rent it out? If not, I would suggest working with a lighting rental house if you need this big of a package. With grip gear and that many fixtures it sounds pretty much like a 1/2 ton or a 1 ton package which is a small truck or vans worth of gear.
  15. for sure an under rated camera. Panasonic did everything right and the market just didn't take it in. Better picture then any sony/canon offering still I'd say. Great DR. sadly people don't request it though. Great value the TV series "Master of None" was shot on it ...good reference to see what its capable of with good production.
  16. Dana dolly is great, but I want something quicker to setup.
  17. Hey all, Doing a shoot with a very small crew. What is the best 4-6ft slider on the market. I want it to have 100mm Bowl to take a 1030D, but something like the Modern Studio (which often is used on dolly) is too heavy. I'd be great if I can put it on a tripod instead of using stands.
  18. ^ This is great. I wish every movie had a bts featurette that was so sincere and explained the process so well. Jarin's segment is really interesting. love "layered and complex" I'm excited to see the frames!
  19. there are lots of rare wideangles new and old so I'm not sure your estimates are totally correct. Here's the widest full frame option I've seen, though its not a "cine lens", I'm sure it could be converted. https://petapixel.com/2020/06/30/the-laowa-9mm-f-5-6-is-the-worlds-widest-rectilinear-full-frame-lens/
  20. Most people would say the biggest differentiating factor is depth of field. A good way to visualize this is to imagine what the image sensor of the camera can see. So lets say you have a 35mm @f2.8 lens that covers a full frame sensor First you place it on a super 35mm camera, then on a full frame camera. on the full frame camera the only difference is the sensor captures a bigger/wider image utilizing the whole lens. So what you get is the exact same depth of field, BUT a much wider aspect, which in turn gives you the effect of shallower depth of field. on full frame photo cameras the difference is 2 stop of depth of field. Meaning you would need not only a wider lens, but a faster lens to match the look of 35mm F2.8 on a full frame. As for aspect ratio. Sure if you have a wider sensor you get a wider aspect ratio, but you can of course simply crop on taller sensor as well. as for width or FOV (field of view) differences. You can always use wider lenses. the widest super 35mm lens I know is the Arri 8R. On full frame there are 12mm lenses (maybe wider?) so maybe you can get a touch wider on full frame. For the Arri 65 I'm not familiar with the options. At the end of the day the biggest difference with shooting on larger sensors is resolution, and an easier ability to achieve shallow DOF or extreme shallow DOF effects.
  21. There is (and I think its a bit old school) idea of the commercial director taking 10% of the budget. Now I think its usually a flat rate. and I've never head of a Director inflating the budget to get a higher cut. Generally commercial budgets are roughly set upfront by the advertising agency or client and the only time you push the budget up is if they are making asks that can't be facilitated with the money they have. It's hard to convince a client that you need more money unless you have a valid reason. sometimes you have a a client with a budget way to big for the job they need and people go ahead and spend it. Usually I see that with like sorta corporate-ish jobs. You'll have a Mini LF w/ everything and wireless FIZ for a talking head for some internal video no one will ever see. but people do it. That all said if the client comes to set and sees only 5 people and a 1ton lighting package that might wonder why they had to spend a 100k to do it...so of course you spend it. Dp's rates are generally per day even the most high end folks will get day rates. for those w/ agents its usually around 3-5k or more if they are "famous".
×
×
  • Create New...