Albion Hockney

I'm confused why you are worried about the "light direction" when it is an interior shoot. Since you are placing the light outside of windows spill/source size shouldn't be a big problem as the windows will control most of the spill. I think you need to separate two things: How diffused the source should be (IE the shadow and wrap quality of the light) and Spread of the beam of light. The spread of light can be controlled in various ways, with flags and egg crates etc. It does get harder to control with a more diffused (IE larger) source, but if you have windows involved and a bit of distance between the source and subject you should be able to use flags to control the source off of what you don't want it hitting w/o much of a problem. So I think all you really need to do is decide how soft you want the moonlight and then decide on the right density and size of diffusion to obtain that (of course along the way make sure you are not loosing too much light to obtain the stop the DP wants at 200 ISO). If you think Lee 250 is too strong try 251 or if you want bigger then 4x4 half soft frost like David mentioned might be a good pick. As for light loss/throw from the diffusion generally you can account for that by using a big enough light. To get a ball park I generally just combine the photometrics of the light you want to use ( http://calc.arri.de/calculator ) w/ the light loss of the diffusion ( http://www.leefilters.com/lighting/diffusion-list.html )

I think traditionally short zooms find a use on multicam style shows or more docu style shows that moves very very fast. The modern angenieux products have pretty much taken over that space. They are sharp, light, and almost as fast as the VP's. These type of shows often care a little less about having really shallow DOF or the characteristics of the lenses too so that might help explain why the VP's never got popular - 4.4KG is also VERY heavy.

best test footage yet. could be the grade, but highlight roll off looks a little too harsh to me. Just brighter frames in general and way color/saturation is handled - feels lacking in richness. looking at the mans face at 2:56 for example. a lot of the other stuff looks great though, tonality/color in the low to mid range is looking really good.

Most of the time the gaffer does incident readings and tells the dp. Or the dp asks what something is reading at. Dp might say can you get another stop out of the key light and you make adjustments until the meter reads a stop brighter. Some dps might let you know they are looking for a certain lighting ratio and you can use the meter to check it. Im not sure of any more formalized way to work.

All I was talking about is the shallow focus.

I think the shallow DOF look is for sure in vogue, but also makes great images. It's not always about getting rid of the BG sometimes its just separation and a feeling. People are so grumpy about trends, everything has always worked in cycles - don't sweat it. just saw this the other day which I think exemplifies the large format/shallow dof trends - and it looks great https://vimeo.com/250157051

https://www.quasarscience.com/collections/a-series-led/products/a-series-medium-base-household-bulbs?variant=3582653635 6000k only still

Is the 1.6k mole (I think thats the biggest they make?) close to m40 output?

How wide is your biggest shot? are you going to see around/the top of the mausoleum. The mausoleum seems pretty far from the graves in the background so I'm not sure how much those are playing in your shot. I think your on the right track, If you need to cover a really big background I would try to get 1 m40 put that high and far away as you can. The only LED fresnel option's I know of are by Mole I think that would work too and maybe be more power efficient though I have never used them. Aside from one big BG light If you need a stronger edge on talent or want to pick out other elements in the BG I'd have some smaller HMI's. M18 and Joker 800's for the frontal light on talent, that could be almost anything. Just something soft and dim. I like the idea of it being toplight. You could also just set up an 8x8 overhead and bounce something like a joker 800 into it. You can do an M40, a M18, and 2 Joker 800's on 2 6500's.

but it seems intended to prevent saturation falling off with luminance, at least as much as is practical. Most of this is over my head! but the last thing you said - this seems quiet important. As the Alexa has very rich color in shadows. Looking that the Venice footage this is something I noticed was lacking.

This is interesting - but the idea that Sony color is accurate and Arri color is optimized for a "pleasing image" feels very vague. Why wouldn't accurate color be pleasing? Is there any information on what is actually going on inside the Arri and how an engineer is "artistically adjusting the colorimetry"

I think this is the million dollar question. Considering the release of the LF I think its clear they don't have anything new and won't soon. That said I think there is a good chance the Alexa sensor will still make better images then the Venice - of course subjective, but I do think many DP's will still favor the Alexa based on the test images from Venice. I think Arri would be hoping the next sensor they release will be another major step forward and hold dominance of the industry for sometime and maybe the tech just isn't there yet for that?

The Alexa LF seems more like a slightly cheaper option then the Alexa 65mm for high end productions (its 90k for the body). Productions that can afford the larger format lens options for the actual large format sensors like the alexa 65 and large sensor reds. I think it is a weak offering considering how long the current sensor has been around. It seems they are starting to enter dangerous territory leaving room for something else to come along. Arri moves slow with R&D and this release signifies they have no new sensor and probably won't for awhile. The Alexa LF does seem old - heavy, no internal ND, just barley hitting the 4k marks. that all said I didn't love the test images from the Venice at all. It also only does 60p which is a problem for some. It seems to me sensor tech is at a bit of a plateau when it comes to really giving a better image then the Alexa. The Alexa sensor in this regard is really amazing considering it came out 10years ago!

^ exactly. Eggcrate is usually used for tighter spaces. It gives the illusion of a big soft source far away that is flagged off on the sides.... but if you have big sources far away you can just use big solids.

I was hoping after 8 years there would be a new sensor rather then just a larger one. I wonder how development is going in general for technology that gives more latitude and color information. Since the first Alexa sensor it seems the forward progress has been very incremental for all manufactures. Finally Sony and Red may have caught up, but I'm not sure if the Venice or Monstro are really any better (was really unimpressed by images from venice thus far) Good news for current Alexa owners though, that investment is still going strong. 3.2k to 4k ...I don't know if that matters to anyone except for Netflix and VFX.

Either c300MKII or Fs7. Mostly still photo lenses like canon zooms, but maybe the higher tier shooters have cine zooms. I doubt they are using any pro mist.

I would try to work with the practicals if you can. I would go over and run some tests with your camera and cross your fingers its possible to turn off the banks in rows that work in your favor. A joker 1600 would be enough to get a bit of your edge, I would personally try to get an M40 though If I could as I'm guessing you want to underexpose your toplight while still getting a brighter edge light. Also nice to be able to option diffusion and get the light as far away as possible. Lighting a space that big for soft top light is a big assignment. My guess would be more like at least 6-8 Lights (3-4 on each side spaced out) and something like a 20x20 ultra bounce would be what would be required to get soft and overall over half the rink - maybe you can do a 12x but it will be semi sourcy over a certain part of the rink. Sounds like a full day of pre-lighting. Rigging will take some serious time and you might want to think about controlling the light off the background with some skirting on the 12/20x. You could probably use standard 1200 HMI's though. If i was in a place I could get my hands on light tile (not sure if an g/e house in Montreal has it) I would do a 12x of that stuff.

wow, thanks for the information.

Stuart - are you sure about the above? That is essentially saying moving a diffusion frame closer and farther from a subject will change the brightness. That doesn't seem correct to me. Or am I misunderstanding what you are saying?

Can I ask, where did you see that listed? That is the same as full grid, seems not quiet enough but maybe that is true!

Has anyone ever got a reading on how much light is lost with magic cloth. I can't seem to find the information anywhere.

Miguel, would you be able to break down the lamp placements in the spot you shared?

The range is compressed on screens. A camera can film 14-15 stops of range and then when its put it a color space like Rec709 that latitude is compressed but still present. If the camera couldn't capture the whole range though it will show as blown out or as solid black. I'm sure it's more complicated, but that is the basic idea.

Certain DP's get very enamored with a specific fixtures quality of light. it might be similar to a normal soft push of light, but it will have some unique traits that seem to mirror the parabolic reflector style lights. It's also 400W of LED (that is 3-4 Astras of power if they are similar LED's) and its 8LBs (A Celeb is like 20lbs and needs a junior mount)

haha, the game of thrones point is pretty accurate! I think its very easy to be cynical about the state of things though - so I try not to do that too much and just ignore all the awful stuff. I haven't been to a major cinema in several years, they for the most part, don't play films with any real heart or soul - big or small.