Albion Hockney

I said prob a book light just because of the wrapping quality and the fall off in the background. Could be a big frame with something like full grid too feels like a book light with neg fill or nothing on the other side though too me. just a guess.

I think one key thing is just to nail the exposure levels. Our eyes see so differently then cameras in low light situations I think people have trouble translating it for the camera. I almost always find I need to underexpose more then I'm comfortable with, that is while keeping some marginal exposure in darks areas of the frame. something like your keylight being 2 stops under and then working in the 3-5 stop range for things you want to keep a marginal exposure on. if there is something bright in frame it needs to be contained and it needs to have a really great motivation like for example deakins with the car lights coming through the windows in no country.

haven't seen the film but looking like just a very soft side key. Probably a book light.

Thanks satsuki yea that sounds about right. Union rate cards arn't online and I think the rates go above that alot.

Interesting to hear everyone on this. Adrian that is amazing you go out so much!

I was just curious on well paid commerical how high do OP rates go? What is a good range for operator rates on national commerical spots or high end branded content....this would be stuff with 6 figure or higher budgets with well established directors from notable production companies. In most cases for an operator doing handheld work.

I think you should talk with the director about what your approach will be to the film and then talk the producer about attaining that. I wouldn't worry about the specfic numbers atleast upfront so much, that is not your job. on budget that low it can be really variable, depends on how ambitious the project is and if people are getting paid at all.

Light fall off can be calculated using photometrics at different distances....See what the difference in stop would be from the distant to the window and then to the back wall of the room your shooting in. Keep in mind the sun is 100million miles away and has no fall off ....unless its hitting curtains or some sorta diffusion it will be as bright on one side of a room as another if direct, so if you are trying mimic it realistically you just always want the biggest source as far away as you can. Not sure what you mean about the DP doesnt want "nice fall off" I donno if there is nice or not nice fall off but as said if you are going after the look of the sun you don't want it falling off much. In regards to HMI, David seems to prefer Tungsten for the color of the light and I beleive in other posts has stated he likes the tungsten heads because since sunset is near 3200k he can use them bare without any gel frames infront of them and therefore sometimes sneak them into frame if shooting back toward a window without seeing a gel frame. The downside of HMI's for some is color temp....sometimes they can be slightly off ....especially if they are older heads. As far as quality of light and diffusion its not really about the source being HMI or Tungsten. If you want the same look as a Tungsten Fresenel then you just need an HMI Fresenel. Par Lights (both HMI or Tungsten) yes can look a little weird without diffusion....they are really designed to be used through some sort of diffusion. That said it depends on the lens you use in the fixure and the look your are going for. Narrow lenses can look pretty good ....Often times Par 64 Can lights are used like this to mimic direct beans of sunlight. It is the various medium, medium wide, and flood lenses that have paterns to them Also the Arri M series is designed to have a nicer quality of light. although I'd still put it through some diffusion. your dead on with the idea to use a 4x4 of Opal. Opal works great to diffuse a sharp sources just a little bit and looks pretty realistic.

^ appears to be a film light as she is backlit from the sun. the first examples I think that the close ups could be bounce but that wide shot on the bridge is probably an HMI through a big Frame for fill. The first examples seemed less overcast and more just over exposed sky...maybe it was a little hazy that day? seems like you want to avoid blue sky and a lot of color in your frames so avoid color and keep the sun behind the talent for sure. shooting into the sun helps get that sky less saturated. I'd fill with either bounces or HMI if you need more power/control and maybe introduce some neg fill. good luck, post your results and experience if you can!

I don't think your over thinking anything. but would be suprised if the DP wants to shoot at an f11/16 ....probably wants to put some ND in there. so I wouldnt worry about the stop so much unless he needs that super deep stop for a reason... your world is quality of light. Bigger lights farther away are generally going to appear more natural with better quality. The thing about size of the head is more about fall off then anything. If you have to move in your light to get a stronger exposure the light will fall off across the room much more drastically and start to look false. A bigger light farther away will fall of less as you move into the room. and also as david said combat natural light coming in, which you might want some of as it helps raise the ambiance and can look nice. The dp should be aware of the curtains and such and you guys should talk about it though. you can alway open up some of the curtain to let the light in more direct if need be. assuming the light it self will not be in frame

you could also go with 1.2k HMI ....the 1.8k arri max is a great product.... runs on household power and will give you more light then a 5k. you'd go 1/2 CTO on that instead....also they are lighter if you are only 2 man crew. I wouldnt get a 10k if you only have 2 people on crew.

yea as david said those don't have too much going on. They do look lit to me....especailly the last one looks like HMI through diff the tighter frames seem like they could be bounces. I'd suggest getting that 12/18K and putting it through a big frame. but keep in mind if your using it as a fill light you still want some contrast. dont bring up your fill side too much....back it off and go big and soft....Generally I think the game is the farther away and softer the more subtle the source appears in situations like this. also keep in mind if you can avoid using that big hmi you will save a huge amount of time and crew. Maybe money spent better elsewhere and spent other places? I think if this is what your looking for less is more, lighting isn't going to make the video, but your shot choice and overall vision is what will make it come to life. I'm kinda assuming your new to using big sources like this, and I myself haven't had many opportunites to use them. Whenever it comes up I find myself at first jumping at it wanting to use some big lights, but often find that I start thinking that using these tools will in itself make for a higher end product. that is not always so, so be careful!

Always curious about this and how it varies among shooters. I shoot good paying gigs maybe 4-5 days a month on average ... Sometimes I'll get on something that shoots a lot of days. ill Ac or op a couple other days. Then every few months something like a short film might come up I bet last year I totaled about 60 days on set... Hoping it will increase though! How about you?

He did say he wanted to use the sun as his backlight. I think it just depends on the aesthetic. Neirin, maybe post some references you like? I hear ya though, overhead sun without control is going to be tough to work with ....but I think it can be workable depending on what the scenes you are shooting are and where they are located....if its all in a big open space that is going to be harder for sure, but sometimes overhead sun can be interesting. I wonder about your suggestion though David, Even if you fly a 20x20 solid and insert your big sources to give the sunset look, what about the background? if the background is lit with over head sun isn't it going to look off? Can you get away with creating sunset in the middle of the day....if you have some examples that would be super informative ....I'm always so afraid to change the time of day with lighting as it seems difficult to get right with out looking weird.

I think If the day is overcast you basically are going to have to roll with that look. You can maybe in that case use a 12k/18K backed off and super soft for a little fill side bump in exposure but honestly you might be better off just shaping the light with negative fill and ultra bounce. I'd make sure to have a 12x solid out there for that. or if you want to get stylized you can use big HMI's on an overcast day to light but it will of course not be too natural ....and a little cliche maybe to do that in music videos.

I think there is a lot to consider the dilemma of working with the sun vs lighting and trying to keep some feel of naturalism is a debate every shooter has. Its tough! If your not too worried about consistency it will help you get away with real sunlight for sure. To light full body shots in daylight you are in 18K territory for sure. You might consider just using 12x or 20x ultra bounce ....as the return from an 18k through 2 layers of diff to 12x ultra is probably not too far off....you might get a little more with the 18k but not too much more. its all variable though honestly with a great camera and great light you can get away with shooting into the sun and having the talent as much as 2-3 stops under I've learned and still look really pretty....sometimes that means you don't even need a fill. If you are shooting all day and have to contend with overhead sun you'll need a really good plan though. Roger Deakins basically says he never uses lights for day exteriors and never cuts the sun. His pictures all look great to me! so its a tough call. he also has the luxury of everyone listening to him about when to shoot cause of light and also can work the schedule around it.

I think it's two fold. The idea of using blue for fill in daylight situations comes from the color of ambient skylight which is of course our blue sky. theoretically if you in an open space where the sun isn't bouncing off the ground too much shadows are going be pretty blue. That said that condition only happens sometimes. the color contrast is a nice perk though.

Yea...generally just fill with cooler light. I think fill should be an after thought though. My approach to situations where you want direct sunlight through windows is that you need to first put up the sun....IE get the biggest damn light you can as far away as you can and pound it through the windows at the angle you want. Generally after doing that you find some nice things happening that maybe you didn't predict (IE specular reflections, the light bouncing off a hardwood floor and producing a nice fill light...all sorts of stuff) from there I just work it to make sure the camera is doing ok....IE balance the exposure so the bright sunlight isn't too hot and the shadows arn't too far gone. Sometimes in sunny rooms fill light is not cool btw....it comes from bouncing off w/e is in the room so it can look good to go warm on the fill too. I have done scenes with sunlight bouncing off a floor/table acts as a key light for example.

Ah thanks, didn't know it was just insulation!

Was curious if anyone had a to-do on making one. Where can I buy foam core of a good thickness and where can I buy the dimpled foil for the shinny side?

I hear ya ....the new tech always leads to problems ...but it is the future as they say.

seems like a great idea - I'm thinking they ad a little chip in the bulbs and get an Iphone app going for dimming and possible color temp adjustments

Use them all the time, everyone does I'd say. Depending on the project you might augment them with different bulbs like Color Correct 3200K Tungsten Kino Flo Bulbs or 5600K Daylight bulbs. Or just change to one of the other variety of consumer bulbs for effect. for example many people like the "Cool White" bulbs. When you shoot at 3200k with cool white bulbs the effect is usually some sorta cool/teal look because the crappy consumer bulbs have a lot of Green or Magenta in them sometimes I have shot scenes with real fluorescent lighting the background and in the foreground either light the talent separately... or I have augmented the ceiling fixtures to look a little better by putting diffusion on them and slipping newspaper around the outside of it to control the light a little.

^ Stuart, can you link to where Roger talks about that? curious what scene that might have been used in?

I use normal bulbs for everything, yea lighting talent for sure ...they are just warmer (no green/magenta concerns ...its like tossing 1/4 or half cto on something). Yes dimmers are also very important. I generally don't go much smaller then 60W bulbs if I can get them on dimmers. I find that for practicals in frame you really want to dial the brightness just right to look good on camera. Haven't had much problem with hum ....maybe in a really quiet scene? I generally wind up using1000w dimmers though ...maybe the litte ones are worse? Adrian, didn't know about teflon coated bulbs saw that and looked it up. Awesome, I have cases of bulbs that are kinda protected but I shatter a couple on every shoot. I donno about those reveal bulbs, isn't that the one with the slight blue coating? Does anyone know if you can get 15 or 25W bulbs in the normal full size bulb housing? Always a problem for me when you have to put a bare bulb in frame at real low brightness and can't get a dimmer on it. I have a full on bulb collection. Lot's of weird low wattage bulbs for putting in frame or specialty use some with painted or tinted glass, those long filament bulbs...did a bar scene once and filed the talent with an array of those painted flood bulbs (barley put out any light, but come in any color you want)... I also really like the low wattage Par bulbs (smaller then par 38, the really little ones).