My goal for writing this post is to get a better understanding of what goes into achieving a "well balanced" shot. For clarity, I'll lay out the main factors which I believe contribute to the composition of a shot. These are:
Physical camera and lens: The desired look and feel of any shot is obviously constrained by the physical tools in use (to an extent). Shooting with different settings on the camera can also either add or take away from a certain look that may be desired.
Lighting: I'm under the impression that lighting can make or break a shot, regardless of how expensive the camera used to shoot is.
Post: Everything that comes in the editing stage. It seems like a well lit, clean shot is crucial here if the goal is to get the most out of color correcting, and otherwise processing, the footage.
How heavily do each of these factors impact the final composition? For example, by percentage, my intuition would be that it's something like:
Physical camera and lens (50%)
Is this about right, or am I way off? I'm guessing this would vary based on the type of shot I was trying to achieve, so for the sake of this post, let's say that I'm specifically talking about achieving a look and feel similar to the screenshot below:
This is an image from a film titled The Raid 2. I chose this scene from the movie because I particularly struggle with setting up lighting for night shots. It looks like they did a pretty good job here, without losing any detail or overexposing the image and making it look unnatural.
Considering the screenshot above, how much of the look and feel would you say is due to having "the right equipment" vs. having talented and experienced individuals with an in-depth understanding of cinematography.
Any input is appreciated!