Stephen Perera

Seems odd nobody is talking of this film in here...or is there another thread I'm not aware of haha https://www.kodak.com/en/motion/blog-post/the-french-dispatch

one light i use a lot actually is a Multiblitz V6 LED which has the P bayonet upon which I can hang my soft boxes etc from my Multiblitz flash heads....a great german product from back in the day and they have since closed down. That light and Arri tungstens......there is something about tungsten i like I cant explain

this set up also natural light.....different flavour light.....focal point on the faces in the print......this is in essence a product shot and not too dissimilar in philosophy from what you have to do!!!! Moral of the story is natural light is THE light for people like me......i get to choose to shoot at a specific time of day to get the light I want....as opposed to everyone else in here - I'm not a cinematographer - that have to 'make the day' and create light most of the time. If this is the case with you then chase natural light as a priority!!!! (All shots in this thread are taken with Hasselblad 2000FCM on tripod with either 110mm f2 or 80mm f2.8 Hasselblad Zeiss lenses)

no issue at all just saying its a youtube favourite....loads of pseudo anamorphic out there.....and filters and stuff.....and perhaps its even going up there to the pros to stick some in cos we, the proletariat equate flares with great camera work....so in a way pandering to the masses......maybe???? also saying as a film photographer flares were always something we wanted to kill in our photography with lens shades etc unless backlit shot bla bla. Personally i love spherical flares. esp on zooms where you see all the lens groups etc and dislike streak anamorphic flares

Hey Raaf, its ok to disagree and I appreciate you coming in on this......I think its 'cos I am divorced with two sons that I REALLY connected to it......I DO think you have to be in this mindset to really get it......same with the film Marriage Story......but yes the over the top eating and drinking and pouring wine sounds were annoying haha...its great for a Coca Cola commercial but you know....

So this is a remake of the 1973 TV mini series by Ingmar Bergman. Originally 6 episodes but this new one is in 5. Really excellent and highly recommended - esp. for those who have gone through a divorce with children like myself. The writing and scenes and situations touch nerves of course, as intended and we have some superb acting to boot. A must watch. I don't have any tech details to share. One thing I find annoying is the too high on the volume (in my opinion) sfx of them eating / drinking - I'm one of those people that can't stand people who make noise when eating hahaha). We get it...they are pouring wine and drinking it and all the rest of it.....the folly dept. was doing their thing I guess. On a par emotionally and acting-wise to the superb Marriage Story by Noah Baumbach featuring Adam Driver and Scarlett Johansson.

I remember going to the cinema and walking out of the Lynch Dune after it finished thinking what the hell was that about hahaha....I DID enjoy this one a lot more......

Back to minute 1:20... Look at the slate.....I dont really know how they do their slates but from what I gather they are shooting with Vision3 50D for starters......they have a side light at 6500k which is like the colour of the light coming in from the exterior through the window.......if it was golden hour the warm light outside compared to placing a side light at 6500k immediately shows you the fact there is side lighting......obviously........hence the 'believablity' of light look.....this is the 'augmenting' that you want to do yourself....it totally looks real and believable that its coming in off the window...they have also spot metered that outside at T16. There is no top lighting..... I feel qualified to help here 'cos at the end of the day the difference between me shooting this on a Hasselblad on Kodak Portra as a still and the dolly move they are doing is simply there is motion in one...the philosophy of capture is the same..... and he's shooting at nearly T2 (f2) as that is what they have metered as key light i.e. taken a reading of ambient coming off her face from the side light and whatever light is spilling in.......Oh, and importantly, they have a low contrast filter on the lens....the LC1.....don't know if a Lee filter but here's some help on that: Low Contrast filters work by spreading light from the highlights to the shadowed and darker areas, leaving the bright areas of the image bright. The dark areas become lighter, enabling you to see more detail in the shadow areas. As there is no F-stop compensation, you will not overexpose any portion of the image. This filter also creates a very slight flare or halation around hot spots and individual light sources. This feature is a useful effect. The more light there is for the filter to work with, the greater the effect. This filter is very popular with people who shoot video but who want to achieve more of a film look to their images. Lee Low Contrast filters are available in grades from 1/4 through 1 1/2, with the 1 1/2 having the heaviest effect."

all your questions now will come to you on the 'set' as answers when you set things up and see what it all looks like..... I'm not au fait with modern lights like panels etc....dont have access to any and have never used any.......I have Arri tungstens (quite a few of them) up to 1000w that Ive bought second hand over the years.....and an Arri L7c LED which in hindsight i would get rid of as not really 'for me'. As I said, unlike most people in here that actually shoot films and have been in film sets I have only been in my own film set so to speak......with at most a few friends helping me out........I also have the liberty to make the most of the limitations that ultimately make you creative..... at the end of the day move the lights around and what the eye sees is always going to be the starting point......then you can metre for getting the reality or otherwise.....by stopping down or up on the iris (T-stops or f-Stops)

I'm just about to finish Season 2 (I'm on final episode). So Season 3 to start soon for me. I find the characters, their lifestyles etc despicable...which is the whole point of course.....love the satire, the cast, the comedy and the writing of the series and of course...yawn yawn....they shot with my beloved Vision3 500T. Obviously shooting mainly on Angenieux Optimo zoom parfocal lenses....hence the stylistic zoom in and out whilst keeping focus......THAT never ceases to amaze me how it just keeps focus....and then there's 'The Office' style handheld shooting too. It all just works....and 'the old money flavour' they wanted by shooting film comes across well. Has a 16mm feel about it which I really like. This series's naturalistic lighting style in my opinion showcases Kodak Vision3 stock latitude capabilities and characteristics in how it handles highlights. The 'curve' of film up there is what makes film what is IS when we have huge contrast..... Chapeau to Cinelab London for their part in all this...processing the film stocks etc.

So, there's no thread I could find of this series so why not. Series Cinematography by Patrick Capone ... (12 episodes, 2018-2021) Christopher Norr ... (8 episodes, 2018-2021) Andrij Parekh ... (3 episodes, 2018) Camera Arricam LT, Leitz Summilux-C and Angenieux Optimo Lenses Arricam ST, Leitz Summilux-C and Angenieux Optimo Lenses Laboratory Cinelab, London, UK (processing: UK) Kodak Film Lab, New York (NY), USA (processing) Technicolor PostWorks, New York (NY), USA (digital intermediate) Negative Format 35 mm (Kodak Vision3 500T 5219)

haha yeah thats right......necessity is the mother of invention and I assure you I could guest star in the instagram 'shittyrigs' of the stuff I have made up haha

simple shots that tell stories.....no big deal but I like the light. The compression on the upload makes the images mure fudge and not as nice colour for some reason but hey

This one has a great story behind it..... This is a beautiful 12-string Mandolin (made in 1921) painstakingly restored by Madrid luthier Felipe Conde. Conde personally crafted guitars for Paco de Lucia and Leonard Cohen, amongst others. He is a direct descendent of the instrument's creator Domingo Esteso and so accurate was the restoration that the same varnish stored from 1921 was used again! Local musician Denis Valerga inherited this instrument from his grandfather Leonardo and it was brought to me to photograph by brother Henry, the other half of the Valerga Brothers for use in the design of the album I am undertaking for the Calpe House charity.

OK so the music album Im doing has a tribute to the artists' parents.....here we have the father is represented by the card and the mother appears....the space around the frame is for text.....Ive cut it down a bit to post the image. This was just natural light coming in off the window. The photos placed on the floor. Doesn't get more 'no-budget' than this. This was Kodak Portra 400 NC - expired stock from 2012 I still have in the freezer. I process the negatives myself at home using Tetanus C-41 chemicals and I scan my shots using a Hasselblad branded Flaxtight 646 scanner. So I do it all myself. Shoot/process/scan and have all the fun!

Firstly thanks for your kind words...... ....how about using silver bounce to amplify the intensity of the daylight and maybe to 'throw' shafts around. Silver amplifies more than white as you know.....sometimes its very sharp but that's your call. A micro can also do some cool things. Idea - Get some cardboard....cut some strips.....wrap aluminium tinfoil around it and place around to throw in shafts of light based on the thickness of the cardboard...it works I assure you. I always shoot natural light as much as possible as I normally have the latitude to 'wait' for the conditions I want. Case in point waiting a week for the damn sun to shoot its rays through the blinds of the window.....wasn't a 'cookie' haha. Yes I know, some call this cheesy but what looks good just looks good! The LUMU is great. I can vouch for it. I use a Sekonic light metre though cos I'm an old school lighting reading snob and like light metres hahaha. I also have a Gossen Mastersix. The LUMU is accurate. The colour temp. readings with it are fun......you can even measure the light coming off your work monitor by placing it over a white patch and putting it flat against the screen!!! I like my monitor at 6500k as I am a graphic designer by profession.

Cinelab absolutely DO Eastman Double X - thats what I have shot mainly. So another tick for Cinelab London

done!

CRUCIAL is that you use a grey card / colour chart on the scene as you need the products to be true to their colour...if intended. Unless you want to put some warmth in or whatever in which case I would use one of my Arri tungsten lamps which come in at 3200k supposedly. I use a LUMU attachment on my iPhone which is the cheapest way I can measure the colour of the light in a scene. https://lu.mu Also, film is a great choice as it doesn't give awful moire patterns on textiles!!!!! though perhaps that's a thing of the past? don't know.

250D is a great choice. It was used in Phantom Thread which is the film I think of when I read this thread. Your main question is what light to use to augment the natural light. First things first....KNOW where you are shooting and start scouting how the light comes into the room.......get the light metre readings. With a 250D stock and the shutter at 180 degrees and 25 fps you should have T-stop or f-stop to work in with no need for any more light perhaps??? ...and explain augment.....do you mean to amplify the light or to add character? I have just done a shoot for a charity music album that was totally dependent on the light coming in off the window. I had to wait a whole week for the light I wanted to come back in the room. This was shot with Kodak Portra 800 (cos I love the grain). I metered the beams of light coming through the shutters of the windows and then stopped down to get more shadow detail.

absolutely....excuses based on money no doubt....anyway....I speak as a cinephile, I am not qualified to speak as anything else

best of all is they wanted to shoot 70mm but the felt the sand in the cameras would be an issue.......David Lean back in 1962 didn't do a bad job with Lawrence of Arabia

thanks for the information. What is YOUR opinion of the resulting 'look'? or even the philosophy of doing this?

Issue with grit and sand on 65mm haha tell David Lean no? ok so aside from that can someone explain how a film out is done……so they shoot digital and the part I can’t get my head round is how they get the digital film onto film stock and then back out i saw the film yesterday and enjoyed it…..I went on YouTube to get explanations for who’s who first and that helped a great deal…..the acting was great…..casting great…..the landscapes superb……beautiful film to look at notwithstanding the compression I saw it under…the audio was torturing at times I agree but hey…..it is what is it…….it was funny how such a sort of complicated film to follow was given the audio clues to when the hero was like on top of it again…..you know….those female voices in the score when he was ON it again haha after seemingly going to go dowm