Jump to content

Stephen Sanchez

Premium Member
  • Posts

    282
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Stephen Sanchez

  1. David, for your top light, have you considered a narrow degree Honeycrate? Also, the higher you raise the source from the stage, the more curtain you can add to narrow the beam spread. Just some food for thought.
  2. Yes. The hard/soft definition is what I learned too. Yet I've since found the term used for anything it seems, which may be from lack of understanding by the user or perhaps ego mouth noise. So I was curious what shooters here thought it was. Afterall, what's the point in existing a term in our field if its use is random. But as David pointed out, it's still vague. How do you tell a gaffer "I wan't a big quality of light coming through that window"? What does that even mean? It's impractical for communication or description. He's going to ask what size and weight rag you want, or perhaps how hard/soft. The term itself is subjective. And I suppose I have beef with it at this point. Because there are more concrete words to use instead of every instance "quality" could be utilized. There's no point in it existing. Due to this, I believe the term to be archaic for cinematography. Literally obsolete. There are clearer words in commonplace when describing a source or diffusion. Which we use everyday, those of us lucky enough to light a lot. And I hope those of you in positions who may one-day teach, or mentor, will help correct or guide the newer generation away from that nonsense term whenever you see or hear it. Which they've likely learned from youtube or videography blogs claiming to tell the secrets of "what you need to know." Basically. I think we should stop using the term and tell others that it's not a real thing. Because nobody will understand you when you try to use it, anyway. I'm all for the betterment of understanding lighting and that term seems to employ the opposite effect.
  3. Brian's comments here, and without knowing the extent of the context, are narrow-minded and opinionated. @Marcos Cooper, don't toss your way of lighting because of what a director said. He's no DP. Your job is to be able to diagnose what soft/hardness, wrap, and contrast is needed to get the look you want. Case in point. Under Michelle Pfeiffer's lighting setup, if she was replaced with Iggy Pop (pictured below), Brian's affinity for the shot will not be so favorable anymore. Like Satsuki said, people with smooth faces and shallow pores will appear to accept hard lighting easy. Seemingly magically. But it's because their faces have no texture to cast micro shadows. This is the same with children because their faces have yet to form blemishes, acne, or wrinkles. There is no magic here, its just a smooth face. Light the way you like. But also, don't stop experimenting.
  4. What Satsuki said, A key grip and good friend in Florida once told me to "stop jumping off the grip truck, it's bad on the knees." Ever since then I've taken my time to move in a fashion that doesn't impact or possibly damage myself. Take your time so you don't strain your body, especially when you are rushing for a shot. Don't destroy yourself to save 30 seconds on set. I know a working DP and director both who have a bad knee and needs a replacement. Not fun stuff.
  5. DPs, new and established, I've seen many shooters refer to "quality of light" in conversations. I've seen it used in descriptions comparing fixtures, diffusion types, soft/hardness, color, color-temperature, and I think even source placement. There are blogs and videos that tout the same random interpretations, sometimes combining them. No doubt, shooters here will have the same difference in opinions on the use of the term, and I'm curious to know what that is. So, what is your definition of "quality of light?"
  6. Altered Carbon (2018) comes to mind. Joel Kinnaman is a foot taller than Martha and they spend loads of time together. I found pictures. These stills are from the web and unfortunately didn't preserve the 2:1 aspect ratio. But essentially, Carbon's 2-shot looks to be at Martha's eye-level, thus slightly looking up at Joel. David's Maisel shot appears to be at Alex's height or a split between the two and is pleasant. Same with Dinklage in Game Of Thrones, a split between the two. That is, nothing sticks out as odd. I'd imagine looking down at everyone (2-shot set at tall person's height) would feel unpleasant. And for individual coverage, I'd go with David about shooting singles or raking past bodies. Of course being narrative, there's always the added factor of using height for power or weakness shots.
  7. Go for tungsten if you're in a blacked-out studio with only tungsten-colored fixtures. They require lots of air conditioning to remove the heat. If you're putting CTB on them to convert the color to daylight, then you're wasting loads of energy for a minuscule lux output and you'll find the exposure will suffer. In which case LED would be better. Go for bi-color LED if in a location where daylight colors are being used. I only use tungsten in enclosed studios because they're already wired for the required amperes and air conditioning, and allows the use of dozens of cheap fixtures. Larry, Aperture must have something up your alley, no?
  8. Oh, my mistake! I misread Janhavi's question. I was meaning shallower. But even then he wants deeper. Well, on that note! While working with the FX9, I sometimes use the extra ISO range to stop my lens down for deeper DOF. That camera is wildly convenient. And can be used in S35 as well. I think I've become a Sony proponent... It's not intentional. I suppose you recommend what you know.
  9. Full frame cameras give deeper DOF. Could be beneficial as opposed to finding faster S35 lenses. I'd also suggest high ISO camera for low-light areas where natural light interiors can drop. My go-to would be the FX9. But there are others that do great in low light, like C500, Varicam.
  10. Thanks Red. Recorded externally with Atomos Flame and internally as a backup. HD only in Rec709. 4K wasn't necessary for this spot. No post processing other than minor gamma tweaks. But there's a reason for this weirdness. Regarding noise on this camera. I noticed during tests 2 issues that attributed to lots of noise on the A7SII footage. 1. Any Log recording was noisy because it's 8-bit. Even fed to the Atomos you can see the noise in a Log profile, which means the external feed is also 8-bit. I work with the FS7 and know what S-Log looks like on that monitor. This meant that the footage had to be recorded in Rec709 to avoid the noise. So you have to be sure about what you're capturing because there is no pulling back detail. 2. Internal record button. The A7SII's HDMI signal out is obnoxiously noisy when it's not recording. Hit the camera record button and the noise goes away. This might sound silly. But I intended to just record via the Atomos then realized the feed was grainy, so I hit the camera's internal record and the Atomos' signal cleared up to a crisp image. As far as exposure in low-light (particular to my product shoot). I was shooting at 1FC, which is very dim. At this point camera monitors appear like bright lights to our eyes and we want to iris down to match what our eyes see. Don't do this. Use the waveform to expose and trust that. Dim the monitor luma level down in cases like that. Hope this helps.
  11. Subjective, agreed. You can either chop the outside light or balance up to it. With this it becomes which approach you prefer. My subjective problem with increasing interior light is it requires lots of HMI fixtures, especially when bouncing. You need room on the floor for those fixtures which then need to be jokeyed for new setups. So it takes more time, money, and grip power. Also practical wattage will need to be increased or recreated with set fixtures if that is needed for any reason. And if you need to adjust light placement, that's more time chewed to address it. Say if the bounce shows in the windows or floor direction changed and you need a wider shot.
  12. David Mullen's advice would be a standard go-to, with powered fixtures as extra. To add to David's gear list, Mathews makes 24x24 reflector boards. A DP friend uses those on MOS shoots for kicker/backlight. They're small and pack small. The 4x4 ones are bigger, but those smaller ones are a gem for travel. Good luck my friend!
  13. If you frame camera into a corner and catch say half the window in frame, the you can place a sunlight in the corner past the window half remaining out of frame. Ive done this a few times on second or 3rd story rooms with good results. Fixture suggestion would be Astras or Skypannel + intensifier because a joker through a frame has a large footprint and pushes too deep into the room to sell the effect. A chimera would be fine though. Ive done this in rooms that were 20x20. Anything smaller where I couldnt do the above because the whole window would be seen, I've armed a fixture (again Astra) over the window and frame the top off. A wall spreader can give the same result. Be aware of weight.
  14. Phil Jackson is right. At the news station I worked at a couple years ago they were using SourceFour Parnels (which are 10" lenses I believe) and softlite/ziplight style fixtures with long foamcore snoots. Their aim is flat lighting. Phil's photo shows some 1k and 2k ziplights with eggcrates on them which do the same as foam snoots.
  15. My first reaction was 28mm. The lens looks to be between 24 and 32. I think you're on the right track. The f-stop in the video was not that deep. It might have been at a f4 or f5.6 and the operator rack focuses during that run. If you show up with enough light to hit f16, then I think you're pretty well covered IMHO. A note. If you're shooting at night, is it possible to get a camera with higher ISO range? The FX9 has dual native ISO of 800/4000, Varicam 35 is 800/5000. Running a higher ISO will give more sensitivity to stop down if you're worried about enough light for DOF.
  16. The mirror is also called a "first surface mirror." Wiki link :https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_surface_mirror Take care not to scratch the surface as it's unprotected. I would get a couple for this reason. Accidents do happen. Here's a link on cleaning as well: https://www.advancedoptics.com/how-to-clean-AlSiO-coated-front-surface-mirrors.html#:~:text=Gently wipe the mirror surface,leave any streaks or spots.
  17. This is slightly off-stubject, but Tamron makes a 45mm 1.8 with stabilization. I own it and it's wonderful. This might be a side-option where lens is concerned.
  18. Stuart's case in point: I got a Godox 32" photography octobox when I first started and put a 750w Tota light in it. This held up for 6 months I believe, before it degraded from the heat and snapped the rods. But to be clear, it was for studio interviews and was never broken down or moved. The constant teardown and setup will likely wear faster. So that's the life I got out of that solution. Afterward I bought a photoflex softbox on ebay specifically intended for hotlights and had a jolly time blasting a 2k open-face into with no problem (which is a very hot light).
  19. Agree with Guillaume. Godox has really started competing for Aputure's customers. Those are the only two companies I would go with on a budget. They have research and reputation you can rely on. Unfortunately $200 is a small budget for an LED light you intend to use for a main source. $700 is where you begin to get the foot candles necessary for key-sized diffusions. 80w is rather low IMHO. I wouldn't go with 100w minimum for LED. If you're dead set on this light, then is there a possibility of mounting the softbox speedring to the stand? If instead the softbox was on the stand and let the light hang off, perhaps that could be your answer. I've seen photography gear like this in some form.
  20. Like Bradley said, Kino Freestyle might be perfect because the LED panel is removable from the housing. See picture below. Another lightweight option might be a small array of Quasar RGB tubes. I had a gaffer once mount 4 on top two c-stand arms with gaff tape for an overhead. Quasars also have the benefit of fitting into old Kino 4ft housings (that grip houses convert themselves), which will make louvers and skirts easier to rig from.
  21. No single trick works. I use a combination of the following: Double-Net outside window. Polarizer (to attack interior floor light reflections) or sunlight kick off street/trees Shoot into trees or dark colors, not a white fence (sometimes must be timed with the sun) ND gel on windows. It is expensive but smaller windows can be treated inexpensively. Punchy HMI Key. 1200 or M18's is a good start. But it also depends on your key size. 2x 2500's may be better if lighting a larger space with larger rags. This is of course, if lighting from inside. If trying to push through a window... I'd imagine 18k, but that's out of my experience range. I'd advise against shooting something big into the ceiling to "raise the light floor" or "create ambient." I becomes toppy light and unnatural indoors. Always light from the side, as if window light is reaching them. I did this once with a 4K Arrisun in the ceiling and gave me about a 15-ft of well balanced lift against the outside. But it was so unnatural as they walked inside. If you can afford it, go with punchier lights like 2500s or 4Ks. You can always take away light.
  22. That Rosco Optiscuplt was designed to spread the light, not focus it, unfortunately. Aadyntech Punch/Jab lights come with similar spread filters to compensate for its fixed focus. But there may be hope. Arri Skypannels have a "intensifier" inserts available that does what you're talking about. Of course Arri specific will be expensive. But there must be a third party manufacturer of the same technology. My understanding is the insert is comprised of micro-lenses.
  23. Yes. I assume you're talking about nets (I know scrims as metal wire inserts). Interesting... Matthews used to have the option to re-cover frames. But it seems to be missing from history. Maybe due to COVID. They do have a fabric section I assume to re-wrap your frames yourself, although I've never done this; I've only ever sent them in for re-cover service. https://www.msegrip.com/collections/fabrics For UK, I suggest to call local rental houses for contacts, as they probably have to re-cover frames now and then. And call grip or rag manufacturing companies in your country. For example, grip companies in america are Modern Grip Equipment and Advantage Grip, both in addition to Matthews I've used for re-covers in the years. Hope this helps!
  24. The productions around here are requiring liability waivers. So if you get sick, it's your fault, not the studio's. I think production companies will continue to want to make money, especially with the choice of waiver requirement.
×
×
  • Create New...