J. Lamar King IMPOSTOR Posted October 12, 2004 Share Posted October 12, 2004 What do you guys think about backlight continuity? Does it jar you when a day exterior dialog scene is shot with both actors in backlight? I mean that's impossible, but it seems to make sense to the eye. Sometimes the decision to do that seems to be driven more by wanting a 'pretty' look than by logic. The thing I hate about it is sometimes it seems like it's expected that you shoot everything like that. I would rather turn the camera around and fudge the non-backlight actor so the sun is hitting him/her 3/4 front. If it's a beauty shot (older actress) I might silk the direct sun and perhaps negative fill. I've seen scenes where they were obviously shooting at morning then an afternoon turnaround. It seems they were shooting like that because they wanted some medium shots to also be in backlight. It looks OK except the shifting shadows in the MS backgrounds, it just seems like it takes more time. I guess it also has to do with how long it took to do the first single. There is a scene like that in 'City Slickers' where they are talking in the pen area of the dude ranch. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Premium Member Phil Rhodes Posted October 12, 2004 Premium Member Share Posted October 12, 2004 Hi, I was talking a friend through and episode of CSI the other night - they are the absolute kings of this. "Look, the sun's behind him, and she's facing him, and - oops, now the sun's to her right!" They seem to semi-cheat it a lot, by having one person backlit, and one with the half-and-half-face of a hard side light. It doesn't bother me; I've started doing it myself. I do find it bothers directors, though! Phil Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest fstop Posted October 12, 2004 Share Posted October 12, 2004 James Pergola managed to get this perfected on Baywatch, where he had actors in backlit during a dialog convo shot either at dawn or the magic hour and often mixed in would be pickups from the other times of the day, often overcast at times- the trick it seems is in the lenses and angles, not giving away any of the ground or VERY little of the background surroundings, other than the sky. pergola really made it look like the clouds were travelling across the sky, alternating the suns glare. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob Hayes Posted October 12, 2004 Share Posted October 12, 2004 In most cases the audience will never notice it when every shot is back lit. Look at ?The Natural?. I Think it is a great look. Even the most discriminating will usually buy into it and like it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Premium Member Michael Nash Posted October 13, 2004 Premium Member Share Posted October 13, 2004 It used to bother me more, but now things like that bother me a lot less. I think it's more important for the quality of the light to have continuity than it is for the logic of the sources to have continuity. If the quality changes drastically between shots (such as a backlit closeup cut with a hard frontlit closeup) you notice it immediately even though it's logically motivated, but the opposite is not true. If the quality of light is the same between shots but the logical source gets "fudged" a little, you don't notice it at first. And that's really what's important in a dramatic context -- that you keep the viewer engaged in the film, and don't give them something that's going to break their concentration and take them out of the moment. Sometimes it's a fun challenge though to try to make the lighting both logically motivated AND dramatically engaging. Emmanuel Lubeski is good at the continual hard backlight/soft frontal fill. It's a good exercise to watch how he motivates the light and blocks the angles to cover the wide shots yet end up with his trademark beauty light for the closeups. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DavidSloan Posted October 14, 2004 Share Posted October 14, 2004 @Fstop: I think it's the coolest thing ever that you know the Baywatch DP by name. G-d, I miss Nicole Eggert. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Daniel J. Ashley-Smith Posted October 15, 2004 Share Posted October 15, 2004 What's the point of a backlight, I mean, cinematographic codes create meaning, what is a backlight supposed to mean? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Premium Member Tony Brown Posted October 15, 2004 Premium Member Share Posted October 15, 2004 Opposing shots being backlit is seemless in my opinion, however jumping from one close up backlit to one frontlit.... THAT jars. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mike Williamson Posted October 15, 2004 Share Posted October 15, 2004 Opposing shots being backlit is seemless in my opinion, however jumping from one close up backlit to one frontlit.... THAT jars. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> The climactic scene in "Klute", Gordon Willis does exactly that with Jane Fonda and the nice fellow playing the bad guy where they're sitting in office at the clothing warehouse. It is jarring, but brilliant! Perfect for the scene. I do find it aesthetically pleasing as well, in some ways because it is more realistic. WWWS = What would Willis do? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
J. Lamar King IMPOSTOR Posted October 15, 2004 Author Share Posted October 15, 2004 Opposing shots being backlit is seemless in my opinion, however jumping from one close up backlit to one frontlit.... THAT jars. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Interesting that you should say that, I've noticed that myself which is part of the reason I asked the question. I have noticed that some DP's tend to match backlights less on interiors. I see them using something more like a Kicker on the guy with the sun in his face. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Morgan Peline Posted October 15, 2004 Share Posted October 15, 2004 What's the point of a backlight, I mean, cinematographic codes create meaning, what is a backlight supposed to mean? I always thought that backlight was invented to seperate actors from the background in the black and white era and then it carried over into colour films because it looked more glamorous than not having it. I notice that many, many Hollywood features and American tv shows still use it constantly, to different degrees of intensity, regardless of what genre they are including action, drama and horror. Morgan Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DavidSloan Posted October 17, 2004 Share Posted October 17, 2004 The climactic scene in "Klute", Gordon Willis does exactly that with Jane Fonda and the nice fellow playing the bad guy where they're sitting in office at the clothing warehouse. It is jarring, but brilliant! Perfect for the scene. I do find it aesthetically pleasing as well, in some ways because it is more realistic. WWWS = What would Willis do? <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Don't you mean WWWD? I've been watching Klute very carefully for the past few weeks, and I found a few lighting inconsistencies in the interiors...even Willis has a day off. :ph34r: I think every DP's fascination with that film though is how he got away with it! When 70% of the frame is pure darkness you would imagine someone on the set saying something. :lol: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest fstop Posted October 17, 2004 Share Posted October 17, 2004 I bet if it had been shot on video, the director and all of the backseat directors onset would have given the last word on wha they saw on the monitor. Ah, the beauty of film! ;) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now