Dustan Lewis McBain Posted October 7, 2010 Share Posted October 7, 2010 Does anybody shoot characters in soft focus anymore? I recently learned that cinematographers such as robert burks shot women in soft focus becuase it was supposed to make women more attractive. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Premium Member Adrian Sierkowski Posted October 7, 2010 Premium Member Share Posted October 7, 2010 not soft focus, per say, but often with softer lenses, and or some lens diffusion, if it's appropriate, and generally in softer lighting. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Premium Member Tony Brown Posted October 7, 2010 Premium Member Share Posted October 7, 2010 Does anybody shoot characters in soft focus anymore? I recently learned that cinematographers such as robert burks shot women in soft focus becuase it was supposed to make women more attractive. I can speak with some years of research on this behind me......You're confusing lenses with beer..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dustan Lewis McBain Posted October 8, 2010 Author Share Posted October 8, 2010 "The way Hitchcock tended to shoot his leading ladies... ... There are only so many times we can look at the directors vision of ideal beauty through a soft focus and not get annoyed." " Some of the film was deliberately filmed with either soft focus lenses (Hedren's close ups) or grainy rear projection" So using a soft focus lens makes women look more attractive? or does it give them a distinct look. Or rather a different perspective from other characters. (assuming that other characters were not shot in soft focus). What im looking for is a creative and original (or in this case unoriginal) way to distinguish characters, more specifically to make women look more attractive in relation to lenses. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Premium Member Bill DiPietra Posted October 8, 2010 Premium Member Share Posted October 8, 2010 Does anybody shoot characters in soft focus anymore? I recently learned that cinematographers such as robert burks shot women in soft focus becuase it was supposed to make women more attractive. If you're talking about classic Hollywood lighting for women, I believe most of that was achieved through heavy filtration and soft lighting to give the appearance of a soft image. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Premium Member Adrian Sierkowski Posted October 8, 2010 Premium Member Share Posted October 8, 2010 What Bill says. If you just have an out of focus image, it's nearly unwatchable. The goal was to have a "soft" look, which they accomplished in lighting and diffusion. But, since diffusion works on small details first you still had important things (like their eyes! very imporant) in focus. And with a light to make their eyes pop, looking a bit wetter and richer [in color] you've got that older glamorous look. The question is whether it's appropriate. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ben Brahem Ziryab Posted October 8, 2010 Share Posted October 8, 2010 It's all about lighting. I suggest you to see the work of cinematographer Jack Cardiff. Very few cameramen were able to light women as he could, and make them look beautiful as you mention. And yeah the soft and diffused glamorous look is something we associate with heavy Pro-Mist filtration. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Premium Member Tony Brown Posted October 8, 2010 Premium Member Share Posted October 8, 2010 And yeah the soft and diffused glamorous look is something we associate with heavy Pro-Mist filtration. The classic diffusion for women was and still is, nets, of varying density and colour, there have been fashionable trends down the years, Mitchell diffs, Soft FX, Softars....but it always comes back to a good selection of nets. Lighting a woman for beauty in any fixed position is really not difficult. If its the primary consideration then you need to communicate early on that her movement will be restricted else optimum result will suffer. The more movement allowed (and obviously restriction is more often than not impractical) the more the optimum is diminished as the target area needs to be widened. 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