Longer lens for close up? Overrating stock?

[Daniel Tan]

Hey everyone,

 

I was at a telecine session earlier in the day looking at the stuff that I shot the last couple of weekends. No doubt, every shoot that I went through has always allow me to gain more experience. No exception this time. I have a couple of questions.

 

First: The newer Kodak stocks that are on the market right now...I guess that will be the vision stocks. Is there a need to overate the stock to achieve a thicker negative. I know a lot of people do that especially in the past but then the question is does it still apply as a general rule to the newer Kodak stocks?

 

Second: Longer lens for close up on women usually yields better results. But then I learn that it would somehow flatten the image more which is usually undesirable. somebody has any comments on that? I meant how do you handle situation like this? I know lighting would be somehow the key to the above. I just want to know if anybody can shed some more light on this topic.

 

After looking at the footages today, I am more intrigued by the knowledge that I need to gain rather than being pleased at the results on the screen. And I know I can do better...

 

Thanks for any input.

 

Regards,

Daniel

[David Mullen ASC]

Overrating a stock and printing down will deepen the blacks as well as tighten the grain, but if this if for telecine only, it is less necessary -- you tend to overexpose more if you are trying to capture more shadow information. Otherwise, you can rate normally.

 

As for lenses, it just depends on the shape of the face as to what lens works best -- generally it will be a medium to long lens though, unless you are shooting Audrey Tatou! Camera height makes a difference too as well as lighting -- for example, a fat face can be made to look narrower in side lighting.

 

Lillian Gish was always worried about the bags under her eyes and used to tell cameramen: "Camera high / lights low". On the other hand, often women look best with a high-ish frontal key light, assuming they don't have bags and deep-set eyes. This shadows the neck, which is more attractive (some people use a net flag to darken the neck and forehead.)

[Phil Rhodes]

Hi,

 

I find that discussions of lighting faces often come down to specifics like darkening certain areas with nets, etc., but in reality don't you find people end up moving way more than this sort of technique will tolerate? Even in direct speech people move somewhat, and your forehead light ends up becoming an eye light. I question the practicality.

 

Phil

[John Pytlak RIP]

Using Kodak color negative stocks at their rated EI is fine in most situations. If you are trying to get even richer blacks and more shadow detail, a bit more exposure helps. Slight overexposure puts scene detail "up the curve" where the grain is finer, and the color interimage is a bit more active, increasing color saturation slightly. But significant overexposure may put the information on the non-linear "shoulder" of a color negative film, and gives an overly dense negative.

[David Mullen ASC]

Yes, using a slash of light across the eyes, shadowing the neck and forehead, etc. only works when the person is fairly static in their close-up so it is done less often than it used to. But it's still useful to know about it.

 

If the net shadow is soft-edged enough, you can handhold them and "float" them to match the actor's movement in their close-up. You can see some moving gobo shadows on Marlon Brando in the temple scene in "Apocalypse Now" as Storaro attempts to keep his face shadowed even as Brando sits up from a reclining position, bends over to wash his face, and sits up again -- watch the shadow on the back wall. You can tell that some grip is floating a flag to keep the shadow on his face. But it works.

[Daniel Tan]

Hey,

 

Thanks for the inputs so far. I can now understand more of the overrating thing. So then the overrating of stock does depends on the situation and the stock used...and I assume that all of these apply to newer stock like the Vision2 as well as Fuji stock.

 

On the longer lens for close up, I usually works with Asian faces which are less angular and much flatter in a sense. Not just on movies but when I am taking still photos or headshots, I tend to bump into the problem of getting a flatter image. I understand most of it lies in the way I light and I will definitlely do some more tests to find a better solution.

 

Regards,

Daniel