Thesis on the study of light design based on the Character Arc

[amirali mohammadi]

Hello dear Masters and friends
 I finally chose the topic of my dissertation, in this dissertation I want to examine the design of light based on the Character Arc, in other words, what is the approach of the four main properties of lighting in the face of Character Arc? Do you think this is valuable?  Do you have any suggestions on this? Thanks a lot

[Satsuki Murashige]

Sounds pretty vague, do you have a particular film case study or cinematographer in mind? Vittorio Storaro’s work probably would be a good starting point, since his approach is so cerebral. 

[amirali mohammadi]

12 hours ago, Satsuki Murashige said:

Sounds pretty vague, do you have a particular film case study or cinematographer in mind? Vittorio Storaro’s work probably would be a good starting point, since his approach is so cerebral. 

Thanks so much for the reply. Yes, I chose the works of Vittorio Storaro.
I mean when the character goes to ruin or perfection. How light reacts. Walter White, for example, in the Breaking Bad, uses soft lights first, and then hard lights when it comes to making methamphetamines .

[Satsuki Murashige]

7 hours ago, amirali mohammadi said:

Thanks so much for the reply. Yes, I chose the works of Vittorio Storaro.
I mean when the character goes to ruin or perfection. How light reacts. Walter White, for example, in the Breaking Bad, uses soft lights first, and then hard lights when it comes to making methamphetamines .

Perhaps I’m just stating the obvious, but I don’t think there is any widely applicable theory for lighting design at play here. At least, there is none I am aware of that is commonly accepted. The design is something the cinematographer comes up with on a per-project basis. That means you can’t really apply (for example) Mr. Storaro’s theories of color that he used in ‘The Last Emperor’ to Michael Slovis’s work on ‘Breaking Bad.’ You will often find influences between the work of cinematographers of different generations - but those are usually aesthetic and not semantic.

One good example of this is darkness and underexposure in the work of Gordon Willis in the 1970s and Harris Savides in the 1990s. On the surface, they are aesthetically similar. But semantically Mr. Willis was mostly interested in contrast - he wanted to move the audience between light scenes and dark scenes, wide shots and tight shots, quick paced edits and slow edits. He wanted the audience to strain to see into the darkness and imagine what was there. He was, in a way, a manipulator of emotion.

On the other hand, I believe Mr. Savides was very much motivated by realism (especially towards the later part of his career) and photographic texture. He came from a still photography background. He disliked artificiality and came to think that the less he added to a scene, the more the audience would engage. He says this in his interviews after working with Gus Van Sant on films like ‘Last Days’, ‘Gerry’, and ‘Milk.’ At the same time, he had an interest in degrading a clean image, adding grain, muddying colors, using soft lenses. He liked the softness of the ‘toe of the film curve’ and radically underexposed to get the important part of his image there. The aesthetics were similar the Mr. Willis’s work, but the motivation was more about immersion than dialectics.

So if you’re looking for intentional meaning in lighting design, then I think it might be best to stick to a single cinematographer. On the other hand, if your main focus is aesthetics then perhaps it would be better to focus on one single aspect of the image like color or contrast? 

[David Mullen ASC]

Often these concepts are developed but are mitigated / softened / made more subtle / watered down (depends on your viewpoint) by the reality of the situation or location if the script or scheduled can't be adjusted so that, for example, in the section where a character is hard-lit from one side, there aren't day exteriors in flat overcast weather or a scene in a grocery store under a ceiling of fluorescent lights.

[amirali mohammadi]

On 9/5/2020 at 1:05 AM, David Mullen ASC said:

Often these concepts are developed but are mitigated / softened / made more subtle / watered down (depends on your viewpoint) by the reality of the situation or location if the script or scheduled can't be adjusted so that, for example, in the section where a character is hard-lit from one side, there aren't day exteriors in flat overcast weather or a scene in a grocery store under a ceiling of fluorescent lights.

Thank you very much for your answer, Master. Sorry I replied late. I did not have access to this site. I understand this fact. In fact, my goal is to study some of the main scenes that are purposefully designed light. For example, the opening sequence of The Godfather  which uses top lighting For Marlon Brando  And for Michael, soft light is used , or the breaking bad, in which Walter  decides to make drugs, uses cross lighting. These are examples. Congratulations on the award. We are proud of you, Master

[amirali mohammadi]

On 9/4/2020 at 10:02 PM, Satsuki Murashige said:

Perhaps I’m just stating the obvious, but I don’t think there is any widely applicable theory for lighting design at play here. At least, there is none I am aware of that is commonly accepted. The design is something the cinematographer comes up with on a per-project basis. That means you can’t really apply (for example) Mr. Storaro’s theories of color that he used in ‘The Last Emperor’ to Michael Slovis’s work on ‘Breaking Bad.’ You will often find influences between the work of cinematographers of different generations - but those are usually aesthetic and not semantic.

One good example of this is darkness and underexposure in the work of Gordon Willis in the 1970s and Harris Savides in the 1990s. On the surface, they are aesthetically similar. But semantically Mr. Willis was mostly interested in contrast - he wanted to move the audience between light scenes and dark scenes, wide shots and tight shots, quick paced edits and slow edits. He wanted the audience to strain to see into the darkness and imagine what was there. He was, in a way, a manipulator of emotion.

On the other hand, I believe Mr. Savides was very much motivated by realism (especially towards the later part of his career) and photographic texture. He came from a still photography background. He disliked artificiality and came to think that the less he added to a scene, the more the audience would engage. He says this in his interviews after working with Gus Van Sant on films like ‘Last Days’, ‘Gerry’, and ‘Milk.’ At the same time, he had an interest in degrading a clean image, adding grain, muddying colors, using soft lenses. He liked the softness of the ‘toe of the film curve’ and radically underexposed to get the important part of his image there. The aesthetics were similar the Mr. Willis’s work, but the motivation was more about immersion than dialectics.

So if you’re looking for intentional meaning in lighting design, then I think it might be best to stick to a single cinematographer. On the other hand, if your main focus is aesthetics then perhaps it would be better to focus on one single aspect of the image like color or contrast? 

Thank you very much for your comprehensive and valuable explanation, Master.
You are absolutely right.
In fact, one of my problems is that I have to choose films in which the character has undergone a character Arc . On the other hand, lighting should not be just a scene lighting. And have expressive functions. Also, sorry for the delay in responding, unfortunately my profile had a problem.

[amirali mohammadi]

On 9/5/2020 at 1:05 AM, David Mullen ASC said:

Often these concepts are developed but are mitigated / softened / made more subtle / watered down (depends on your viewpoint) by the reality of the situation or location if the script or scheduled can't be adjusted so that, for example, in the section where a character is hard-lit from one side, there aren't day exteriors in flat overcast weather or a scene in a grocery store under a ceiling of fluorescent lights.

Thank you for your complete and useful explanation, dear master