Lighting an appartment
Posted 21 December 2006 - 04:42 PM
I am just starting my career Dping, have been climbing up from cheap music video to commercials in 6 months, I do not quite feel I have the knowledge to do what I am doing but I am doing it. What are possible options in such a place to make things more moody without going hard with the light... I'll post a photo so you get the type of light I mean, in this photo it is natural light...
I thought of an Hmi through a chimera with eggcrate maybe, more contrasty than the image 80 diffused... Maybe undiffused image 80 to bring the reading from the subject at a higher ratio of difference to the background... Hard light fake window patterns coming inside shots.....
I was shooting with Cooke S4 lenses, kept a constant f2, so I used a ND3 or ND 6 once in while...
What would you do?? I know this is very up the air without seeing theplace and my images but I am asking anyways....
Here is a commercial that very much looks like my footage in the large scene altought I did not have that amount of space to play with lights and only had a few lit practicals here and there with "daylight" bulbs...
www.jetfilms.ca, you click on directors, find Maxime Giroux, look for the commercial entitled "Comte-Le temps s'arrête...."
How would you make this less bleak while keeping it soft, I mean by less bleak, to sort of have denser areas...
And here is the photo, forget the window there...
And another one...
Thanks a ton, I know this is a weird post, I am just trying to see differently.
Oups I posted twice the same image, sorry! I have trouble with other one, anyway, you get where I am going.
Posted 21 December 2006 - 06:07 PM
I tried to keep a bit of contrast in the faces lighting from one side only 90 degrees to the left side, no fill on the face, ...
This seemed strange to me, for an interior that's supposed to be daytime. Maybe had you increased the amount of fill it wouldn't have looked so "fake" to the producers.
Mixing kinos with 6k fresnels can be chancy too, if you're not quite sure how to handle them. Eggcrates help to direct the light better, but the transmission of the different kinds of lamps is noticeable...possibly even to the untrained eye.
You probably could have kept it really simple, with the 6k's outside the window for your main source/key, and then a bead/bounce board to provide the amount of fill you needed on your actors. Just an idea.
Posted 21 December 2006 - 06:46 PM
I will post another photo in a new thread, I have reached the limit, this was done shooting flash with a small 2x3 chimera... This is the sort of light I would like to create in film which I have not yet been able to... ... See, the shadow is soft, althought the light is punchy, all in all it still looks like soft light but it's got more crunch than those kinos which I am starting to consider not using anymore... But all the chimera experience I had in film were not concluding, I once had a 3x4 chimera on a 1.2k HMI placed about the same way as in this photo and it looked mushy, nothing like this.... It's this in between soft and hard that I'd like to attain, any ideas?
I just thought of THE perfect example: the Calvin Klein CKOne ads from Mark Romanek,
Both the one of the guy and the girl. This looks real. Natural light I mean.
Posted 21 December 2006 - 07:03 PM
hmmm, i think the shot looks great.
Those weren't his, Daniel
But I agree, they do look pretty good, ha ha
Posted 21 December 2006 - 07:07 PM
I tried posting the photo, it does not work so sorry I don't have more photo for reference...
Posted 21 December 2006 - 07:08 PM
Hi Jonathan, light temperature was not an issue I had a color meter and checked it all previously...
Oh, it wasn't color temperature that I was trying to address, but the general transmission and wrap around effect of the different types of light. A diffused fresnel and a diffused Kino are going to have different looks, respectively.
I like the cross key used in that Mark Romanek commercial, again, it was probably really simple how they did it. 5 or 10k's with 216 diffusion or muslin can get you that kind of midland between soft and hard edges. Chimeras work great too, I haven't worked with them on a shoot yet, but I demoed a Chimera pancake not long ago and I really loved how it looked. I plan on using one sometime soon.
Posted 21 December 2006 - 07:17 PM
keep it simple, Savides does the same in those commercials. i reckon big source through diffused material (or big source far far away) and soft bounce back
Posted 22 December 2006 - 09:24 AM
I must say, 6 months. That?s a very light sentence for the work your getting, good for you.
Hope this is what you were seeking.
Posted 22 December 2006 - 12:13 PM
Posted 22 December 2006 - 01:01 PM
Posted 22 December 2006 - 01:49 PM
Imagine this photo without a window but a wall a little farther and that the light quality was the same but artificial, what light would it be? I understand I need a large source, diffused probably, so that's why I went for Image 80... But I needed something a little less mushy, punchier but still soft and large... Maybe a bunch of small fresnel behind one large diffusion...
Thanks, and sorry for the confusion!
Posted 23 December 2006 - 10:43 AM
Looks great to me. Perhaps the producers were just busting your balls maybe?
Yes, then they can make you worry and keep your rate down as long as possible.
Who knows, but I hear stories, usually by grads who are so happy to be getting higher
end jobs and building commercial reels that they'll take the abuse for a while until they
feel secure and know that people will hire them other than the ones who'll "give you
another chance but you have to (work cheaply.)"
Posted 23 December 2006 - 01:32 PM
And based off the discussion, I'd probably say that you could have done more with the window light too... and then mabe bounce some smaller HMIs units onto the subject -- just so they wouled pop out a little bit, and you wouldn't loose the contrast given to you by the bright window.
Did you "blow out" the window? Just curious -- if so, what stop did you rate it at (if you remember)?
Finally, I like how you aimed the window HMIs to avoid hotspots and keel a nautral flow... *learned*
Posted 24 December 2006 - 10:08 PM
If you were shooting for telecine, you could have shot without the 85, giving you an extra 2/3 stop to work with.
"The close ups were beautiful, very real, but in a large view, it looked blank..."
Are you saying that the wall behind your actor was lit too flat, or that the actor's face was lit too flat? Because when I look at your reference still (which looks great, by the way!), what I notice first is that the back wall has a high degree of fall-off, almost like you darkened the left side with a soft matte in post. You might have been able to get away with doing the same thing to the wide shot in telecine (Of course, I'm sure you would have preferred to get it right on the negative).
Good luck, six months is a very short time to be getting such work. Hope I'm that lucky some day!
Posted 26 December 2006 - 07:07 PM