Jump to content


Photo

First shoot with 35mm


  • Please log in to reply
13 replies to this topic

#1 Jimmie Armentrout

Jimmie Armentrout
  • Basic Members
  • PipPip
  • 22 posts
  • Student
  • Brooklyn, NY

Posted 15 March 2008 - 08:12 PM

Hello All

This is an exercise project for my cinematography class. The project calls for me to light a 'Night Scene' with a WS - MS - CU and reversal incorporated within it. This is my first time shooting 35mm and my second time using lights. I've always been intimidated with gaffing! I would appreciate any feed back. Thanks!!!
(shot w/500T Vision3)


View on Vimeo
  • 0

#2 Jimmie Armentrout

Jimmie Armentrout
  • Basic Members
  • PipPip
  • 22 posts
  • Student
  • Brooklyn, NY

Posted 21 March 2008 - 12:15 AM

Any suggestions . . .
  • 0

#3 David Mullen ASC

David Mullen ASC
  • Sustaining Members
  • 19759 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Los Angeles

Posted 21 March 2008 - 02:05 AM

Any suggestions . . .


Night interior or exterior? Practical lights are on or off? Moonlit? What do you mean by "reversal"? Reverse angle?

-- oh sorry, I didn't see the link, that you already shot it.
  • 0

#4 Jon Rosenbloom

Jon Rosenbloom
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 713 posts
  • Cinematographer

Posted 21 March 2008 - 10:23 AM

Lighting is too flat, try to shape it a little more.
  • 0

#5 David Mullen ASC

David Mullen ASC
  • Sustaining Members
  • 19759 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Los Angeles

Posted 21 March 2008 - 11:48 AM

I can't get the clip to play -- it just goes to black each time I hit play.
  • 0

#6 Serge Teulon

Serge Teulon
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 757 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • London UK

Posted 21 March 2008 - 12:21 PM

I could see that you went for a 'safe' style without allowing yourself to be adventurous. You set the foundations but didn't build on it!

My pennies' worth is that you need to relax and have fun.

Cheers
S
  • 0

#7 Tom Lowe

Tom Lowe
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1211 posts
  • Director
  • somewhere worshipping Terrence Malick

Posted 21 March 2008 - 12:24 PM

Why waste film on some ugly dude doing nothing? Get a babe in there or some kind of interesting subject matter. :)

The lighting looked okay, but whatever codec you used for compression was awful in terms of motion. Next time try H.264 with settings on high and a high bitrate.
  • 0

#8 Jimmie Armentrout

Jimmie Armentrout
  • Basic Members
  • PipPip
  • 22 posts
  • Student
  • Brooklyn, NY

Posted 21 March 2008 - 04:36 PM

Thanks for your suggestions everyone. I'll try to get more adventurous with my lighting and subject matter. This was done with limited time and subject matter.

- Lighting is too flat, try to shape it a little more -
. . .I thought the warm lighting and the cool (blueish) lighting would help the separation within the frame. What do you think could of helped?


- Next time try H.264 with settings on high and a high bitrate -
. . .Its odd cause that is the codec I used with settings on high. Maybe the bitrate wasn't high enough. Do you think this may have caused this?

Thank you again everyone!
  • 0

#9 Michael Nash

Michael Nash
  • Sustaining Members
  • 3330 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Pasadena, CA

Posted 21 March 2008 - 05:16 PM

. . .I thought the warm lighting and the cool (blueish) lighting would help the separation within the frame. What do you think could of helped?


I though the mix of colors looked pretty good, and the wide shots had enough modeling. It was the closeup that was flat:

screenshot.jpeg

The wider shots could have used some edgelight for more 3-d modeling, but that's a matter of taste. You did a good job of using contrast and color for separation. I didn't think it was "safe," just "naturalistic." Pulling off a naturalistic look can actually be pretty difficult with artificial lighting, so I'd say you did a good job.

. . .Its odd cause that is the codec I used with settings on high. Maybe the bitrate wasn't high enough. Do you think this may have caused this?


Relax folks, we're looking at a Vimeo flash video, not the straight MPEG. Flash re-compresses whatever you've given it and wreaks havoc with interlacing and frame rates.
  • 0

#10 Jimmie Armentrout

Jimmie Armentrout
  • Basic Members
  • PipPip
  • 22 posts
  • Student
  • Brooklyn, NY

Posted 21 March 2008 - 11:09 PM

[quote name='Michael Nash' date='Mar 21 2008, 03:16 PM' post='223611']
I though the mix of colors looked pretty good, and the wide shots had enough modeling. It was the closeup that was flat:

screenshot.jpeg

Michael

Thank you for your input. I do agree with you on the close up. I'm not to fond of this particular one. I do like my wide shot and the two close ups in the beginning though. I still have a lot to learn and appreciate everyones input.
  • 0

#11 Jimmie Armentrout

Jimmie Armentrout
  • Basic Members
  • PipPip
  • 22 posts
  • Student
  • Brooklyn, NY

Posted 21 March 2008 - 11:22 PM

I can't get the clip to play -- it just goes to black each time I hit play.



It may just need a second to load. I would love to hear any comments from you.
  • 0

#12 David Mullen ASC

David Mullen ASC
  • Sustaining Members
  • 19759 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Los Angeles

Posted 21 March 2008 - 11:24 PM

It may just need a second to load. I would love to hear any comments from you.


The internet connection in my hotel room is rather slow, so video clips are hard to play.
  • 0

#13 Tom Lowe

Tom Lowe
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1211 posts
  • Director
  • somewhere worshipping Terrence Malick

Posted 22 March 2008 - 02:23 AM

Vimeo does not introduce motion streaking like that, as far as I know. It's got to be the initial compression. I would simply keep upping the bitrate until that motion blur/blockiness problem goes away.
  • 0

#14 Michael Nash

Michael Nash
  • Sustaining Members
  • 3330 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Pasadena, CA

Posted 22 March 2008 - 11:41 AM

Vimeo does not introduce motion streaking like that, as far as I know. It's got to be the initial compression. I would simply keep upping the bitrate until that motion blur/blockiness problem goes away.


The only "streaking" I see is the result of displaying interlaced material progressively, which has nothing to do with the bitrate. You'd have to deinterlace the material before outputting the mpeg/whatever.

Other than that there's some subtle flickery/blocky noise, evident in broad areas of midtone. Those look like what you'd expect from flash compression, not H.264.
  • 0


Metropolis Post

Media Blackout - Custom Cables and AKS

The Slider

CineTape

Broadcast Solutions Inc

Technodolly

Abel Cine

FJS International, LLC

Rig Wheels Passport

CineLab

Ritter Battery

Opal

rebotnix Technologies

Tai Audio

Paralinx LLC

Wooden Camera

Glidecam

Willys Widgets

Visual Products

Gamma Ray Digital Inc

Aerial Filmworks

Willys Widgets

Technodolly

Gamma Ray Digital Inc

CineLab

Rig Wheels Passport

Abel Cine

rebotnix Technologies

Paralinx LLC

Opal

Wooden Camera

CineTape

FJS International, LLC

Aerial Filmworks

Tai Audio

Media Blackout - Custom Cables and AKS

Glidecam

Ritter Battery

Visual Products

The Slider

Metropolis Post

Broadcast Solutions Inc