I shot this all with Natural light. I had the camera for the weekend and so I was alone in this shoot and with my limited time I wasn't able to really control the natural light like I would want to. Nevertheless it was a good shoot, I wanted to push the camera to the very dark and bright places.
I want to make a kind of poetic visual and lyrical film. Think, Terrence Malick. This is a proof of concept. Please leave comments with Ideas, thoughts, questions.
I shot this handheld without a rig. Some shots are pretty shaky, I'm sorry.
Thank you for your time.
Color Corrected, no CG
Zeiss 50mm (All night time shots, house INT)
Edited by Davi Silveira, 21 August 2013 - 04:27 PM.
I agree with you, shakiness was not my friend. I shot this without a rig of any kind just holding on to the camera so it was a challenge to keep it steady. some kind of hand held rig would of done the trick real nice I think. Between a little more smooth movement and shaky. The purple twilight was on the 70-200mm if you can believe that! Thank you for the comment. This was a very educational experience with natural light and composition.
How fortunate we are to have eyes and voices such as David Mullen's here!
I enjoyed the warmth of some of the shots, and the shot of the two hands coming together against the corrugated in the background worked very nicely. For my part, I would have wished for seeig some of the shots longers; the editing was too jumpy in places for me.
I EWA running in the field shots -- again, a matter of taste -- are overly wide. I had the benefit many years ago of getting some still photography counsel from Walter Rosenblum. He told me once that the way to use wide angle is to keep it from looking wide angle, particularly with regard to distortion. (This was, as I recall, in the late '60s, when wide-angle distortion was seeing a meteoric rise inpopularity, for reasons including new lens designs and the rise of the drug counterculture.) Today, it has been pervasive for many years already, and our lenses are phenomenal, but it is, in my view, essential to remain sensitive to the perspectives we use and consider their effects.
thank you for your comments. You brought up a very good point to me in expressing gratitude to David Mullen ASC. I just recently signed up to the site and this is in fact my very first post. I couldn't believe that David Mullen replied to my little post.. it made my day and I constantly re-read his comment looking for further secrets... ha I'm always fascinated at the inner workings of the mind, our thoughts as cinematographers and filmmakers. I believe our love for this expressive art makes our eyes and heart merge into one. Phillip I'm grateful for your comments and all the comments made by professional and students in this blog. This site is awesome!
I'm not sure what EWA means I've tried looking it up but to no avail. I assume you didn't really like the field shots due to their wide nature?? I will keep a closer look to the distortion regard and shaky camera.
btw, I agree with the shot's being a bit too fast.. shame, due to the shakiness of almost all the shots I think I was trying to cycle through them at a pace that matched the shakiness.. Sometimes less is more, maybe staying on a shot would of helped people connect a little more.
My apologies for the acronymious mystery -- EWA: Extreme Wide Angle. ECU is Extreme Close-Up. I haven't come across an EN -- Extreme Normal yet, but one never knows these days; it would probably be spelled XN, though. In any event, as one who disparages acronym-laced writing and speech, I should practice what I preach.
Sine scientia, ars nihil est. (Without science [or, knowledge], art is nothing.
I was trying to make it very Naturalistic, in fact those aren't even actors. The couple in the film is actually a couple in real life, they know nothing about acting. The hardest part was trying to get them to pretend fight or argue. Thanks again for the kind words