Jump to content


Photo

Never Let Me Go Cinematography

never let me go

  • Please log in to reply
27 replies to this topic

#1 Robbie Fatt

Robbie Fatt
  • Basic Members
  • PipPip
  • 56 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Sydney, Australia

Posted 01 June 2016 - 06:35 PM

I really did enjoy the cinematography of the movie "Never Let Me Go" and now I have some simple questions about the cinematography and in particular the focal lengths and lighting. My guess is that HMI's were used largely throughout the film but I'm interested to know what focal lengths the DP shot at. Apparently he used Cooke Lenses.

 

28mm?

2.jpg

 

32mm?

3.jpg

 

Any information would be helpful.

 


  • 1

#2 Robbie Fatt

Robbie Fatt
  • Basic Members
  • PipPip
  • 56 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Sydney, Australia

Posted 01 June 2016 - 06:40 PM

28mm?

1.jpg

 

40-50mm?

5.jpg


  • 1

#3 Phil Rhodes

Phil Rhodes
  • Sustaining Members
  • 12276 posts
  • Other

Posted 01 June 2016 - 07:11 PM

The dinner hall is some of absolutely enormous soft source top left. That's the sort of thing people constantly want on low budget stuff, and it's very hard simply to achieve the required scale to get it to fall off like that.

 

Huge HMI into... what, a huge diffusion of some sort. One of those inflatable things, perhaps.


  • 0

#4 David Mullen ASC

David Mullen ASC
  • Sustaining Members
  • 20164 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Los Angeles

Posted 01 June 2016 - 07:29 PM

Your guesses are close to my guesses...


  • 1

#5 Phil Rhodes

Phil Rhodes
  • Sustaining Members
  • 12276 posts
  • Other

Posted 01 June 2016 - 08:23 PM

Like so?

 

67.jpg


  • 0

#6 Adam Frisch FSF

Adam Frisch FSF
  • Sustaining Members
  • 2040 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Los Angeles, USA

Posted 01 June 2016 - 09:06 PM

I would say 32mm and 40mm in first, 28mm and 50mm in second, but a complete guess.

 

Yes, big soft sources, flagged and controlled so they don't spill everywhere is time consuming and fund intensive to do. Not to mention finding an excellent location like this. Half the battle with good cinematography is good locations/sets... :)


  • 1

#7 Stuart Brereton

Stuart Brereton
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 3378 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Los Angeles

Posted 01 June 2016 - 11:08 PM

Old locations like the one in pics 1&2 often have a lot of restrictions on rigging and lighting, so unless there was upper level to the room that they could light from, or windows that were easily diffused, I would think that a lighting balloon was an obvious choice.


  • 1

#8 Phil Rhodes

Phil Rhodes
  • Sustaining Members
  • 12276 posts
  • Other

Posted 02 June 2016 - 05:50 AM

Or just a row of large stands with three or four 8x8s on them and 2.5K HMIs fired into it, which is how I'd end up doing it.

 

Which would probably be cheaper.

 

P


  • 0

#9 Mark Kenfield

Mark Kenfield
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1188 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Australia/Wherever The Wind Takes Me

Posted 02 June 2016 - 07:43 AM

Such a gorgeous, devastating film. I won't bother guessing as to the how. I just loved that movie.


  • 0

#10 Stuart Brereton

Stuart Brereton
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 3378 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Los Angeles

Posted 02 June 2016 - 09:21 AM

Or just a row of large stands with three or four 8x8s on them and 2.5K HMIs fired into it, which is how I'd end up doing it.

 

Which would probably be cheaper.

 

P

Cheaper, yes, but more restrictive in terms of coverage. Most likely lit with something big, through a frame, from outside the window (assuming there is one).


  • 0

#11 Phil Rhodes

Phil Rhodes
  • Sustaining Members
  • 12276 posts
  • Other

Posted 02 June 2016 - 10:10 AM

And how would you deal with the inevitable criticism "it's so dark, I can't see their faces!"


  • 0

#12 Stuart Brereton

Stuart Brereton
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 3378 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Los Angeles

Posted 02 June 2016 - 01:20 PM

They're keyed with a soft source from left of frame. You can see that the doors on the left lead outside, so assuming that there's also a window there, above frame, then you could punch something like a 12/18k through a frame big enough to cover the window. Depending on how big the window is, you may also be able to push another, smaller lamp through as a low level, more frontal fill. If you can't, and there are no other suitable windows, then you'd have to do it from inside the room.

 

I'd always try to avoid a big rig with frames and multiple lamps inside the room, as it will inevitably get in the way of the last minute B camera angle, or will take a lot of effort to reposition for the reverse angles.


  • 0

#13 Robbie Fatt

Robbie Fatt
  • Basic Members
  • PipPip
  • 56 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Sydney, Australia

Posted 02 June 2016 - 05:25 PM

If this helps. Here is a similar room lit through the windows.

2.jpg

 

And the beautiful MS/CU.

1.jpg


  • 0

#14 Chris Burke

Chris Burke
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1739 posts
  • Boston, MA

Posted 02 June 2016 - 05:41 PM

Are these two pics reverses of each other? That might explain a lot. Beautiful film. 


  • 0

#15 Phil Rhodes

Phil Rhodes
  • Sustaining Members
  • 12276 posts
  • Other

Posted 02 June 2016 - 05:51 PM

Well that's easy, five 10Ks, five cherry pickers...


  • 0

#16 Miguel Angel

Miguel Angel
  • Sustaining Members
  • 850 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Spain / Ireland / South Africa

Posted 02 June 2016 - 06:40 PM

10Ks? Make it 24Ks if the Cinematographer likes working with Tungsten lamps or 18Ks if he / she likes working with HMI

1 per window and far away!
  • 0

#17 Phil Rhodes

Phil Rhodes
  • Sustaining Members
  • 12276 posts
  • Other

Posted 02 June 2016 - 06:45 PM

Well, I didn't want to be predictable.


  • 1

#18 Mark Kenfield

Mark Kenfield
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1188 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Australia/Wherever The Wind Takes Me

Posted 03 June 2016 - 09:13 AM

Perhaps the saddest thing about Never Let Me Go, is that Adam Kimmel hasn't shot another feature since :(


Edited by Mark Kenfield, 03 June 2016 - 09:13 AM.

  • 0

#19 Alexandros Angelopoulos Apostolos

Alexandros Angelopoulos Apostolos
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 471 posts
  • Student
  • Athens

Posted 03 June 2016 - 09:35 AM

Who was the colourist? He/she did a good job.


  • 0

#20 John E Clark

John E Clark
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 850 posts
  • Other
  • San Diego

Posted 03 June 2016 - 11:44 AM

I'm sure there were Big Lights™ outside dowsing the scene with illumination... but just on the off chance... a lot of the shots looked pretty close to available light or bounced available light.

 

Shot On What lists the following for film stocks used. A Digital Intermediate was also used, so there could be some amount of post processing done.

 

 
As a note, the above film stock URLs go to a page that indicates how many films that were shot on that film in the site's data base.

Edited by John E Clark, 03 June 2016 - 11:45 AM.

  • 0


Glidecam

Willys Widgets

CineTape

Tai Audio

Wooden Camera

Broadcast Solutions Inc

FJS International, LLC

Rig Wheels Passport

Aerial Filmworks

The Slider

Metropolis Post

Paralinx LLC

New Pro Video - New and Used Equipment

Technodolly

CineLab

Gamma Ray Digital Inc

rebotnix Technologies

Visual Products

Abel Cine

Ritter Battery

Media Blackout - Custom Cables and AKS

Gamma Ray Digital Inc

Broadcast Solutions Inc

Wooden Camera

New Pro Video - New and Used Equipment

Media Blackout - Custom Cables and AKS

Visual Products

CineTape

Willys Widgets

Ritter Battery

Abel Cine

Glidecam

Rig Wheels Passport

Aerial Filmworks

Paralinx LLC

Tai Audio

Metropolis Post

rebotnix Technologies

Technodolly

CineLab

FJS International, LLC

The Slider