another HMI vs Tungsten question - budgets
Posted 16 August 2005 - 01:04 PM
But i was so impressed by the 'glow' tungsten fresnels had - much softer/flattering. HMI feels very harsh in comparison.
Am after some experiences from other dp's who get the shocked look from directors and producers when you say you want 1, 2 or maybe 5, 12k HMI's????? I feel like a doormat sometimes in pre-pro or post-pro when the clients complain at the result. i know myself it could have looked better with brighter light - or we could have shot it more quickly by not having to move lights every time the shot changed... but the client want champagne on a beer budget.
Thanks in advance
Posted 16 August 2005 - 05:04 PM
I'd like to go with tungsten all the time, but the gennys I normally work off prevent me from that. It's nothing to max out a 150kva (and that's a pretty big truck) genny on tungsten - that's done in a snap on a big setup. With HMI's you can go a bit further.
I've actually calculated the wattage/power from tungsten vs. HMI's and factored in the genny and it comes out at about the same, maybe with a slight advantage towards tungsten. And if you factor in rigging time for HMI's and their ballasts, cables, weight etc, there's a definite saving in using tungsten. HMI's take time.
Posted 17 August 2005 - 09:49 AM
Posted 18 August 2005 - 09:40 PM
My day job is commercial still photography and as i have hardly ever shot above asa 100 in my life - i feel very awkward using anything above 100 for cinema work. I even shot a 15 second tv commercial last month on 50D for the interior - only with kinoflos - very close to the actors mind you....
Posted 19 August 2005 - 06:07 AM