|
|||||||||
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
April 11th, 2006, 01:10 PM | #16 |
Major Player
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Phoenix, AZ
Posts: 493
|
Yes. Everything, from the lenses, choice of stock, desired DoF is chosen in concert to best tell the story and achieve a look. Then, it is lit to match.
The point is, very few productions are shooting at F1.4. In part, because most lenses don't perform at their best at those wide apertures, and, as Leo notes, it'll drive the focus puller nuts! There was Barry Lyndon and Kubrick with his custom F0.7 lenses to shoot by natural candlelight, but that's a rare (and not likely to be repeated) exception.
__________________
Owner/Operator, 727 Records Co-Founder, Matter of Chance Productions Blogger, Try Avoidance |
April 11th, 2006, 04:10 PM | #17 |
Trustee
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Sauk Rapids, MN, USA
Posts: 1,675
|
One of the reasons that shallow DoF is a big topic for digital (esp. Standard Def) is the lack of resolution of the format. The ccd's lose so much detail and cause "jaggies" in the background of a shot that it screams digital rather than letting the pictures speak for themselves. Unless that look is your intention. Lots of the people on this board have also researched this one topic to death and kind of forget that other s haven't...I'm as guilty as anyone on this. The primary reason for shallow depth of field is to draw the viewers attention to a specific area of the screen. Different lenses have different DoF appearances based on f-stop range/setting and focal length. Digital works best when you give it enough information to resolve (i.e. The more pixels an individual item gets, the better it is recognized as an item rather than a pixel).
|
| ||||||
|
|