View Full Version : need lighting input! HMI's & bright windows


Darren Levine
March 4th, 2015, 10:35 AM
The basics of the shoot are that it's 3 dancers in front of large bright windows, and i am tasked with getting enough light on them to get the skyline background window exposure within range, with strong preference against throwing shadows aka diffuse. Some of the shots are fairly wide, i'm estimating i can get the lights/silks maybe within 15ft of the talent.

So what i've worked up within the smaller budget are 2 joker 800's with 4x4 silks. figuring i can play with the distances to find the balance.

But my rental shop buddy just threw me a bone: he can do the same rate for a pair of arri 1.2K HMI's. From what i've read around, the joker isn't that far off the 1.2 (depending on how it's used of course)

So the input i'm looking for: have i planned enough light? go for the 1.2's? bounce instead of silk? I obsess over these things and some other brains would be of great help!

Ken Plotin
March 4th, 2015, 01:10 PM
Do you have the option of gelling down the windows? ND.60 will get you a couple of stops closer to the interior light level.
Ken

Darren Levine
March 4th, 2015, 01:12 PM
unfortunately no, i wasn't kidding about the 'large' windows, it's practically wall to wall floor to ceiling of 1x1 squares of glass on a 3rd floor.

Daniel Epstein
March 4th, 2015, 04:55 PM
Hey Darren,
Bigger light is better in this case and you are probably not going to have enough light for even a mildly overcast day to bounce. The sun is a very big source. 15 feet is a relatively long throw for to match the sun. Are these 1.2 pars? You might be able to use one direct and then bounce or use more diffusion on the second one.

Joe Holt
March 4th, 2015, 07:33 PM
Exactly how large are these windows? I would make every effort to try to knock down the light coming through the windows. You can get 12' wide mosquito netting from these folks. https://www.mosquitocurtains.com/store/mosquito-netting.html
a 30'x12' piece of the black netting would run you about $165 which is a a bargain compared to ND gels for the same coverage.

I just got an 8x10 piece of the "no See Um and it is good for about 4-6 stops. It would be best if you could hang it outside but that might be tough on the 3rd story without a cherry picker.

Jacques Mersereau
March 4th, 2015, 07:42 PM
Couple of things. First, you hit those dancers with a lot of light and big silks and you will be dealing with HUGE reflections from those lights in the windows. You might get away with it depending on the 'angle of incidence' but don't count on it. The netting is a good idea if you can swing it- but wind and enough hang points to keep it smooth will be a challenge.

The other thought is to try and shoot as the sun goes down - or as it is coming up - depending on which direction N-E-S -W the building room orientation is. That doesn't give you much time - but ...

Also, dancers LOVE side light. You could miss the windows and hit them from the sides keeping the light cut off the windows.
Front fill ? Yes, but reflections = ugh ... unless you can hit the dancers from a fairly steep angle high angle using lekos to avoid reflections.

Paul R Johnson
March 5th, 2015, 11:45 AM
It takes a while to do, but if the glass is in small squares, 1 x 1, then have you thought about using car window film? With water and a squeegy it's simple to cut to size with a craft knife and apply to the windows, and it's cheaper than ND - which is tricky to attach to windows. Some of this car film is pretty dark, and will simplify everything. 1.2K discharge fixtures also kick out LOTS of heat - much simpler with softer sources and dimming the windows.

Darren Levine
March 5th, 2015, 11:51 AM
Thanks for chiming in guys.

some more details i neglected that answers some questions for you:

the mosquito netting is interesting, but cannot be done outside, and would likely show up on camera inside, and for the price of the size i would need, i could get a third hmi. setup time is also not very grand, 2-2.5 hours, so playing with those windows in any way just isn't ideal.

this is an all day shoot, can't plan around the sun. as for reflections, i'll be placing the lights at 45degrees to the talent and adjusting as needed, as well as having pretty high ceilings to play with and not shooting perpendicular to the windows, so i'm wary of but not overly concerned about reflections.

On the bright side (get it) my rental buddy upgraded me to 2x 1.2 pars for barely much more in cost, which is a nice bump and i feel more confident i can get what i need out of it. i have plenty of space to play with the balance, and if shooting through silks at full spot at 10feet still doesn't get the exposure, i'll give the client the option of proper exposure with talent shadows, or somewhat blown windows.

and heat wise, it's a very large space, with industrial HVAC to kick on during breaks.

cheers

Charles Papert
March 6th, 2015, 03:22 AM
A few more pieces of information are important to consider here, chiefly, what camera? Are you shooting log? The better the dynamic range of the camera, the more you can get away with less firepower on your set.

What is the compass orientation of the windows? Will the view seen through the windows receive direct frontal sun during the shoot day? Are you concerned about continuity within the piece, as you will see a major difference between that view in shade vs sun?

Outside of that--it is extremely unlikely that even 1200 pars will be enough to balance against direct sun with the setup you describe. Absolutely not as bounces, and still underwhelming through all but the thinnest diffusion (by the way, don't use silks for this purpose--they are old school and inefficient in terms of their softening quality vs transmission characteristics. 216 or full gridcloth will be similarly soft and deliver more light). Without knowing the specifics above, I wouldn't want to tackle this setup with less than two M40's or 6K pars for the direct version through diffusion, or M90's/12K pars for the bounce version, if the goal was to keep the exterior within 2 stops of the interior.

Darren Levine
March 6th, 2015, 08:26 AM
Thanks for chiming in Charles!

We're shooting with C100s and GH4s, of course the GH4 doesn't have log(despite many rumors that VLog is in existence), but it has some nice control for what is is, but still not the best DR out there. I can delegate the weaker cameras to the angles which will have fewer windows in them and perhaps nudge them into a position with little to no windows. On one side there is 1 bare wall to work with and might go for a higher up angle with the other.

I did inform the client that direct sunlight may likely bleed in the corner in the afternoon, it's a north/westish situation and the sun sets pretty southwest this time of year (Been catching some great cityscape sunsets with that info!)

diffusion wise, was using the term silk somewhat generally. and that's another issue i've been racking my brain over. Can't order every option from the rental shop, so i'm trying to narrow down 2 or 3 options. Do you think full grid cloth wouldn't cut too much light? i was eyeing half grid and china silk

and power wise, unfortunately i'm getting as much as the client's budget allows. i'm trying to see if i can get an m18, but i was already pushing it going from the 800s to the 1.2 fresnels to the pars. The client loves shooting against windows, so there's no swaying from it. It's not ideal, but some combination of lens/diff/distance can get the exposure albeit with various tradeoffs, i'll likely have to dial in that setup, audition it for the client and explain the tradeoffs with that setup vs backing it off.

Thanks again for the input, every tidbit helps me get this nailed down!

Here's a shot from one of their prior videos, and from what i'm told, they used 4x 4 bank kinos + 2x 2bank kinos. I am not aware if they were expecting to compete with the windows with that.

Charles Papert
March 6th, 2015, 09:05 AM
I would recommend that you go to your buddy's rental house and shoot a test with the 1200's against a similar facing window so you can audition the setup (and maybe he has various diffusions skinned for you to try?) That way you can attack this job with the appropriate confidence, be able to show the client what they would be getting in terms of exterior detail.

Half grid will obviously give you more punch than full, but of course it will also be harder. I'm not sure how soft you are looking to go--it's a matter of taste. It's not going to look like a big soft source no matter what you use as long as it is direct light into a 4x4, just varying degrees of "less hard", if you know what I mean. At least shooting into hot windows means that background shadows won't be that much of a tell.

Darren Levine
March 6th, 2015, 11:07 AM
Thanks for making that suggestion, i hadn't considered trying it out since i knew they didn't have a test room, but just asked and he mentioned they do have a fully windowed conference room, which happens to be the perfect test space in this case. Awesome beans.

I'm not looking for super soft, just to take as much edge off as can be done without losing the exposure battle with the background.

I also just came across this nice little tool by lee fitlers: Wide Range of Diffusion Filters in a Range of Densities (http://www.leefilters.com/lighting/diffusion-list.html)

Charles Papert
March 6th, 2015, 11:21 AM
Let us know how you make out. It's probably going to be tough to get the head back as far as you would need to in a conference room vs what you will be doing with the dancers, so maybe simulate your widest setup in the parking lot to figure out how far the heads have to be (really, the diffusion frames since they will be closest to the shot) and try to recreate that when you do your test. They don't have a rolltop loading door at the rental house??

Darren Levine
March 6th, 2015, 02:48 PM
Thanks again, i will indeed report back. they do have a load in area, but i'll see if they mind me hanging around there.

cheers

Bruce Watson
March 6th, 2015, 04:56 PM
...it is extremely unlikely that even 1200 pars will be enough to balance against direct sun with the setup you describe. Absolutely not as bounces, and still underwhelming through all but the thinnest diffusion ... Without knowing the specifics above, I wouldn't want to tackle this setup with less than two M40's or 6K pars for the direct version through diffusion, or M90's/12K pars for the bounce version, if the goal was to keep the exterior within 2 stops of the interior.

Listen to Mr. Papert. He's a gifted cinematographer who can light the heck out of almost any challenge. If he's sayin' that 1.2K HMIs aren't enough, they aren't enough. But you don't have to believe him, and you certainly don't have to believe me. Test before you commit, it's the only way to know what will really work for you and your individual situation. Just understand that there's zero upside to showing up to the gig with insufficient lighting. As long as you understand that, you can act to prevent it.

Bill Ward
March 7th, 2015, 07:36 AM
Well...there's your problem. Just pull the drapes. ;}

Good luck, and let us know what you ended up trying and how it worked out.

Daniel Epstein
March 7th, 2015, 10:30 AM
Looking at the still I would let the windows blowout like they did if the lights you bring are not strong enough battle the outside completely. If you are limited by Power and budget then 1.2's might be the biggest you can run safely even though you would like or need more.

Charles Papert
March 7th, 2015, 12:51 PM
The basics of the shoot are that it's 3 dancers in front of large bright windows, and i am tasked with getting enough light on them to get the skyline background window exposure within range

I think this is the key to it all. By "I am tasked", Darren, I am assuming that you mean the client has specifically requested that you maintain detail outside the windows. If that is the case, this is not a "fudgeable" notion as Daniel is perhaps suggesting (i.e., try it and see how it goes). I have been in this exact boat myself. I shot a commercial on 35mm many years ago with large windows in the background, and pushed the interior as hot as I could with my available lighting. In telecine, the exteriors held within the latitude of the negative but that system was too rudimentary to be able to bring that dynamic range down to NTSC. We dialed it in for the windows, the foreground was too dark. Opened up for foreground, the windows blew out. The colorist turned and looked at me expectantly. The clients were dead silent. I sweated. It wasn't pretty.

While tools like Resolve are quite powerful today, it helps to get a "fat negative" going in and even the C100 in log is not a dynamic range powerhouse. When you do your test, try exposing somewhat to the right and seeing if you can pull up the interior enough to make it work. And then show the test to the client and make sure they are comfortable with the results. If not, quote them on a package that will make it work, so it's their decision to go for it or not. That will cover you on the day.

The classic misconception out there these days is that cameras are so sensitive, you don't need big lights any more. Even at my level I still have to point out that the sun is as strong as it always has been, so going up against it still requires the same out of intensity. The next few years will represent groundbreaking changes in this regard as dynamic range creeps higher, but we aren't there yet.

Ken Diewert
March 13th, 2015, 12:49 PM
Darren,

Keep us posted on this if you wouldn't mind. I was wondering if you could use some bounce back from the windows to help... it would need to be pretty big and bouncy though!

Darren Levine
March 13th, 2015, 07:22 PM
Thanks Ken, i very much need to catch up with emails, didn't see notifications on the last few posts in here.

i'm still a bit hectic and have a different shoot to go pack for for the morning, so forgive the brief update:

Did the lighting test, had to be fairly brief about it, but tried out a 1.2 and an m18, first scrimming the m18 to simulate a second 1.2, and then de-scrimmed to see the gain on the m18. we tried half frost and 1/4 grid, with a head placement of 10' to the lead subject, diff 4-5' from the fixture. There was not a whole lot of space to work with, but got a decent enough simulation

Result was that we could get details in the buildings outside of the windows, but the sky was still at least another stop away from real detail while keeping the skintones within reason. Sub'ing in the m18 was a big bump, despite being only 600watts larger, it does indeed act more like a 2.5 with that new reflector design that my lighting guy was telling me about. With that kicked in, we were starting to hit a balance between the skintones and sky.

Prepped the client that while we already have planned significantly more light than they've used in the past which will achieve more detail in the windows, that upgrading to the larger m18s would be recommended should the budget allow either now or for future shoots. Client was happy with sticking with the current plan since it's already more than they're used to, and work from there for the following shoot, which is planned for may.

Thanks again for the inputs, and i might add that if anyone has need for a GH4 rental, i was stunned to get this rate for a rental from lensrentals: 6 days. $111 total including round trip shipping... bonkers

cheers

Charles Papert
March 16th, 2015, 05:28 AM
Those results are consistent with what I suggested in my earlier post--you got satisfactory results with M18's through light diffusion, whereas I recommended M40's but would have used full grid or 216 for more softness (or more likely, going through a 4x4 frame of opal and then a secondary 8x8 of light frost or 1/4 gridcloth). That extra stop gives you the firepower to make choices and also service the clients when they say "it's still just a little bright outside, any way to bring it down more?" I find it very stressful to have "just enough" light to combat daylight, you always want a little extra so you have flexibility in how you manage it. Of course, budget dictates all.

A couple of notes about the M series lights for those interested. As Darren noted, they emulate the output of the "next-level-up" classic pars, so an M18 can replicate an older style 2500, an M40 can emulate a 6K par etc. They have a wide focusing range, but one trick worth mentioning is that taking roughly a 1/4 turn from full flood towards spot will result in a significantly greater output without excessively narrowing the beam. If you are pushing through a 4x4 frame with a reasonable amount of diffusion (more than opal for instance) or bouncing, the beam spread won't change much but you can amp up the effective output easily 1/2 a stop and approaching a full stop, which is very handy. On the other side, the M series ballasts feature a dimmer that allow you to knock the output down incrementally to a full stop less, which is handy if you don't have time to drop in a scrim (very helpful during magic hour). And with their modern design, hot strikes are much more likely than with the finicky older ballasts.

One caveat about the magic M-series reflector is that the shadow pattern. Whereas a fresnel will get you the cleanest edges and a par will give you a more funky edge along with the uneven spread typical of those lenses, the M-series delivers a fairly uniform beam with an array of individual shadows in a tight formation on the edges. You can help things by pushing through a light diffusion to merge them together, but of course the shadow will become softer by design. As a result they are not the best light to simulate hard daylight if the shadows will read on camera--that is still the venerable 18K fresnel (arguably, carbon arcs were the best but those are all but gone).

Another is the perceived notion that the M18 can be plugged into a 110V outlet. While most household breakers are 20 amp, the outlets themselves are generally rated at 15 amps and the startup current when you strike the head can overload the circuit. Bottom line is it may work, it may not, but it's a tough risk. In an industrial setting that is properly wired, you are more likely to be able to plug into the wall. In any event, there is always the M8. I haven't used it yet but based on my experience with the rest of the line, it should be a great problem solver when power and size is a factor.

In general, the M-series are great performers and I bring them on every show.

Daniel Epstein
March 16th, 2015, 08:01 AM
Hey Darren,
Your results sound about as expected. Managing the clients expectations vis a vis budget is a good skill. Bigger was better. You said your next shoot is in May. I have found shooting in NY out of windows that the time of the year does change the results a bit when trying to balance to the outside light. May is probably going to be brighter than March so if you were only a stop under you might be 2 stops under when the sun is at its brightest.

Darren Levine
April 24th, 2015, 11:43 AM
Hey all, sorry for not following up sooner, was waiting for the client to post some of the finals (i'm not the editor on the project), but until then...

To sum the shoot up: the client was happy.

But of course i'll elaborate:

Settled on half soft frost, which kept just enough punch to squeeze almost everything into serviceable place on the waveform, but required plenty of tweaking along the way to accommodate changing light as well as various moving/non moving talent, which ranged from mostly stationary, to jumping up and down, to all over the place. I would have liked a chunk more setup time to really squeeze the most out of the setup/gear, but that is par for the course.

Suffice it to say the challenge of creating a wide enough field of light with minimal diffusion was the greatest battle. As the days got late, the sun did make its appearance, which we all loved the look of except for the last shoot on day 1 where near the end it got a bit too "stylized", but still the client was pleased.

The client has done several shoots before, so it seems she has a good handle on budget vs tradeoffs, vs expectation, and all such things i conveyed to her along the way. Such as when finalizing the first setup she asked about the shadows; i advised i could reduce/remove them but at the expense of the window exposure. She of course chose windows over shadows. If it weren't for a pillar in the middle of the space, i could have pulled everything back and gotten the shadows all on the floor.

The attached grabs are from the GH4(the wide shot), and a quick dirty grade done in cameraraw.