If the scene is lit by natural light, then if you need to light the spots that are in shadow, then they need to be the same colour as the natural light.

If any of the outside is direct sunlight and not cloudy day light, then the intensity of the direct light will be very bright, and trying to boost this will be tricky. This is drifting into one of those scenes that you just cannot do properly. If the car park has a roof, and real sunlight and real shadows the contrast ratio will be very high, so if you don't want these areas of darkness, sorting them out will be very difficult.

Me personally - I'd manage the shadows and use the sunlight. I'd accept any artificial light as exactly that - artificial and if it casts odd coloured shadows on the cast - well, it does in real life too. I certainly would not be trying to turn the location into a studio. Tinted light is everywhere and frankly, for what you're describing, why is it a problem? You're going to have more trouble with shooting in this location for an extended period with the light outside changing.

If Ryan ever films this scene I can only imagine the deluge of problems and questions. And this time the problems might even be real not imagined. ;-)

Gelling the lights in a car park is way beyond your means, but you can gel your film lights so that you don't have green on the faces.

Again, talk to your DP, because they're the one who has to do all this.

What if he gelled the sun? :-p

I suspect the car park has mercury type lighting, which tends towards the daylight end of the spectrum. Ryan seems to be using "natural" incorrectly, implying light from the sun, rather than daylight colour temp. ambient lighting.

Oh sorry, by natural, I meant the lights that are already in the parking garage to begin. My mis-usage. Should I have used the term practical?

I could have my own lights be the white balanced ones, and have them be tungsten lights, but I am just wondering where to hide the lights in the wide shots of the parking garage. I could hide them behind the pillars, but wonder if it would look obvious that they are lights hidden behind the pillars, if that is where the brighter lights are coming from.\

Also when it came to those two movie examples what apertures were those shot at, in the parking garages?

If the scene is lit by natural light, then if you need to light the spots that are in shadow, then they need to be the same colour as the natural light.

If any of the outside is direct sunlight and not cloudy day light, then the intensity of the direct light will be very bright, and trying to boost this will be tricky. This is drifting into one of those scenes that you just cannot do properly. If the car park has a roof, and real sunlight and real shadows the contrast ratio will be very high, so if you don't want these areas of darkness, sorting them out will be very difficult.

Me personally - I'd manage the shadows and use the sunlight. I'd accept any artificial light as exactly that - artificial and if it casts odd coloured shadows on the cast - well, it does in real life too. I certainly would not be trying to turn the location into a studio. Tinted light is everywhere and frankly, for what you're describing, why is it a problem? You're going to have more trouble with shooting in this location for an extended period with the light outside changing.

Well there is only sunlight coming in into the entrance in one section of the parking garage. The rest of it is not lit by sunlight.

I;m not sure why you have the what's best thought process. If this is a dramatic highlight to your film spend the money on it and save on the talking head scenes.

When you say save on the talking head scenes, do you mean do not have as much camera movement during them in comparison?

Talking head scenes are the purely dialogue scenes, rather than the action ones.

There's me answering questions on natural light suddenly realising Ryan doesn't mean natural light at all, but artificial light. What a waste of energy that was!

Ryan - do us a favour? If you want responses, try to at least get the questions right? We're used to you asking all kinds of random things, but at least spare some thought to checking what you are asking.

If you are set on the location, then practically, you will have to shoot available light only - which might be fine - but one or two sources on stands really won't work. 20 or 30 maybe?


I've just got a repeat job, because the client has come back to me again because the space is large and troublesome. Audio is a challenge, and light sources are multi colour temperature and not able to be matched. The first job really made me think a lot, but the eventual plan worked well, the sound was far more complicated to capture than everyone would think.

Can you try to ease back on advance planning where you can never do it properly because you're imagining problems and lacking experience to solve them, when you could just visit places, look around and then come up with good plans, that we could help find the flaw in - at the moment you have NO plans, and just imagine problems where often, they really don't exist.

Honestly every time Ryan starts asking questions about the next scene I can’t help but think how on earth is this guy going to film this? The lack of experience and knowledge is unsettling. He doesn’t own any lights or understand how to use them, or even speak intelligently on the subject. Underlying all that is all the other things that would go into filming it. It feels a kin to someone trying to learn how to fly a plane by asking questions on a forum. In addition to all that he withholds information. I could recommend lights but even a very minimal setup would cost a lot of money. It’s fine if he doesn’t have any money but what’s the point trying to give advice on the proper way a professional production would tackle such a scene. Same thing with the camera and lenses... We are basically trying to give advice to someone imagining what it would be like if he films his movie.

Talking head scenes are the purely dialogue scenes, rather than the action ones.

But are you saying that I should put more money and camera movement into the action shots, rather than the talking heads one, is what I meant?

There's me answering questions on natural light suddenly realising Ryan doesn't mean natural light at all, but artificial light. What a waste of energy that was!

Ryan - do us a favour? If you want responses, try to at least get the questions right? We're used to you asking all kinds of random things, but at least spare some thought to checking what you are asking.

If you are set on the location, then practically, you will have to shoot available light only - which might be fine - but one or two sources on stands really won't work. 20 or 30 maybe?


I've just got a repeat job, because the client has come back to me again because the space is large and troublesome. Audio is a challenge, and light sources are multi colour temperature and not able to be matched. The first job really made me think a lot, but the eventual plan worked well, the sound was far more complicated to capture than everyone would think.

Can you try to ease back on advance planning where you can never do it properly because you're imagining problems and lacking experience to solve them, when you could just visit places, look around and then come up with good plans, that we could help find the flaw in - at the moment you have NO plans, and just imagine problems where often, they really don't exist.

Sorry I used the wrong term. I will try to use the correct terms as best I can.

Honestly every time Ryan starts asking questions about the next scene I can’t help but think how on earth is this guy going to film this? The lack of experience and knowledge is unsettling. He doesn’t own any lights or understand how to use them, or even speak intelligently on the subject. Underlying all that is all the other things that would go into filming it. It feels a kin to someone trying to learn how to fly a plan by asking questions on a forum. In addition to all that he with holds information.

Sorry, I didn't intend to withhold information. What if I just stopped trying to concentrate so much on the cinematography and got a DP to do all this, and I just direct, without trying to worry so much about it. Let it be the DPs department. Would that be better?

But are you saying that I should put more money and camera movement into the action shots, rather than the talking heads one, is what I meant?.

Yes, since it's a thriller.

Okay thanks, that's what I thought too. I was thinking of keeping the camera very still in most of the dialogue scenes, but as long as it doesn't come off as too different or too cheap in comparison to the suspense filled scenes more.

Sorry, I didn't intend to withhold information. What if I just stopped trying to concentrate so much on the cinematography and got a DP to do all this, and I just direct, without trying to worry so much about it. Let it be the DPs department. Would that be better?
If you actually started out by giving us proper background information it would save a lot of time instead of trying to figure out why you’re ask specific questions. You should have just told you did test shots of the location, provided us stills or video...

Yes, since it's a thriller.
I agree thrillers should be fast paced. The way it’s filmed should reflect this.

For what reason have you decided to keep the camera still for the dialogue scenes? I just don't u8ndewrstand you. Have you not noticed that when dialogue scenes are critical, a static camera tends to not be used, because it can provide useful interest. In movies you often find the head stays centre frame and the camera moves left or right or even changes height as they talk. Static camera tends to shout news coverage. You take decisions in the most strange way I've ever come across.

You've asked many times if you should leave it to the DP, and you direct, would this be better? We always say better to get a DP and a Director because you have never ever determined where your skills lay. You often say it's organisation, or directing then in a later post say you are bad at organising and rubbish at directing. We also repeatedly query the status of your team - Director of Photography is not a title you just adopt because you're the guy who owns a camera, and owning a few lights doesn't mean you know about lighting. Having access to a washing machine doesn't mean you are head of wardrobe.

You are a film maker, with no budget, little equipment, lofty aims and a totally random method of doing it.

I cannot imagine thinking about a project 24/7 as you do, and then handing it to somebody who does not have this 'need' to get it done?

You got a martial arts video to shoot - and it was so simple, and probably half a days shooting. You wrecked it getting sidetracked into thinking you were making a movie. The reality was you didn't even shoot the training project in a way that guaranteed success.

Ryan = you really need to look at your success rate and progress and consider the facts. You change direction constantly. Have trouble explaining to others what you are doing and then walk away every time it gets hard. Have you ever looked at your clients who use you and thought long and hard at why they use you?
What would the credits say?
Ryan Wray - excellent director with effective interpersonal skills, gets on well with people and gets the best performance out of them.
or
Ryan Wray - always arrives on time, sometimes buys the coffee.

I’m pretty sure this is I’m home all day, unemployed, need to keep busy type of project. I highly doubt anyone is getting hired. Either through necessity or suggestion, he has adopted roles such as director or screenwriter because they require no layout of money for equipment. His idea is plan out every detail, get funded, and hire everyone needed to produce it.

When you say save on the talking head scenes, do you mean do not have as much camera movement during them in comparison?

Hopefully, the "in comparison" will allow for camera movement, just less than in the chase scene.

Certainly, the amount of chat with people who are not directly involved with a production is way beyond what directors do. This seems to be a blow by blow procedure.

For what reason have you decided to keep the camera still for the dialogue scenes? I just don't u8ndewrstand you. Have you not noticed that when dialogue scenes are critical, a static camera tends to not be used, because it can provide useful interest. In movies you often find the head stays centre frame and the camera moves left or right or even changes height as they talk. Static camera tends to shout news coverage. You take decisions in the most strange way I've ever come across.

You've asked many times if you should leave it to the DP, and you direct, would this be better? We always say better to get a DP and a Director because you have never ever determined where your skills lay. You often say it's organisation, or directing then in a later post say you are bad at organising and rubbish at directing. We also repeatedly query the status of your team - Director of Photography is not a title you just adopt because you're the guy who owns a camera, and owning a few lights doesn't mean you know about lighting. Having access to a washing machine doesn't mean you are head of wardrobe.

You are a film maker, with no budget, little equipment, lofty aims and a totally random method of doing it.

I cannot imagine thinking about a project 24/7 as you do, and then handing it to somebody who does not have this 'need' to get it done?

You got a martial arts video to shoot - and it was so simple, and probably half a days shooting. You wrecked it getting sidetracked into thinking you were making a movie. The reality was you didn't even shoot the training project in a way that guaranteed success.

Ryan = you really need to look at your success rate and progress and consider the facts. You change direction constantly. Have trouble explaining to others what you are doing and then walk away every time it gets hard. Have you ever looked at your clients who use you and thought long and hard at why they use you?
What would the credits say?
Ryan Wray - excellent director with effective interpersonal skills, gets on well with people and gets the best performance out of them.
or
Ryan Wray - always arrives on time, sometimes buys the coffee.


Oh do I walk away when it gets hard? When do I do that?

Also, I know the camera would not be static for every shot, I just thought I should probably have it static for a lot of the dialogue shots maybe, and was asking.

As for the martial arts video, I was only doing what they wanted, and they wanted a few days shoots, not just half a day, for what they had in mind.

As for having little equipment, if I should rely on other crew and departments, then should I have much equipment, if we should just rent, or if I should have a DP?

Well, pretty well every project you’ve shared with us went wrong. Did the martial arts one get finished or abandoned? All the things you’ve asked us about cameras, lenses, supports, audio, lighting the list is huge. In each one you had a problem. We talked you through gave you suggestions and then blam you move on. This topic got instance started with grading that turned into effects. Did you sort it?

Oh sorry if I made it seem like I was abandoning projects. the martial arts one is almost finished, the clients wanted a few tweaks done, and then it should be done.

As for the color grading issue, I am still working on trying to separate the skin tones with different scenes, and still trying to get better at it.