Would using a star filter for cinematography be too weird?

Brian Drysdale · January 7th, 2020, 04:30 PM

You are asking to do things that the equipment that you've got available on your budget can't do, plus you paint yourself into a corner by wanting to do complex camera moves with long lenses.

Pete Cofrancesco · January 7th, 2020, 04:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Brian Drysdale

You are asking to do things that the equipment that you've got available on your budget can't do, plus you paint yourself into a corner by wanting to do complex camera moves with long lenses.

He has this fixation with close ups. I think he has seen one too many Sergio Leone movie. Cu have their place but his world seems to revolve around them and super telephoto lenses.
https://www.dvinfo.net/forum/open-dv...ml#post1948473

Ryan Elder · January 7th, 2020, 04:53 PM

Oh well the sets I worked on were very different. They just shot everything with a tripod. One had a large large jib and one had a drone, but I don't want to use those. But perhaps their style of shots is different than mine, and my style requires different equipment.

And no I don't think I have too many close ups in mind. I want a good amount of the shots to be close ups but not all of them.

Brian Drysdale · January 7th, 2020, 05:43 PM

" I want a good amount of the shots to be close ups" that sounds like TV, rather than cinema.

Ryan Elder · January 7th, 2020, 08:27 PM

Well I think it depends on how you make the close ups look. Lots of movies have a good number of close ups and do not feel like TV, at least I didn't think.

When it comes doing the martial arts video, the martial artists want to show specific moves where I need to show each arm performing the move. So if I have to show both arms, should I break the 180 degree rule then to get on the other side, to show the other arm, do you think?

Josh Bass · January 7th, 2020, 08:58 PM

I noticed this years ago but to me the "TV look" has more to do with the use of midrange or telephoto focal lengths for everything...where even the wide shots kind of look compressed. Maybe to a lesser degree less dynamic lighting and less sophisticated grading (I would swear movies tend have grades that really "pop", where as TV shows will often slap a "blue" or "orange" look on everything). Exceptions of course but many shows seem to follow these tropes. In recent years much of the streaming and prestige TV stuff has gotten to where it's indistinguishable from films in terms of production values.

Closeups with a wider lens look really cool..dynamic, with a feeling of depth.

Of course it's all project dependent etc. etc.

I would think for the martial arts you could find a side angle (sounds like that's what you mean) where you could still see both arms...if you have to elevate above the performer and shoot down to see the arm farther from the lens, or from below, etc.

Or just from in front of the person. It would depend on each move and the best way to show it off.

As always, you'll probably have to see the action in person to decide the best way to film it. As we've said...you just can't storyboard and plan everything. Unless they'll let you, and you want to take the time to go there on ANOTHER separate day from the shoot, and have them demo all the moves, and think through your shots then, so on. shoot day you can be ready. That's a lot of trouble...most folks would get there on the day, and talk this stuff through and decide angles at that point. That's how we often do corporate training videos....tell them to demo the action, then decide where camera(s) should be to best cover it.

And also as always...look to see what others have done before you (look up martial arts instruction on youtube or something) and do something similar when applicable. This is one of those time where the copy paste thing is just fine.

Ryan Elder · January 7th, 2020, 09:05 PM

Oh okay, yeah they want me to just come shoot it, rather than demo first, but I will ask if I can have two shoot days then.

I am thinking I won't break the 180 degree rule and shoot a wide shot, but on a telephoto lens, zoomed in for more movement on the panning, during the fight.

Then use a wider lens for close ups, pointed more diagonally and down at the arms but without crossing the line.

Well when I think of close ups for TV, a lot of older TV shots, looked made for TV, cause the cameras were always in the same spot. It was as if the cameras never moved in a set hardly, so the close ups looked made for TV that way, like soap operas or sitcoms.

Where as if shows nowadays like Breaking Bad for example, they seem to put the camera wherever they want to, compared to a soap opera or sitcom. That show has a lot of close ups but it doesn't look like TV, compared to a movie, does it? Bad as for using wide lenses on close ups, that real close intimate feeling look is just not my style I guess.

The only thing for the martials arts video is I only have a tripod now, so I will have to move fast, where as if I had a gimbal, perhaps I could move faster, without having to lock a tripod down for so many shots...

John Nantz · January 7th, 2020, 10:38 PM

Josh had some good comments and I’d like to throw in some more thoughts..

First off, how far away, or how difficult is it, to drive to the martial arts place? If it’s not very far then I’d go there with mics and cam in hand to make some recordings, preferably with some people in the video. (Is this a wide-open studio or one with small rooms?) With those clips one can see how the color is going to look, skin tones, and hear how the audio is going to sound. Play around with cam settings and profiles.

If it’s possible to get some video with someone actually working out it would be best. As we know, the human ear is good at tuning out sounds that that are undesirable and that the mic will really pick up. Hopefully on the day(s) of the shoot(s) the conditions are the same, especially noise-wise.

Josh’s idea about casing out what others have done before is good and the client should, hopefully, have some links to videos they like.

This will be a really interesting shoot. If they’re paying the actors then that’s probably why they only want one shoot.

Question: Have they ever had a video done before? If so, what did they like and not like about it? Can you see it?

Ryan Elder · January 7th, 2020, 10:46 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by John Nantz

Josh had some good comments and I’d like to throw in some more thoughts..

First off, how far away, or how difficult is it, to drive to the martial arts place? If it’s not very far then I’d go there with mics and cam in hand to make some recordings, preferably with some people in the video. (Is this a wide-open studio or one with small rooms?) With those clips one can see how the color is going to look, skin tones, and hear how the audio is going to sound. Play around with cam settings and profiles.

If it’s possible to get some video with someone actually working out it would be best. As we know, the human ear is good at tuning out sounds that that are undesirable and that the mic will really pick up. Hopefully on the day(s) of the shoot(s) the conditions are the same, especially noise-wise.

Josh’s idea about casing out what others have done before is good and the client should, hopefully, have some links to videos they like.

This will be a really interesting shoot. If they’re paying the actors then that’s probably why they only want one shoot.

Question: Have they ever had a video done before? If so, what did they like and not like about it? Can you see it?

It's a few miles but it's not open until the first shootdate though in a few days. This fight scene is trickier for me though, cause if was a movie, people do not care about the specifics of seeing the move from different perspectives. But now that they want to show off the moves, from different perspectives, I want the shots to be 30 percent different each in the editing, so it cuts together better, without looking too much the same, but it's hard to make the shots 30 percent different, when you want everything shot closer up to see how the moves are done.

The space is a long room, narrow room actually, so I was thinking of being all the way on one side with a telephoto, while the martial arts are on the other side, but not too close to the wall of course. Then I can move in for the wider close ups.

Here's one short film I did:

Actually I was doing some tests with my lenses, and maybe as far as barrel distortion goes, a 35mm might not be so bad, but can a gimbal handle a lens like a 35mm, or is that not wide enough for a gimbal?

Brian Drysdale · January 8th, 2020, 02:17 AM

How well a gimbal will handle a 35mm lens will probably depend on the quality of the gimbal, the operator and the type of shot you're trying to do. I've used 35mm lenses when shooting 35mm and 16mm lenses on Super 16 using a Steadicam and it works, although more care is required than when using short focal length l.

BTW I've used a 14.2mm lens on 35mm film which had very little barrel distortion (you had to go looking for it), however, it would have a distortion on faces if you decided to go in for a close up. I suspect you may be using an incorrect term for this effect. A number of directors use wide angle distortion on close ups. This is the effect distance and focal length on the face shape, as you move in closer the perspective changes.

I wouldn't cross the line in the middle of a fight, it causes confusion in the context of sports coverage, as explained by Paul earlier, That's different to the crossing of the line in drama, as explained in the 180 degree video posted earlier in the thread, where a switch occurs at dramatic point in a scene and tends to stay using the new line, with everything having a clear geographical relationship. .

Ryan Elder · January 8th, 2020, 10:06 AM

Okay thanks, that's a really good video thanks. It seems to me that when it comes to a close up, at that close, it starts to look good around 75mm for me. But for medium close ups, pulled further back, 35mm should be fine I think.

I won't cross the line in the fight. But I think to show some of the moves, I am going to have to be on the line though, to show the move from above, pointed down. So as long as on the line is okay.

Brian Drysdale · January 8th, 2020, 10:27 AM

All this comes down, to personal taste and the characteristics of the lenses you're using and the story you're telling, combined with the action.

I've found 50mm an interesting lens for CUs, going longer tends to make things a bit flat.

Ryan Elder · January 8th, 2020, 10:35 AM

The 50 looks pretty good too. I suppose anything beyond 75mm looks too flat, and I just rounded it off to 85 mm, since that is what I have, along with a 50mm. It's also possible that the person I tested it on, maybe just looks better, face shape wise on an 85mm, compared to some people that may look better on a 50?

Well for a lot of the wider shots, where I want movement, I can use the wide lenses, just if I want to move on a face close up, on a lens, even around 50mm, I guess I could use a dolly if I have to.

For the martial arts video, which is being shot soon, my main worry is that since I am shooting close ups of all the hand placements, so you can see them well enough, is that I have to show different sides of the placement. So not sure how to show different sides, without crossing the line. I could do it just staying on the line maybe. But they want everything shot close up, so you can see where the fingers should be placed, and if everything is shot closer up, than I feel the shots might be too much the same and not feel different enough to cut differently together, if that makes sense.

However, when it comes to gimbals, I see in videos people are using gimbals for shots, where dollies and jibs would be used, like for the push in and booming shots, in the video:

Do those shots not look good since they are done on a gimbal, instead of a dolly, or jib?

Also for the camera push in move in this video at 0:52, did they use a dolly for it?

Cause the lens doesn't seem long enough, to zoom in past a long track that has to be hidden. So did they use a dolly or a stabilizer for that shot?

Brian Drysdale · January 8th, 2020, 11:57 AM

They probably used a Steadicam, although a crane would do the same job and you wouldn't see the tracks.

Ryan Elder · January 8th, 2020, 12:04 PM

Oh okay. Well how did they make the steadicam look good though for that unmotivated movement, compared to a dolly or crane? Does it look better cause the lens was wider and less shake?

It's just what I don't understand is, is that sometimes I will see gimbal shots in projects done on longer lens, so how do they make them look good. I found this video on gimbal moves for example, and in 1:40 into the video, he talks about how gimbals can stabilize telephoto lenses, and shows an example of how the gimbal operator is using one. How are they doing this on a gimbal with a telephoto lens then?

January 7th, 2020, 04:30 PM	#256
Brian Drysdale Inner Circle Join Date: Feb 2006 Location: Belfast, UK Posts: 6,152	re: Would using a star filter for cinematography be too weird? You are asking to do things that the equipment that you've got available on your budget can't do, plus you paint yourself into a corner by wanting to do complex camera moves with long lenses.

January 7th, 2020, 04:53 PM	#258
Ryan Elder also known as Ryan Wray Join Date: Nov 2017 Location: Saskatoon, Canada Posts: 2,888	re: Would using a star filter for cinematography be too weird? Oh well the sets I worked on were very different. They just shot everything with a tripod. One had a large large jib and one had a drone, but I don't want to use those. But perhaps their style of shots is different than mine, and my style requires different equipment. And no I don't think I have too many close ups in mind. I want a good amount of the shots to be close ups but not all of them.

January 7th, 2020, 05:43 PM	#259
Brian Drysdale Inner Circle Join Date: Feb 2006 Location: Belfast, UK Posts: 6,152	re: Would using a star filter for cinematography be too weird? " I want a good amount of the shots to be close ups" that sounds like TV, rather than cinema.

January 7th, 2020, 08:27 PM	#260
Ryan Elder also known as Ryan Wray Join Date: Nov 2017 Location: Saskatoon, Canada Posts: 2,888	re: Would using a star filter for cinematography be too weird? Well I think it depends on how you make the close ups look. Lots of movies have a good number of close ups and do not feel like TV, at least I didn't think. When it comes doing the martial arts video, the martial artists want to show specific moves where I need to show each arm performing the move. So if I have to show both arms, should I break the 180 degree rule then to get on the other side, to show the other arm, do you think?

January 7th, 2020, 08:58 PM	#261
Josh Bass Slash Rules! Join Date: Apr 2002 Location: Houston, Texas Posts: 5,472	re: Would using a star filter for cinematography be too weird? I noticed this years ago but to me the "TV look" has more to do with the use of midrange or telephoto focal lengths for everything...where even the wide shots kind of look compressed. Maybe to a lesser degree less dynamic lighting and less sophisticated grading (I would swear movies tend have grades that really "pop", where as TV shows will often slap a "blue" or "orange" look on everything). Exceptions of course but many shows seem to follow these tropes. In recent years much of the streaming and prestige TV stuff has gotten to where it's indistinguishable from films in terms of production values. Closeups with a wider lens look really cool..dynamic, with a feeling of depth. Of course it's all project dependent etc. etc. I would think for the martial arts you could find a side angle (sounds like that's what you mean) where you could still see both arms...if you have to elevate above the performer and shoot down to see the arm farther from the lens, or from below, etc. Or just from in front of the person. It would depend on each move and the best way to show it off. As always, you'll probably have to see the action in person to decide the best way to film it. As we've said...you just can't storyboard and plan everything. Unless they'll let you, and you want to take the time to go there on ANOTHER separate day from the shoot, and have them demo all the moves, and think through your shots then, so on. shoot day you can be ready. That's a lot of trouble...most folks would get there on the day, and talk this stuff through and decide angles at that point. That's how we often do corporate training videos....tell them to demo the action, then decide where camera(s) should be to best cover it. And also as always...look to see what others have done before you (look up martial arts instruction on youtube or something) and do something similar when applicable. This is one of those time where the copy paste thing is just fine. __________________ The Bass' camerawork The Bass on IMDB

January 7th, 2020, 09:05 PM	#262
Ryan Elder also known as Ryan Wray Join Date: Nov 2017 Location: Saskatoon, Canada Posts: 2,888	re: Would using a star filter for cinematography be too weird? Oh okay, yeah they want me to just come shoot it, rather than demo first, but I will ask if I can have two shoot days then. I am thinking I won't break the 180 degree rule and shoot a wide shot, but on a telephoto lens, zoomed in for more movement on the panning, during the fight. Then use a wider lens for close ups, pointed more diagonally and down at the arms but without crossing the line. Well when I think of close ups for TV, a lot of older TV shots, looked made for TV, cause the cameras were always in the same spot. It was as if the cameras never moved in a set hardly, so the close ups looked made for TV that way, like soap operas or sitcoms. Where as if shows nowadays like Breaking Bad for example, they seem to put the camera wherever they want to, compared to a soap opera or sitcom. That show has a lot of close ups but it doesn't look like TV, compared to a movie, does it? Bad as for using wide lenses on close ups, that real close intimate feeling look is just not my style I guess. The only thing for the martials arts video is I only have a tripod now, so I will have to move fast, where as if I had a gimbal, perhaps I could move faster, without having to lock a tripod down for so many shots... Last edited by Ryan Elder; January 7th, 2020 at 10:30 PM.

January 7th, 2020, 10:38 PM	#263
John Nantz Trustee Join Date: Jun 2010 Location: Seattle WA Posts: 1,254	re: Would using a star filter for cinematography be too weird? Josh had some good comments and I’d like to throw in some more thoughts.. First off, how far away, or how difficult is it, to drive to the martial arts place? If it’s not very far then I’d go there with mics and cam in hand to make some recordings, preferably with some people in the video. (Is this a wide-open studio or one with small rooms?) With those clips one can see how the color is going to look, skin tones, and hear how the audio is going to sound. Play around with cam settings and profiles. If it’s possible to get some video with someone actually working out it would be best. As we know, the human ear is good at tuning out sounds that that are undesirable and that the mic will really pick up. Hopefully on the day(s) of the shoot(s) the conditions are the same, especially noise-wise. Josh’s idea about casing out what others have done before is good and the client should, hopefully, have some links to videos they like. This will be a really interesting shoot. If they’re paying the actors then that’s probably why they only want one shoot. Question: Have they ever had a video done before? If so, what did they like and not like about it? Can you see it?

January 8th, 2020, 02:17 AM	#265
Brian Drysdale Inner Circle Join Date: Feb 2006 Location: Belfast, UK Posts: 6,152	re: Would using a star filter for cinematography be too weird? How well a gimbal will handle a 35mm lens will probably depend on the quality of the gimbal, the operator and the type of shot you're trying to do. I've used 35mm lenses when shooting 35mm and 16mm lenses on Super 16 using a Steadicam and it works, although more care is required than when using short focal length l. BTW I've used a 14.2mm lens on 35mm film which had very little barrel distortion (you had to go looking for it), however, it would have a distortion on faces if you decided to go in for a close up. I suspect you may be using an incorrect term for this effect. A number of directors use wide angle distortion on close ups. This is the effect distance and focal length on the face shape, as you move in closer the perspective changes. Perspective-Male on Vimeo I wouldn't cross the line in the middle of a fight, it causes confusion in the context of sports coverage, as explained by Paul earlier, That's different to the crossing of the line in drama, as explained in the 180 degree video posted earlier in the thread, where a switch occurs at dramatic point in a scene and tends to stay using the new line, with everything having a clear geographical relationship. .

January 8th, 2020, 10:06 AM	#266
Ryan Elder also known as Ryan Wray Join Date: Nov 2017 Location: Saskatoon, Canada Posts: 2,888	re: Would using a star filter for cinematography be too weird? Okay thanks, that's a really good video thanks. It seems to me that when it comes to a close up, at that close, it starts to look good around 75mm for me. But for medium close ups, pulled further back, 35mm should be fine I think. I won't cross the line in the fight. But I think to show some of the moves, I am going to have to be on the line though, to show the move from above, pointed down. So as long as on the line is okay.

January 8th, 2020, 10:27 AM	#267
Brian Drysdale Inner Circle Join Date: Feb 2006 Location: Belfast, UK Posts: 6,152	re: Would using a star filter for cinematography be too weird? All this comes down, to personal taste and the characteristics of the lenses you're using and the story you're telling, combined with the action. I've found 50mm an interesting lens for CUs, going longer tends to make things a bit flat.

January 8th, 2020, 10:35 AM	#268
Ryan Elder also known as Ryan Wray Join Date: Nov 2017 Location: Saskatoon, Canada Posts: 2,888	re: Would using a star filter for cinematography be too weird? The 50 looks pretty good too. I suppose anything beyond 75mm looks too flat, and I just rounded it off to 85 mm, since that is what I have, along with a 50mm. It's also possible that the person I tested it on, maybe just looks better, face shape wise on an 85mm, compared to some people that may look better on a 50? Well for a lot of the wider shots, where I want movement, I can use the wide lenses, just if I want to move on a face close up, on a lens, even around 50mm, I guess I could use a dolly if I have to. For the martial arts video, which is being shot soon, my main worry is that since I am shooting close ups of all the hand placements, so you can see them well enough, is that I have to show different sides of the placement. So not sure how to show different sides, without crossing the line. I could do it just staying on the line maybe. But they want everything shot close up, so you can see where the fingers should be placed, and if everything is shot closer up, than I feel the shots might be too much the same and not feel different enough to cut differently together, if that makes sense. However, when it comes to gimbals, I see in videos people are using gimbals for shots, where dollies and jibs would be used, like for the push in and booming shots, in the video: 7 Essential GIMBAL MOVEMENTS in 4 Minutes - YouTube Do those shots not look good since they are done on a gimbal, instead of a dolly, or jib? Also for the camera push in move in this video at 0:52, did they use a dolly for it? Breaking Bad - Best Scene of all time - YouTube Cause the lens doesn't seem long enough, to zoom in past a long track that has to be hidden. So did they use a dolly or a stabilizer for that shot?

January 8th, 2020, 11:57 AM	#269
Brian Drysdale Inner Circle Join Date: Feb 2006 Location: Belfast, UK Posts: 6,152	re: Would using a star filter for cinematography be too weird? They probably used a Steadicam, although a crane would do the same job and you wouldn't see the tracks.

January 8th, 2020, 12:04 PM	#270
Ryan Elder also known as Ryan Wray Join Date: Nov 2017 Location: Saskatoon, Canada Posts: 2,888	re: Would using a star filter for cinematography be too weird? Oh okay. Well how did they make the steadicam look good though for that unmotivated movement, compared to a dolly or crane? Does it look better cause the lens was wider and less shake? It's just what I don't understand is, is that sometimes I will see gimbal shots in projects done on longer lens, so how do they make them look good. I found this video on gimbal moves for example, and in 1:40 into the video, he talks about how gimbals can stabilize telephoto lenses, and shows an example of how the gimbal operator is using one. How are they doing this on a gimbal with a telephoto lens then?