Would using a star filter for cinematography be too weird?

[Brian Drysdale]

I'm just saying that the lighting in the interview is something a film student would do, if you want the same effect effect there are methods that don't look as crude.

[Pete Cofrancesco]

Originally Posted by Josh Bass

He's said he has $50k right now to spend and thinks he can raise more.

You believe that. Did you believe he was going to get a BMPCC camera a few months ago?

[Josh Bass]

Well he's been saying the "I have the money right now" and that that's why he wants to do this now, since if he waits a few years, he may not be able to self fund it, ever since these threads started last year, so yeah.

[Pete Cofrancesco]

The 50k is BS

[Josh Bass]

Maybe? It's conceivable that someone could have saved money.

[Brian Drysdale]

All this reminds me of someone who used to phone me every couple of months about buying a video camera. In the end he never bought it, but the conversation was the same as these threads.

With the amount of time spent discussing this policeman's office, the scene could've been shot and everyone gone down the pub. .

[Pete Cofrancesco]

Originally Posted by Josh Bass

Maybe? It's conceivable that someone could have saved money.

He’s filming with 2ti and an antique sound recorder and cant buy a power adapter. Maybe he’s a Howard Hughes. Who knows. I just think he fits an insecure type of person who wants to be taken seriously. He’s been caught before with inconsistency in what he says.

Just remember this is the same rape thriller that he can’t find anyone who wants do it.

[Josh Bass]

You could be right. I feel with the things he's chosen to reveal that he's nigh incapable of deception. But I do think all the past problems and criticisms have to led to a serious case of decision paralysis, where any move he makes on anything could be the wrong one leading to no moves at all.

[Paul R Johnson]

Yes - it is bad. 100% bad, and usually horrible to look at.

I'll try to explain. Let's assume you have one light in a room 20ft x 30ft with a ceiling height of 10ft. You put up your key till it touches the ceiling. You are shooting across the room to fill the frame left to right with the usual picture ratio. The best place for natural lighting would be half way from the wall - at 10ft. If you have multiple actors you could spread them left to right at the 10ft distance but that isn't practical. If you want them in a group 15 ft from the camera, then their shadows are going to be very visible on the wall. Let's send the actors, bar one to get a coffee. At 15ft, he will have a quite prominent shadow on the wall. Bring one more actor back and stand him in a position where he's in shadow. Stick up your next light to light him, but then this creates another shadow. with two actors, you now have 4 shadows on the wall. Add more actors and the shadows multiply. Oh dear - we don't want shadows on the wall, what can we do? Lets add some light to make the black shadows lighter. We don't want them to come from the front of course, so it has to be side light, but that means it's bright ones side, but not the other. So we stick in another, and put it on the other side. Now we have shadows centre, but less in the brighter wall at the left and right. If it was old days, we'd put a half scrim in, so we could make the light closer to the fixture dimmer. That doesn't work with LEDs that well. Before long we have a lot of lights on stands and every time actors move, the shadows do too. We've also got a very bright background which probably bleaches out if exposure is right for faces. we cannot up the face light brightness because the shadows increase again. If we were doing a documentary and the ceiling was white, we'd bounce loads of light off it and get an even bright soft coverage. You hate this, so that option is not open to you. Low ceilings in bigger rooms mean lighting is far from easy.

You cannot just fill shadows with light. It works for interviews fine, but if you want the actors to be able to move, it falls down very quickly.

Shadows you deliberately create are good. Accidental shadows are usually bad, because it might look good until people move, and when you move from the wide shot to the closeups, things can get very strange looking, so you have to change the lighting rig to match the look but probably by a different technique. The setup above goes horribly wrong as soon as you change camera position. In a real studio with proper lights, then every camera position can have kit hanging in the right place. That means rigging trim height is dependent on camera to subject distance to get the angles right.

Lighting is either for mood or illumination. Often mutually exclusive. If you really have 50 grand to waste - you're on a good path.

You also need to think about audio. The scenario above is boom unfriendly, so it's hidden lavs probably. Yet another complication for you to juggle.

[Ryan Elder]

Oh well I was going to use a different camera for shooting, probably the bmpcc but waiting for a DP's input. Is that ad to use the antique sound recorder? I was told before that the technology has hardly changed, and to still use it, unless I should get a new one?

I am still looking for a good DP and good actors to work with, first, in order to make it good. Those were the reasons for the delay, because I don't want to settle for just anyone, since I need more experienced people to work with.

[Ryan Elder]

Originally Posted by Paul R Johnson

Yes - it is bad. 100% bad, and usually horrible to look at.

I'll try to explain. Let's assume you have one light in a room 20ft x 30ft with a ceiling height of 10ft. You put up your key till it touches the ceiling. You are shooting across the room to fill the frame left to right with the usual picture ratio. The best place for natural lighting would be half way from the wall - at 10ft. If you have multiple actors you could spread them left to right at the 10ft distance but that isn't practical. If you want them in a group 15 ft from the camera, then their shadows are going to be very visible on the wall. Let's send the actors, bar one to get a coffee. At 15ft, he will have a quite prominent shadow on the wall. Bring one more actor back and stand him in a position where he's in shadow. Stick up your next light to light him, but then this creates another shadow. with two actors, you now have 4 shadows on the wall. Add more actors and the shadows multiply. Oh dear - we don't want shadows on the wall, what can we do? Lets add some light to make the black shadows lighter. We don't want them to come from the front of course, so it has to be side light, but that means it's bright ones side, but not the other. So we stick in another, and put it on the other side. Now we have shadows centre, but less in the brighter wall at the left and right. If it was old days, we'd put a half scrim in, so we could make the light closer to the fixture dimmer. That doesn't work with LEDs that well. Before long we have a lot of lights on stands and every time actors move, the shadows do too. We've also got a very bright background which probably bleaches out if exposure is right for faces. we cannot up the face light brightness because the shadows increase again. If we were doing a documentary and the ceiling was white, we'd bounce loads of light off it and get an even bright soft coverage. You hate this, so that option is not open to you. Low ceilings in bigger rooms mean lighting is far from easy.

You cannot just fill shadows with light. It works for interviews fine, but if you want the actors to be able to move, it falls down very quickly.

Shadows you deliberately create are good. Accidental shadows are usually bad, because it might look good until people move, and when you move from the wide shot to the closeups, things can get very strange looking, so you have to change the lighting rig to match the look but probably by a different technique. The setup above goes horribly wrong as soon as you change camera position. In a real studio with proper lights, then every camera position can have kit hanging in the right place. That means rigging trim height is dependent on camera to subject distance to get the angles right.

Lighting is either for mood or illumination. Often mutually exclusive. If you really have 50 grand to waste - you're on a good path.

You also need to think about audio. The scenario above is boom unfriendly, so it's hidden lavs probably. Yet another complication for you to juggle.

Okay sure, I will allow the DP to sort out the lighting more then. However, why can't I use a boom? I've used booms before in office settings. What about the location would make it boom unfriendly, since it's worked before? Are you saying the ceiling would be too low for a boom?

[Paul R Johnson]

No (engaging patience control). The scenario with the one light, one actor, that gets out of control quickly would be simply awful with a boom wouldn't it. Virtually nowhere for the boom to be operated from that would not be in one of the beams, and then casting a very obvious shadow. You'd perhaps get away with it in the tight shots, but even then - if you have multiple keys and loads of fill, its a boom nightmare. The usual ideal boom position would be right where the light is coming from.

[Ryan Elder]

Oh okay, well in the other shoots I have done before, I couldn't see a shadow in of the boom, in the shots, so I thought as long as you deal with the shadow then it's okay I thought. But I would be sure to go over that with the DP and tell them that I want the to be able to use a boom, and to light so you cannot see a shadow of it. Sorry, I don't mean to test your patients, it's just in the previous post, you didn't explain why the boom would be a problem, you just said it would be unfriendly. So I just wanted to ask why, that's all.

I really do appreciate all the help! I just only want to ask questions on points that are not touched upon, cause if someone says something like 'unfriendly', that is not very specific, so I just want to ask what was meant by those things, that's all. Sorry, I really do appreciate all the input.

But in the past, we would always light the scene in a way, in which you wouldn't see the boom, so I didn't think that would be a problem, if we did that.

[Paul R Johnson]

Low ceilings, mean shallower lighting angles, light travels to the subject through space that needs to be clear of anything that can cast a shadow. Where exactly do you think a boom could go? Your plan to add lights means more problems with shadows. With lights higher, the shadows don't travel so far and land on the floor which may be out of shot.

If you find a good DP, do you think this person will wlecome you handing him the camera you can't work yet, with your lens choice and smile when you expect your predetermined results.You WANT a team, but a team who will do exactly what you say.That isn't a team it's a disaster. Roles come with responsibility. You need to micromanage.

Let assume we lived near you. Do you think that based on what we know, we would be your team. I think it would be a pretty good team if you let us get on with it, but you won't. You just have this weird obsession with unusual or perculiar production techniques and your list of importances is upside down.

[Ryan Elder]

Oh okay, I have no problem allowing a a team make the decisions since that is what they are hired for. I just thought I could have some input as to how I feel the movie should look.

I could just allow the team and the DP to light for the boom correctly, if that's best.