Results 1 to 9 of 9
  1. Collapse Details
    SONY F35: lit with Litemat
    #1
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    LOS ANGELES
    Posts
    806
    Default
    Hello group:

    I have an interesting dilemma. Last year a gaffer I was working with brought along his new Litemat to light a scene for me. And the footage came out looking amazing. So I decided to rent one to see if it fits all my needs, and then I will purchase one. Unfortunately despite lighting it similar to how I did before the footage from the test didnít even look at the same ball park. So I shot with the camera set to daylight on s log while the light was set to 5600k. Dissapointgly my test footage came out looking inferior. I tried a lot of different combinations but the footage looked crappy. Is there something to know in regards to shooting under the light of Litemat?


    Reply With Quote
     

  2. Collapse Details
    #2
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    LOS ANGELES
    Posts
    806
    Default
    http://vimeo.com/299276583

    The crappy clip

    http://vimeo.com/299276583

    the good one

    Why is 2 better then 1 when its the same light? I realize they are both different environments.


    Reply With Quote
     

  3. Collapse Details
    #3
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    1,782
    Default
    Those seem to link to exactly the same file.


    Reply With Quote
     

  4. Collapse Details
    #4
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    LOS ANGELES
    Posts
    806
    Default


    Reply With Quote
     

  5. Collapse Details
    #5
    Senior Member Grug's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Melbourne, Australia
    Posts
    3,386
    Default
    What differences are you seeing? The skintones and light quality seem very comparable between the two.

    The first clip is a much nicer frame, with a balanced composition, and without the subject backed up against a wall. But I'm not seeing any issues that stem from the light itself.


    Reply With Quote
     

  6. Collapse Details
    #6
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    LOS ANGELES
    Posts
    806
    Default
    maybe your right


    Reply With Quote
     

  7. Collapse Details
    #7
    Senior Member nyvz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    New York, NY
    Posts
    2,164
    Default
    Yeah the difference seems to be scene-based. Different talent, different location and background. The angle is pretty harsh I'm both cases but it works better I'm the scene where elements of the scene justify it. It's also somewhat conventional wisdom that harsh lighting is more common and accepted on male subjects than female.
    Noah Yuan-Vogel
    http://www.noahyv.com


    Reply With Quote
     

  8. Collapse Details
    #8
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2017
    Posts
    115
    Default
    It's just how you set the light that makes it look good or bad. Move the subject away from the wall and increase the contrast ratio between the background and subject so that the background goes darker and you basically have the same set light. Easy.


    Reply With Quote
     

  9. Collapse Details
    #9
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2016
    Posts
    10
    Default
    Looks to me like in the 'good' scene, the light is more directly overhead and is also getting filled in a little bit beneath the face by bouncing off the table directly below the subject.


    Reply With Quote
     

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •