Going beyond 3-point .... for beginners?

[PerroneFord]

After looking at some of the lighting tutorials suggest in this section, I am somewhat intrugued. But also need some assistance. I typically shoot corporate video. All indoor, sometimes small room, sometimes large room. I have been looking into buying a starting lighting package. After looking carefully into this, I've backed off.

My dilemna is that I need something flexible that can let me get a lot of directed light into a big room. I cam bring up the ambient light levels in the room with mostly overhead lighting. So essentially, I've just got to re-direct it a bit, and provide some lighting for depth.

In looking at the lighting kits, they come with mixtures of fresnels, pars, and softboxes. All that seems wonderful, but it doesn't offer much in the way of control outside the barn doors that come with the lighting fixtures. In looking at a number of online tutorials, it seems that in larger settings the popular methods are shooting through diffusion materials like silks with a large par, or bouncing a par off a large reflector. Some swear by one method, some swear by the other. What I cannot find, is a comparison of the light texture and quality between the two.

My initial intent was to shoot a fresnel direct on the talent for a key, perhaps flooded, use a smaller light, maybe a 650w for a fill, and use a backlight. It seems now, that the better idea is to include some c-stands and start using some bounce, and some flags to get the fill and control I want or need.

So let me ask a few questions here.

1. Does anyone have comparitive photos or video showing talent light with flooded fresnels, lighting through diffusion (with a frame), and bouncing with flexfil or whiteboard?

2. If you had to put together a light and grip kit to light everything from a basic 2-shot interview, to a conference table with 10-20 participants using both good ambient and lighting fixtures and grip equipment, what would you buy?

3. Occasionally, these shoots must be done in a live audience setting. How would that change your approach? Light and shoot it correctly, audience be damned, or do you make certain concessions to try and accomodate the audience view of the speaker?

I want to buy a light meter as well so I don't have to rely on the zebra in the camera, and I've asked for a budget of $3500. Basically I was given $3k and asked for another $500. Given that, pars stretch my money over fresnels, foamcore is a LOT cheaper than flexfil, and I am not printing to film. Mostly online video and DVDs. I'm not going for hollywood, just something better than the usual fare.

Thanks very much for your thoughts. And if there is material online already that I might have missed, but would be helpful, don't be shy about linking me there and telling me to read.

-Perrone

 

[Cool Lights]

After looking at some of the lighting tutorials suggest in this section, I am somewhat intrugued. But also need some assistance. I typically shoot corporate video. All indoor, sometimes small room, sometimes large room. I have been looking into buying a starting lighting package. After looking carefully into this, I've backed off.

My dilemna is that I need something flexible that can let me get a lot of directed light into a big room. I cam bring up the ambient light levels in the room with mostly overhead lighting. So essentially, I've just got to re-direct it a bit, and provide some lighting for depth.

In looking at the lighting kits, they come with mixtures of fresnels, pars, and softboxes. All that seems wonderful, but it doesn't offer much in the way of control outside the barn doors that come with the lighting fixtures. In looking at a number of online tutorials, it seems that in larger settings the popular methods are shooting through diffusion materials like silks with a large par, or bouncing a par off a large reflector. Some swear by one method, some swear by the other. What I cannot find, is a comparison of the light texture and quality between the two.

This isn't exactly true on the fresnels. They don't just have barndoors. You also have a focus mechanism that brings the beam into a narrow or wide pattern. Thats quite a bit of control actually.

While its true that shooting through a large silk or bouncing off a whiteboard are popular you need to get at the root of why the light is softer. What is diffusion? Its basically taking a small point of light and making it larger and broader. Its the light emanating from a large source thats soft and diffused and that's why it is. The softbox is a convenient way to do this for sure with its big built in silk surface available in just about any size you would like including the extra-more-than-huge fisher lights.

I would add to that list fluorescent which is also a popular method of getting diffused light now to and you're not heating up the room either. Its already diffused because the light is emanating from a large surface area inherently.

On the question of seeing differences between the different kinds of soft light or methods: personally, I think its hard to see the difference between one kind of diffused light and another. Most all softlight no matter what the source has the same characteristics and has a quick falloff too beyond a few feet.

You're mostly down to color temperature and quality of light. And with the ability to white balance you can make most things look great as long as all the color temps involved are consistent. Even sickly looking (to the eye) 4200K office type flo lighting can be made a bit better with white balance as long as the tubes are somewhat higher CRI and quality. So whatever you do, don't get into the habit of thinking that just because it looks good to your eye it looks good to the camera--it can go either way worse or better than what you see based on the quality of light, your camera and how you set it up.

Also, when you need daylight color, you simply can't do it efficiently with tungsten without losing a lot of light through gelling up to bluer color temps. Going to a discharge type light like fluorescent or HMI fits much better in those cases where daylight color is needed.

My initial intent was to shoot a fresnel direct on the talent for a key, perhaps flooded, use a smaller light, maybe a 650w for a fill, and use a backlight. It seems now, that the better idea is to include some c-stands and start using some bounce, and some flags to get the fill and control I want or need.

That's one method or use a softbox or flo as the key and reflector as fill. Not everyone looks great with hard light on the face. Older people look better with a softer key for instance. Some think women should only be shot with soft light.

So let me ask a few questions here.

1. Does anyone have comparitive photos or video showing talent light with flooded fresnels, lighting through diffusion (with a frame), and bouncing with flexfil or whiteboard?

I don't but I'm sure there are these pictures on the internet though or some others here may post.

2. If you had to put together a light and grip kit to light everything from a basic 2-shot interview, to a conference table with 10-20 participants using both good ambient and lighting fixtures and grip equipment, what would you buy?

China balls work great for conference table shots. 360 degree diffused lighting covering everyone and the rest of the room very well. Placed over the center of the table and above (if possible) camera view. Stick a 200w fluorescent bulb in it to keep the heat down. Although since the 200w is already diffused you may only need that in the center of the room for lighting everyone. Other than that, a fluorescent multi-tube unit as a replacement for softbox, 42" 5 in one reflector (or two or three), C-stands, sandbags, maybe 1 or 2 150w fresnel for hair light, several 650w and/or 1000w fresnels for background lighting and fill. Don't forget some grip hardware and also some black cloth (duvetyn) and black foam core for flagging and more light control.

3. Occasionally, these shoots must be done in a live audience setting. How would that change your approach? Light and shoot it correctly, audience be damned, or do you make certain concessions to try and accomodate the audience view of the speaker?

Its a pretty universally accepted principal that studio audiences are just there for show. No one cares too much about their comfort or what they see. They're just supposed to be there to add to the overall mood with contrived reactions (oh isn't that joke funny?--no not really but we're supposed to laugh anyway) and not cause any stops by doing something stupid. Just go wait in line all day at the Price is Right or for Leno or Letterman and you'll see what I mean. The sound for the audience is even pretty low level many times so its very hard to hear what's going on occasionally--this to keep feedback and echo from being a problem in the real sound mix which is the important part.

I want to buy a light meter as well so I don't have to rely on the zebra in the camera, and I've asked for a budget of $3500. Basically I was given $3k and asked for another $500. Given that, pars stretch my money over fresnels, foamcore is a LOT cheaper than flexfil, and I am not printing to film. Mostly online video and DVDs. I'm not going for hollywood, just something better than the usual fare.

I recently got the Sekonic L-758Cine and its great. I can recommend that one as will several others around here that have one or other Sekonic models. There's also the Spectra Professional IV-A which many cinematographers swear by. I was torn between the two but the Sekonic was easier to find where I'm at now.

 

[PerroneFord]

Thank you very much for your reply. I do want to clarify a few things based on your response. I am not against Flous. In fact, they were my first choice. The problem is that they tend to be expensive.

No disrespect to you or your company (I enjoyed browsing your webpage last week lookind at your products) but the concern I work for is a bit picky where I buy from. So these lights will be coming from a major shop and they well say Mole or Arri on them. I spent a lot of time looking at Kinos and Biax lights. In the end, it was simply too expensive to get the AMOUNT of light I wanted. I can bounce 2K of light for $1k using Mole and Mathews gear. There are cheaper names out there but this is an example.

I will not be able to afford HMI, so I'll be shooting tungsten. I can gel the lights if I have to shoot in a room with daylight, but that is such a rarity I'm not overly concerned.

The Chinaball is an idea I've looked at before, and that may work nicely on a c-stand suspended from an arm. The ability to use a flou in there is not something I had thought of, so thanks for that suggestion!

In terms of audience, again, I am not shooting TV. As an example, next weekend I am sending my two camera guys to central florida for the weekend to shoot a conference. They have 3 jobs responsibilities. There are three distinct groups on the stage. A presenter (1-shot) a group of actors at a table (5 people so medium shot), and a panel who will be discussion the action that takes place at the table after the action is complete (medium shot). They will be recording this for teh purposes of creating a DVD when they get back, but there will be an audience of several hundred there live, and that audience is there to see and learn from this presentation. They are not participatory, but the conference is being put on for them primarily, not to primarily be recorded. In this instance, we are using a local lighting group and I just want something usable. The stage will apparently be lit rather flat with about 4k of light, and that should let us get a usable image back.

In the future, I'd rather set this up myself, but I need to have the correct instruments to do it. That is about the largest setup I'd ever have to do, but mostly it'll be lighting 1-shots, 2-shots, and a small group at a table in a large room. So I want some flexibility with the instruments. Bouncing an open face on foam core or gatorboard or whatever is correct gives me a LARGE light source a lot cheaper than a Flou. Shooting through a silk seems to give me similar advantages.

A lot of my subjects will be older people so a soft pleasing light without a lot of shadows will be appreciated. Unlike shooting drama, these people are generally not actors, and in some cases, they are my bosses!

Thanks again for your response. Gives me something to think about.

 

[Spartacus]

Bouncing an open face on foam core or gatorboard or whatever is correct gives me a LARGE light source a lot cheaper than a Flou. Shooting through a silk seems to give me similar advantages.

You seem to be doing mostly stage events, the problem I always encounter is that the technicians there may have an understanding of sound, but not of light.
Most of the time they just try to avoid light hitting the projection sreen of the beamer, no matter how the rest of the stage is lit...
I understand that the event is primarily for the 500 or so people sitting in the audience, but that doesn´t mean the light has to be shitty for videorecording.
If this is all one company, everyone should have interest in a perfectly produced after market product (like the DVD of that eevnt).
On the other hand, this is no filmset, so rigging foamcore to c-stands and flagging for spill, will be in the picture - maybe not your recorded one, but the audience will see it!
I think a softbox with a grid still is the best compromise for your purpose, it gives you nice and strong softlight with a professional look that won´t disturb an audience or a client.
Just remember that any softlight becomes not only weaker, but harder the further you put it away from your subject!
The grid will add some direction, so you can minimize spill on a projection screen or cut down the BG...
Personaly I´d go for two HMI 575s fresnels with softboxes as key and fill and two HMI 300s or 150s for backllighting (asuming that a clean flat look fits this style of shooting... Why HMI? They draw less power, when hooking up two 1K and two 650W tungstens you might run into problems and you can always use CTO...)
Thats for the room setups, for the stage it always depends on whats already there, when they flood the stage with hard lights from above the audience, there´s no need to bring in aditional softlight, but maybe you bring in some punch or BG seperation from behind with your 575s...