How do you deal with mixed footage (dof adapter / non-dof adapter)? Strategies?

T

tomperson

Active member
Hi all,
After researching a lot about DOF adapters, I have some questions regarding its usage.

1) Filming wide open
For what i've seen, If one chooses to film with a DOF adapter, it seems most people end up filming wide open all the time because of the inherent light loss of the device. I wonder, doesn't that limit you too much? Isn't it tiring to have all of your footage with such a shallow DOF?

Of course, you could say that if you don't need shallow DOF, there's no point in using the DOF adapter at all. But what if you want small DOF in some shots, and deep DOF in others?

Which brings me to the next question:

2) Mixing footage
So, you want to have shallow DOF in shome shots, and deep DOF in others. You could a) Use a DOF adapter for shallow DOF, and using the camera lens for deep DOF or b) Use a DOF adapter all of the time, but you probably won't be able to step down a lot (I guess not more than f/3.5 or f/5.6), and there will be a noticeable loss of image quality.

Let's suppose you go a) and film some scenes with the adapter, and some scenes without it. How do you deal with mixing such different footage? I mean, the 35mm optics add a lot of texture, there's no way in the world you can make both look the same...If you go b) well, we're back at question 1) which is, how not to make the footage boring by having everything with shallow dof.

I'd like to hear how are YOU dealing with those problems, what are the tradeoffs that work for you, how's your workflow regarding this....

THANKS A LOT!!!
 
Last edited:
tomperson said:
Hi all,
After researching a lot about DOF adapters, I have some questions regarding its usage.

1) Filming wide open
For what i've seen, If one chooses to film with a DOF adapter, it seems most people end up filming wide open all the time because of the inherent light loss of the device.
Click to expand...

Filming wide open is a bad idea not because of short DOF, but because you end up with soft footages. The majority of lenses are soft wide open, and it's a good idea to stop down to around f4 for maximum resolution.

tomperson said:
Isn't it tiring to have all of your footage with such a shallow DOF?
Click to expand...

DOF isn't the point. Using DOF to tell a story is the point. 35mm adapter actually makes you care less about DOF. Once you've moved beyond the initial awe of being able to get the background out of focus, it's really not that exciting anymore. I've really stopped caring whether the background is out of focus or not and start worrying about composition, lighting and how to tell that story. Shallow DOF isn't an end in itself, it's a storytelling tool; honestly, I've never heard a single audience member comment on the DOF of the shot. It's a very cool tool, but when you've grow as a filmmaker it's just one more weapon in your arsenal.


tomperson said:
Let's suppose you go a) and film some scenes with the adapter, and some scenes without it.
Click to expand...

Keep a wide shot on the camera without 35mm adapter.

tomperson said:
how not to make the footage boring by having everything with shallow dof.
Click to expand...

By having interesting composition, attractive lighting and above all, a good STORY. Like I said, people couldn't care less about the background being out of focus.
 
I've filtered the non adapter footage with something like a 1/8 or 1/4 Promist as that cuts the basic sharpness of the footage and adds a teeny amount of flare. just makes intercutting less abrasive.

Lenny Levy
 
@HUY
I don't think I'm being clear enough, or maybe you aren't getting my point. I totally agree with you, I don't want all my footage with shallow dof. I want to use it when the storytelling requires to do so.

My doubt is regarding texture. We cannot deny the fact that using a DOF adapter and 35mm optics change the image "feel" a lot. So, how do we overcome this problem, I mean mixing footage that "feels" different (softer, with more CA, etc)? The ideal would be to have footage that looks the same, but just the DOF changes. The ideal would be, then, to use the adapter for the shots that call for Shallow dof, and on the others, use the stock lenses...BUT HOW DO WE MAKE FOOTAGE THAT LOOKS SO DIFFERENT MIX SEAMLESSLY?

@Lenilapi
Interesting idea, that's what I'm talking about! Have the results being satisfying? Do you have some footage that shows that strategy?
 
I don't have anything that I can post that makes it clear, but I did a bunch of testing to figure this out and that's direction to go in. Its not perfect, but it helps take the edge off the difference. You want to add a teeny bit of softness, flare and raise the blacks a bit - that's what a ProMist does. Y0u might try similar filters from Schneider.

It depends on what adapter you're using also. I mixed with a Brevis CF1 and 1/8 was fine. If it was a Redrock I would use a 1/4 for sure - at least. It also depends on the lighting and the shot too, you don't want to overdue the flare.

Lenny Levy
 
I agree with lenilenapi.
The promist is the best solution.

What I do is NEVER mix the adapter and no adapter within the same LOCATION.
On my last project, a zombie film, I filmed the graveyard at night without the adapter and with a promist 1/2. Then the house and party and school scenes were shot with the adapter.

As long as each location maintains a "look", I find it edits fine. You run into trouble with the look changing within the same local. DEFINETELY if you try to edit adapter and non-adapter footage side by side in the same local.

The arguement could be made that using the adapter / non-adapter method is a good story telling device to completely differentiate between locals.
 
I've mixed in the same location, but the shots have to be different enough so that you know what you're doing. Maybe the rule should be - beware of intercutting within the same scene.
In my case a house interior was the only location but we used no adapter for a dolly tracking shot that wouldn't directly be intercut with other shots in the same room.
 
This is a really interesting discussion, I'm glad I came across this because it is something I haven't really thought about.

Hopefully I don't disrupt the flow of the conversation too much but what do you mean by 'intercutting'?

and would a 72mm Promist filter work alright instead of a 4x4?
 
Intercutting is basically just editing back and forth between two different things (like a conversation in an office and a shootout at an airport), or in this case, between adapter-on and adapter-off footage.
 
Thanks to all that jumped to this conversation. It's cool to be able to throw ideas at one another and challenge our assumptions.

@atlfilmguy
Your approach seems the easier to implement. Give every location a specific "look", and avoid generating confusion. Seems like a no-nonsense idea. At least that way we avoid the strange feeling of going from the "dreamy", soft look of the dof adapters to the sharp, clinically sharp, videoish look of the stock lens within a scene.

Any other ideas/suggestions?

Do you plan in advance where you'll use the adapter and where you won't? Do you go by your guts?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top