Close-ups Sexy; Wide shots, Kill me...

[Logan LeBlanc]

When I film close ups, I use the DOF cheat (zooming in). Those shots look really good. However, the wider angle shots look pretty crappy. I think I saw a similar thread; don't remember where though. Are there lenses that can give a better, not-so-flat DOF to the picture. I've seen the guerilla35. Is this thing gonna be a DVX users Messiah? I guess what I'm asking for is a tutorial on lenses COMPATIBLE with DVX100. What their function is and all that stuff. Thanks Again guys. This forum is the closest thing to a film school I'm gonna get.

 

[David G. Smith]

One of the things that you have to remember is that choice of focal length is an important part of visual aesthetic that can be exploited for creative effect. Changing the focal length dosen't just change the angle of view (how much you see), it changes HOW you see the scene. Everyone knows the basics, wide angle exagerates distance and 3d space and telephoto minimizes distance and "flattens" space. One of the problems with learning on video is that we get lazy and instead of moving the camera, we will zoom in or out. I pefer to stay close to the same focal length during a scene so as to maintain somewhat of a "visual continuity" between shots.

There is a lot of discussion about the 35mm adaptors here and that is cool, but lens choice is not just about depth of field. The cool thing about these adaptors, is that you get many more choices, which is always cool in a creative endeavour.

 

[pmark23]

Framing and composition.

Cinematographers have managed to avoid shallow DOF for decades by proper (and clever) composition.

Camera and subject placement can create great three-dimensional compositions without having to blur anything (which imnsho is a crutch to be used only when you have no other choice).

 

[Policar]

David Smith, while you make a good point, not all directors shoot that way. John Woo, for instance, basically uses ultra wide (25mm) and ultra telephoto (200mm) lenses and cuts freely between them--the exact opposite of sticking to a central range during a scene.

The issue here isn't so much DoF as it is lighting. A shallow DOF can compensate for bad lighting or a cluttered background, but in wide shots (where the background should be in focus anyhow usually), you see everything and all the limitations of DV. So use lighting and art design here.

My rule of thumb:

For interiors use exaggerated motivated lighting, 3200º bulbs for night, 5600º for day and enough light to prevent blown windows during the day. Try to add "texture" to the scene. DoF isn't the best depth cue, differences in color, brightness, and backlighting are all just as effective. If you only use 1/2 CTBs you can use the orange tone of the light as a depth cue. Backlight characters heavily with motivated lighting for a real sense of depth. Shoot them, then move in for close ups where you need only adjust light slightly and you already shoot have a good looking shot to work from, plus you can go for a shallowed DOF then. (I always use moderately long focal lengths when shooting shot/reverse shot even if I shoot my master wide, though I agree that both shots in shot/reverse shot should have roughly even focal lengths as a general rule.)

For exteriors, try to shoot after 4pm or before 9am, avoid shooting heavily backlit skies, and try not to get too many blown highlights. Clouds work as big diffusion filters so if you have scattered clouds over the sun it can be very nice. A tiffen ultracon filter may help. Use reflectors or whatever if you can get ones that are big enough. If you have the money for HMIs, they're wonderful, too, but who has the money to rent them? I like shooting my landscapes wide, but not everyone does. I wouldn't zoom in more than a bit, though, unless you're going for a weird claustrophobic feel.

Anyhow, my wide shots and close ups suck so you're a step beyond me. I'm working on makign them better, though, and I'll share any more advice as I figure out what works for me.