http://vimeo.com/34448226
Let me know what you think!
Let me know what you think!
T2i Colt: Low-Light Filmic Test
- Thread starter KyranFord
- Start date
Your link is broken, there is an extra "Let" at the end of the address, causing a 404.
What exactly are you testing here? Do you have anything to compare to? Did you take a reading with a lightmeter so you have a quantifiable measurement of the light? What was your lighting setup - what fixtures and modifiers were in use and how far are they from the talent?
I can see that you had enough light to get a decent, if dim, exposure of the gentleman with the gun, but there doesn't seem to be any way of knowing just how much light that is. For all we know, he could be getting blasted by a dozen 18Ks.
What exactly are you testing here? Do you have anything to compare to? Did you take a reading with a lightmeter so you have a quantifiable measurement of the light? What was your lighting setup - what fixtures and modifiers were in use and how far are they from the talent?
I can see that you had enough light to get a decent, if dim, exposure of the gentleman with the gun, but there doesn't seem to be any way of knowing just how much light that is. For all we know, he could be getting blasted by a dozen 18Ks.
Chris Adler
Veteran
Looks like video
Just because it was shot at f/2, it isn't by definition "low light". You can shoot at ISO 100, 1/50, and f/2 in broad daylight if you put some ND in front of the lens. I'd also argue that this is not likely a lowlight situation as you have added lights... even though, as "nothing" has pointed out, we have no reference point.
As a side note: using some one else's copyrighted music without permission is illegal, and adding a disclaimer that you don't own the rights and that you credit the author still doesn't make it legal.
As a side note: using some one else's copyrighted music without permission is illegal, and adding a disclaimer that you don't own the rights and that you credit the author still doesn't make it legal.
Hmm, yeah.. good point. I guess it's not really a "low-light" test; just more of a quick, pointless video because I wanted to use my new lighting kit as soon as possible, so I went out and shot this on no prior thought. I just wanted some feedback on the lighting. To me, it's interpretation, but if I'm doing something dead wrong, I'd like to hear from someone else. On second thought, maybe I should have posted this in the lighting forum.
And I don't know about Vimeo, but I know that, now, on YouTube, they tag the tracks and the artists make money from it. That's why they don't mute the videos anymore when songs are detected. I would never use copyrighted music anywhere else or if I had intentions of making money from it. I would always get permission then. If I were to get permission, how would I go about it? Do I need to contact the artists or the record companies?
Thank you for the response.
peanutbutter
Member
How is using copyrighted music for personal use wrong?
I think the post would have made more sense if you had titled it "critique my lighting setup". And on that note, I'm not a fan of what you've done. It's very contrasty (which is not necessarily a bad thing for night-time shots), and it looks like you've shot a single lighting source nearly straight-on at the actor. Further, his wardrobe just blends right into the shadows, so he looks like a big, black blob with a human head.
I'd soften the light a little, and take a lower-level fill to the left of the camera just to make sure the shadows aren't so crushed. The best thing you can do in shooting night-for-night is to light for shadows as well. If you need to crush them, do it in post. Record as much detail as you can the first time around as you can always take it away but you can never add it back in.
Vimeo does not do that. As for YT... yeah, they do that on SOME videos and in cases where the record companies opt not to have the videos yanked. This doesn't happen for all of them. There are still hundreds of videos (or more) removed every day at the requests of the labels. It's entirely up to them, not to YouTube. This also doesn't make it right... those who end up with the iTunes ad on their video get off easy, and lucky.
Yes, you have to get permission from the copyright holder.
But the whole "I'm not making any money off this" argument does not hold water. It doesn't matter if you're selling the product or not. What matters is that it's a public exhibition of a creative work. What matters is that you've appropriated some one else's work and incorporated it into your own. What matters is that, even if you aren't selling your video, some one else makes a living off that music and they're losing out on unauthorised use.
Last edited:
For personal use, it is perfectly acceptable. "Personal use", however, includes listening to the music (that you legally acquired) at home, in your car, on your iPod. It does not include using the music in a video that you create, even if you aren't selling it. Buying the music does not give you permission to make and distribute cpoies of it. When you use that music in a video and upload it to the Internet, you are distributing a copy of that music to everyone who watches the video. It's no better than making copies of the CD and giving them to everyone you know.
wgzn
Veteran
i dont get it. why 9 seconds of black at the end? was there something in the dark there we were supposed to see?
and what was that guy wearing? some kind of energy consuming cloak? that jacket was just crushed black. was that what you were shooting for?
im not saying thats by definition"bad" it's just not clear what your goal here was...
and what was that guy wearing? some kind of energy consuming cloak? that jacket was just crushed black. was that what you were shooting for?
im not saying thats by definition"bad" it's just not clear what your goal here was...
Bruce Foreman
Veteran
Mistake #1: Subject against the fence, light casts hard crisp shadows destroying any possible cinematic effect.
Get about 4-6' separation between him and that fence. Get a little more light on him too.
I've had better luck with 60watt bulbs in 11" reflectors, even Bright White CFLs in 11" reflectors. I had to do a night segment on our gun club range showing use of Crimson Trace lasers on a Colt Combat Commander and a Glock 19. Got enough detail on the shooters and pistols without hard shadows and harsh light.
vision_filmz
Carbonite Member
Alex H. Many many professional videographers used copyrighted music, even the most famous ones. I think you went a little overboard on the kid. Also I think his footage looks fine, I do agree though that creating some separation would look better, but overall keep shooting. Many people always like to say what's right and what's wrong, there would be no Robert Rodriguez, Tarantino , and more if they listened to everyone. Understand the rules, then break them
peace
peace
???
Yeah... lots of big-budget projects use copyrighted music. The difference is that they get permission, and pay the licensing fees. Just because "many professional videographers" do it doesn't mean that anyone can do it without going through the proper channels.
For what it's worth, any music from any music library - whether that library is purchased (Killer Tracks, Digital Juice, etc.) or licensed for free (Incompetech, Creative Commons, etc.) - is copyrighted. It's just that the licensing is easier to obtain. And in case you hadn't noticed through the various threads in which we've discussed this, DVXUser will not tolerate any discussion that encourages or promotes the unauthorized use of copyrighted works (see "No Piracy" under the "8 Ps" in the Forum Guidelines.
Last edited:
recordingwhiz
Well-known member
Alex is 100% correct!! it is not an issue of what we think is right or wrong, its the LAW plain and simple, no if ands or buts about it.
ignorance of the law or intent of use is NO excuse. and has held up in court over and over.
=)
ignorance of the law or intent of use is NO excuse. and has held up in court over and over.
=)