Dilemma with the client

Noel Evans said:
I have to ask. What level are you at as far as corporate / video in general?

The reason I ask is you say the client is upset, however from where I stand Im not seeing that a lot of dollars would have exchanged hands for producing this piece. Forgive me if I wrong there, its just my perception of it.

It seems your still in your early stages of development and when a client hires you from that place, especially if its because they're trying to save a few $$, Im not sure why they'd be expecting a lot. You took this as a chance to experiment.

I do corporates, and whilst I take risks, especially in the concept development stage, I never experiment on shoot day. Those tests are done prior. An easy way around this would have been to describe to him the style you wanted to shoot and do a little test. He would have seen that's not what he's looking for and you could have come up with a plan together.

FWIW, I've just finished shooting a 6 minute piece and some of the shots I did handheld - rather steady handheld, however I wanted to give the piece an underlying feeling of being there, so mixed in amongst ronin, long tracking shots etc etc there's a few of these in there.

Anyhow tough image to fix there. I added some light leak over your hotspot and tried to pull it back, warmed up skin, added vignette, readjusted levels with a curve. Still not great, I think you could do a bit extra to improve it though.

View attachment 104603
Click to expand...
Noel,

Thank you kindly for taking time. Funny thing is that I actually practiced with a stand-in day before the shooting. I liked the results, but didn't think to share it with the guy. The stand-in preson was actually shorter, so I think some of the comments are spot on, his body got more light, than the face. Not discussing the plan was truly my mistake. Thanks again
 
maranfilms said:
Cinematic+60P=Oxymoron! Out of curiosity how much did you charge for this? From a client perspective, I would be a bit upset if this was delivered to me. But then again, the client has a responsibility to convey their vision. I always ask, how they see the finished product, then take notes. After all their paying the bill. If I were you, I would crop in, stabilize, warm up the image, it's very cold, and uninviting now. Add some graphics, music and some b-roll, No one wants to watch pathetically fake enthusiasm from a guy that has a terrible delivery. He's just as guilty to the overall amateurish aesthetic of this video, When he jumped up and spun around I bust out laughing, couldn't be any more corny LOL.
Click to expand...

Maran, sorry I cannot disclose how much I charge, but not enough to quit my day job. You're right I am an amateur, but trying to learn. Again, I should have asked for the final vision, but my ego told me that my vision is the only right vision out there. Live and learn
 
maranfilms said:
It definitely looks better now. I think some B-roll would help immensely. In the future stay away from that fuzzy vignette, it's no substitute for shooting with a shallow dof. In a year you will look back and realize it was just a learning experience, this is how we grow as artists, if you didn't make mistakes you wouldn't improve. At least your willing to listen and take input, that's half the battle. Be open to criticism even if it does hit at the ego. shoot on!
Click to expand...

Absolutely! You see it was both of us who disagreed. And hey, I was the one shooting. I was the one who read all these books. I was the one subscribed to American Cinematographer. I knew better, right? Well, hell no. Wrong! My problem with him that he was not very specific, and I had a very little idea how to improve. So, I had to ask you guys. Thanks again for helpful comments.
 
Chris Santucci said:
I'm not sure how you guys are seeing "body is bright but the top of his face is way too dark" in this. The levels seem pretty even to me.

I'd concur that yes, it's sharp. As for the lighting, it looks fine (although moody) to me. I can see why a client might not appreciate "moody" lighting, but then that's why they should be looking at a monitor when the footage is being shot.

As for the light in the frame, that should be a fairly easy fix (just defocus it or reframe) and you have room to print up the footage if it would help make the client happier.
Click to expand...

Chris, thank you kindly for taking time. I see it now. I can really see it now!
 
Rudi,

Might be the whole thing would have been better received if the talent had a little more... err... talent. Irritated the h e l l outa me.

All the best with your next one.

Claire
 
Not to beat a dead horse, but I think it's helpful to get a few different people's perspectives.

I do agree that this is very amateurish. If I was paying - any amount - I would be unhappy. In fact, if you value this client and experience, I would reshoot this for free no questions asked.

But here's some easy ways to improve it:

1. Lighting - This is what, above all else, is killing this. Don't kid yourself, this is not Gordon Willis. And unless you are shooting a reenactment or some fiction section, I would keep all ideas of Gordon Willis out of your corporate vocab. Clients want clean and pretty, even when they don't fully articulate this.

Move your subject away from the wall and shoot with a longer lens/more zoom to help with the depth of field. Consider using a product cutaway rather than keeping it all in one shot.

Keep your light on the back ground as a gradient if you want, but keep it and all fixtures our of the shot. NEVER let the light fixture in for this type of shot, only if you switch to a BTS angle, which is not appropriate here.

If you want it to look dramatic/edgy (which does not IMO fit this piece, but is an acceptable choice sometimes), use a very soft light in front of your talent, isolated from the background. Then move this light camera left to create as much wrap as you need - but don't overdo the contrast ratio. You still need some fill, but less fill tends to be more dramatic.

Definitely give use a hard fixture like a fresnel to backlight/edgelight the subject - that will add to your drama if you want it to feel edgy.

Edginess comes from contrast rations... your subject to the background, and and the key vs fill vs backlight ratios. Experimenting is what makes things interesting, but above all your eye needs to pull to the subject. In your shot, all I'm looking at is that light on the wall. It's distracting and looks bad.

2. Audio: You need to get a clean sound with no clipping. Not sure how what your mic setup is so I can't offer a ton of suggestion, but a decent boom above the subject should be fine in a quiet room if it mixed properly.

3. No 60p, no vignette, take it easy on the look. Again, I'm totally unconvinced that drama is what you want here, so I'd just go for a standard high key look with soft light.

Hope this helps a bit, not trying to be harsh but to be honest this video could use a lot of work!!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top