There's an interesting interview over at www.2nd-unit.tv with Bobby Finley, a veteran of Lucas's films. Finley recently shot a feature using the Panavision F900 and talks about how much harder it was to light using this HD camera vs. film. Finley is clearly not as impressed with shooting digital as he is with film, and insists it's much harder to get those black blacks and those whites that aren't completely blown out. Now, here on DVXuser there's a lot of discussion about how Red may be a camera that outperforms even more expensive cameras like the F900. From the footage seen so far, will Red be solving some of the lighting problems/exposure lattitude problems that Finley identifies with the F900?
exposure lattitude
- Thread starter sean90291
- Start date
Stephen Williams
Well-known member
sean90291 said:
Hi,
Sure film is far easier to light for film than any digital camera. Next week I am shooting with a Viper, about 11 stops of DR, lighting will take far longer as I have to be careful with highlights that on film I would just let burn.
Stephen
It's all a matter of perspective. For people used to shooting on film it's second nature to light for film as it is second nature for people who always shot on video to accommodate that format. Simple. Like saying using pastells is better than oil on canvas. Different, that's all.
Stephen Williams
Well-known member
bakalaj said:
Hi,
I have actually been paid to shoot about 1750 days on video, so I do have some perspective of lighting for video. Without a doubt film is quicker, I don't need to use a monitor just my eyes, quite often without a lightmeter.
Why compromise the lighting because the camera can't handle the range?
Stephen
Graeme_Nattress
Red Team
1) shoot RAW. That makes digital cinema a lot more easy to use.
2) expose correctly. Expose to the right - just like you do with a DSLR.
3) SNR = Dynamic range. You place the white clipping point where you want it, and let the shadows fall where they fall.
Graeme
2) expose correctly. Expose to the right - just like you do with a DSLR.
3) SNR = Dynamic range. You place the white clipping point where you want it, and let the shadows fall where they fall.
Graeme
Stephen Williams
Well-known member
Graeme_Nattress said:
Hi Graeme,
Doing as close as I can! Viper Film streem to HDCAM SR double speed 880 mode. Rating @ 320 asa lighting +/- 5 stops and allowing +/- 0.5 stop of latitude. That is about the 11 stop DR available.
Unfortunately a bright sunny day has more than 11 stops DR.... so IMHO it is easier when lighting for film than any available digital camera.
Stephen
An excellent tutorial on "exposing to the right":
http://www.luminous-landscape.com/tutorials/expose-right.shtml
It's talking about DSLR cameras--but the principles are the same.
http://www.luminous-landscape.com/tutorials/expose-right.shtml
It's talking about DSLR cameras--but the principles are the same.
Graeme_Nattress
Red Team
I'm a big fan of Michael and his work. If you're into photography his articles are great as is the video journal.
Graeme
Graeme
Stephen Williams
Well-known member
Policar said:
Hi,
FWIW I like the look of backlit bright sunny day!
On film I can use a butterfly & fill if I have the time & some crew. I often have to shoot film for Digibeta money, that means NO CREW at all, with video or digital stills, highlights will blow, negative film can hold that range.
You are correct reversal is hard work, latitude about +/-1/3 of a stop. I shot over 250,000' of Kodak 7240 in the late 1970's early 80's before camcorders existed! Then spent 10 years shooting video only, the last 10 years I have shot 50/50 film & video. In total I have shot more days video than film.
Stephen
Fair enough, that makes sense. It just bugs me when people demand so much out of equipment (I want to be able to shoot at noon and have it look good) instead of just shooting smarter (i.e. shooting exteriors at other times of the day or using bounce cards.) Clearly you're in a different situation than that and know more about this than I do.
im.thatoneguy
Well-known member
They aren't demanding *that* much. They're demanding what they're ALREADY doing.
"Here use this?"
"What is it?"
"The future"
"Can it...?"
"No."
"Doesn't sound like the future."
"Well you should just adapt."
- Gavin
"Here use this?"
"What is it?"
"The future"
"Can it...?"
"No."
"Doesn't sound like the future."
"Well you should just adapt."
- Gavin
All mediums require some adaptation. Nothing gets at what the human eye can achieve in terms of lattitude and color perception, not film and not 4K either. And often we wouldn't want it to--because film is not real life, but an interpretation of life. Learning to use the limitations to our advantage is what made film beautiful and it will be the same with digital cameras.
I was talking to a very experienced cinematographer now in his 80's and he said that thirty years ago he had to be sure he bought his film stock all at once because there was no consistency between batches and the film stock was so slow you had to be a genius to ensure proper exposure every time. Film was the future then, even though it required certain adaptations by the people using it. Film still requires adaptations with scrims and filters and light meters and specialized developing procedures, daylight stock versus tungsten stock, the list goes on. Similarly, Red and cameras like it will require filmmakers to make some adaptations to get the look they want. The masters will make it look amazing. The biggest difference isn't the look between film and digital, because that difference is vanishing--a camera like Red is "the future" because you get something that is visually amazing that's been financed with savings from your job at Wal-Mart versus something that requires a million dollar bankroll.
I was talking to a very experienced cinematographer now in his 80's and he said that thirty years ago he had to be sure he bought his film stock all at once because there was no consistency between batches and the film stock was so slow you had to be a genius to ensure proper exposure every time. Film was the future then, even though it required certain adaptations by the people using it. Film still requires adaptations with scrims and filters and light meters and specialized developing procedures, daylight stock versus tungsten stock, the list goes on. Similarly, Red and cameras like it will require filmmakers to make some adaptations to get the look they want. The masters will make it look amazing. The biggest difference isn't the look between film and digital, because that difference is vanishing--a camera like Red is "the future" because you get something that is visually amazing that's been financed with savings from your job at Wal-Mart versus something that requires a million dollar bankroll.
Stephen Williams
Well-known member
sean90291 said:
Hi,
I started shooting motion picture film in 1979, Kodad only made 1 x 35mm negative 5247, 100 asa tungsten, 64 asa daylight with an 85 filter. There were not big issues batch to batch, however for a feature it was normal to work with stock from 1 batch. About 6 years earlier Stanley K had used candles light only for lighting Barry Lyndon, he was IMHO a genius.
Stephen
alacritymedia
Active member
Right...
Right...
I understand the idea of shooting to the right and have done it on pretty much every video shoot in my career - then I turn on Battlestar Gallactica and the DoP is blowing the top end on his Sony CineAlta (F900s I think) and getting some of the most amazing HD video images I have ever seen. An extreme stylistic choice that few of us will have occasion to duplicate but it sure makes me curious about the character of the RedOne / Mysterium sensor when blown hard. There are times when that white hot part of the pallete suits a scene and it would be great if the rig showed good manners at the top end.
Blair S. Paulsen
RedOne #19
Right...
I understand the idea of shooting to the right and have done it on pretty much every video shoot in my career - then I turn on Battlestar Gallactica and the DoP is blowing the top end on his Sony CineAlta (F900s I think) and getting some of the most amazing HD video images I have ever seen. An extreme stylistic choice that few of us will have occasion to duplicate but it sure makes me curious about the character of the RedOne / Mysterium sensor when blown hard. There are times when that white hot part of the pallete suits a scene and it would be great if the rig showed good manners at the top end.
Blair S. Paulsen
RedOne #19
Graeme_Nattress
Red Team
Blowing out seems to be well behaved here on my test images. But that's as much sensor characteristic as to how you process the data.
Graeme
Graeme
Stephen Williams
Well-known member
evinsky said:
Hi,
I am sure SK would have wanted to recored uncompressed, with a shooting ratio of 100:1! Sounds like fun for the data management.
Stephen
JDHolloway
Member
Film easier to light?...Not a chance. Just different.
Perhaps when shooting directly into a sunset.
Night Exteriors? I've done dramatic night exteriors (city) with available light and a 300 watt Arri for a rim. Clean blacks and decent exposure with f900s. Send back the Mosco/LRX/cherry picker what-have you. No fear of under-exposed mush when you have no budget. Also, its rather fun when your budget dictates blocking actors into the available light. Kinda working in the box.
Night Interiors? A handfull of peppers and a couple of dueces.
Day interiors? A couple of daylight kinos and a couple of 1200/575 HMIs.
Day exteriors? Sure, a little control...floating a Lt. grid/silk or double net. Throw in a nice fill bounce and voila...very tasty.
I prefer big budget lighting tools and crews, but you don't need them if you're creative.
just my .02 $ worth
Perhaps when shooting directly into a sunset.
Night Exteriors? I've done dramatic night exteriors (city) with available light and a 300 watt Arri for a rim. Clean blacks and decent exposure with f900s. Send back the Mosco/LRX/cherry picker what-have you. No fear of under-exposed mush when you have no budget. Also, its rather fun when your budget dictates blocking actors into the available light. Kinda working in the box.
Night Interiors? A handfull of peppers and a couple of dueces.
Day interiors? A couple of daylight kinos and a couple of 1200/575 HMIs.
Day exteriors? Sure, a little control...floating a Lt. grid/silk or double net. Throw in a nice fill bounce and voila...very tasty.
I prefer big budget lighting tools and crews, but you don't need them if you're creative.
just my .02 $ worth
Last edited: