film student here; clip from a film I DP'd on

S

Stephen Michael

Member
Here's a short clip (without sound as of yet) from my friend's short that I was the director of photography on. We shot on the fs700 with zeiss zf.2's. Very quick color correct done in FCP. Man I wish I could afford this baby, broke my heart returning it to the rental house...I am looking to concentrate on cinematography in the future, and this was my first serious shoot as DP. I guess my question is pretty simple: how does it look...? :D

Anyway, comments/criticisms are welcome.

https://vimeo.com/50498827
 
Both of the actors could have used a bit more eye-light (the girl in particular as her fill was quite weak), but other than that I think it looks great. Editing-wise I would have personally opened with the dolly-shot because the medium close-up just doesn't cut very well as the two setups are quite similar. I'm mentioning this because there may just be that you didn't get sufficient coverage for the part where the girl enters, but - Of course, because I can't tell anything for sure we'll just assume the editor did less well on that one (I found the rest solid though).

Over-all it looks hawt - I keep picturing Olivia Wilde in that scene with the more direct lighting and the warm colors of the set.
Looking forward to seeing the rest of your work on the short.
 
Looks good! A few short inserts of close-ups, extreme close-ups of their expressions, hands, their wine glasses, etc. could be good as well. Also, I agree with Tolin, the girl could use a bit more fill since the right side was a tad bit dark compared to the guy. Or was that the point? Symbolism perhaps?
 
Dont know if I entirely agree on the eyelight but, generally I found it a little under exposed.

I think you've done a pretty good job overall with this - from what we can see. I think your keylight positions seem a little unmotivated and a bit too 3 and 9 oclock .
 
Agree with the above comments. The girl needed more fill light (except if the director wanted something special from lighting). The overall exposure on the actors could have been about 15% more bright and a less orange. I know we are in a room lit by candles but still it doesn't hurt to have the subject lit a bit more representative (this is just my personal taste though...).

As for the dolly shot I don't know what the director wanted but the shot is IMHO totally unmotivated and it has no place being in this scene. This kind of unmotivated movements with sliders or dollies makes the film look like a tv commercial. You know...the long ones that want you to call them right away and make a purchase:)
What does the movement have to do with the subject? Why is it there? If the answer is only to make things looks better or more dynamic, etc. then cut it out:):)
 
Noel Evans said:
Dont know if I entirely agree on the eyelight but, generally I found it a little under exposed.

I think you've done a pretty good job overall with this - from what we can see. I think your keylight positions seem a little unmotivated and a bit too 3 and 9 oclock .
Click to expand...

POtentially dumb question here but can you clarify what you mean by 3 and 9 oclock? The keylight position was motivated by two sconces that were hanging on the wall on the actresses left, but I guess that wasn't totally clear because they are never shown in the shot.
 
CheapFilmmaking.com said:
Looks good! A few short inserts of close-ups, extreme close-ups of their expressions, hands, their wine glasses, etc. could be good as well. Also, I agree with Tolin, the girl could use a bit more fill since the right side was a tad bit dark compared to the guy. Or was that the point? Symbolism perhaps?
Click to expand...

The intention was exactly that. I guess I should give some background on the story; essentially, this woman is playing two different men and seeing each of them at the same time unbeknownst to them, and as the plot progresses she becomes more and more of this (for lack of a better term) devilish figure. I decided then that she would have a bit more negative fill on that side of her face than the actor opposite her. Does that seem a fair intention?
 
Stephen Michael said:
POtentially dumb question here but can you clarify what you mean by 3 and 9 oclock? The keylight position was motivated by two sconces that were hanging on the wall on the actresses left, but I guess that wasn't totally clear because they are never shown in the shot.
Click to expand...

If straight ahead is 12oclock and 6 oclock is directly behind then 3 and 9 would be right and left respectively so my point was if your key on the girl was at 10 oclock we would see more of the key on the right side of her face.

In addition as you had a lot of practicals in the room - candles my eye expects to see more fill as the scene as I see it makes me assume there would be candles on the other angles we dont see, yet one was left dark. And if its not in shot it motivates very little.
 
I kind of wanted to see an establishing or wide shot of the whole table.. or at the very least maybe behind one of them looking across table to see the other one. At first the dolly move looked out of place to me but after watching it twice I see that it reveals the chair at the end of the move where she is to sit so maybe it was motivated.
 
Hectorxd said:
I kind of wanted to see an establishing or wide shot of the whole table.. or at the very least maybe behind one of them looking across table to see the other one. At first the dolly move looked out of place to me but after watching it twice I see that it reveals the chair at the end of the move where she is to sit so maybe it was motivated.
Click to expand...


The dolly shot is for all intends and purposes the establishing shot of this scene. It's the widest shot. It does reveal the chair and it does reveal her plate on the table. But why do we need to see here chair? A move like this emphasises the chair. Why do we need to emphasise the chair?? Does it give new meaning to the subject or does the chair mean anything? I don't think so. If there was an item in the first plan that the dolly move revealed that held a meaning than it would be justified. But revealing a chair and putting emphasis on it is wrong IMHO. The shot is there to make things more dynamic.
 
I agree with the "eye light" comment, though it needs to be something subtle.

...I have a much bigger problem with the huge lighting change between the wide shots and the medium close-up shots. The lighting for the wide shot is very even and flat on the gentleman sitting at the end of the table, but when you switch to the medium close-up shots the lighting is now directional and appears to be coming from the left side of the gentleman. You can see lots of very attractive "modeling/sculpting" of his face in the medium close-up, but all of that is gone in the boringly flat wide shot. ( getting a little picky, the exposure between the wide shot and the medium close-up seems different too )

It's not a bad shot, but the lighting needs some improvements to make it even better.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top