Framegrabs please critique

donatello said:
you get 5 DP's to light this scene - you'll end up with 5 different set ups and 5 different exposure's & compositions ...
Click to expand...

Funny you should mention that, as that is exactly what this project was. I was one of 4 DPs that shot the same short film over the course of two days. All Four of the films have turned out quite different.

I had the oppurtunity to use, 2 kino flos, 2 small lite panels (LED lights) 2 600watt arri lights 2 350watt arri's, a 1k britek, a 600watt britek, a 350 watt britek, a lowel rifa88, 4 lowel totas, and various PARS and Scoops.
not to mention 3 DVX's and my own JVC hd110 (and hd-1).

I have used and know how to use every element.
weather the people on this board want to believe it or not every lighting choice was made on purpose. I would love to show all of you the 4 films and then you could tell me which one was right and which were wrong.
 
hoofandmouf said:
everytime I hear that over-used excuse of "my blown highlights were an artistic choice" I chuckle....

how bout this.... light it right and compose it properly and if you still want an artistic choice to blow the highlights, do it in post

hope this helps.
Click to expand...

the third shot on your reel has a ton of blown out lights in shot... why would you put such a crappy shot in a demo reel... or was that your worn out artistic choice???
 
Starshine Video said:
the third shot on your reel has a ton of blown out lights in shot... why would you put such a crappy shot in a demo reel... or was that your worn out artistic choice???
Click to expand...

Oh my ****ing god. I read this thread a day or two ago and wasn't going to reply, but now I can't help myself.

You ask for honest feedback claiming you can take it, people offer gentle critiques of your hugely sub-par framegrabs, and then you flip out and not only become overly defensive, but start lashing out at others.

You had a massive light kit and produced underlit, decently composed, but generally poor frame grabs. That demo reel you critizied exhibited generally awesome composition, exposure, and use of light. AND IT WAS OF DOCUMENTARY FOOTAGE. HE DIDN'T EVEN HAVE A LIGHT KIT! Plus, the shot with the flourescents looked great; the color correction and diffusion were awesome and the exposure was spot on. I heard Robert Richardson put a back light a few stops over key, want to call him out on it, too?

I normally (but not always) try to be a nice enough guy, but I can't really abide by this. Simply put, the only thing worse than your footage is your attitude. And that says something. People here have some awesome advice and are (remarkably enough) willing to share it with someone who is totally ungrateful. Be open to this advice, use it, and maybe your footage will some day look as good as that demo reel!
 
Amulet Man said:
Plus, the shot with the flourescents looked great
Click to expand...
agree 100%

Amulet Man said:
I normally (but not always) try to be a nice enough guy, but I can't really abide by this. Simply put, the only thing worse than your footage is your attitude. And that says something. People here have some awesome advice and are (remarkably enough) willing to share it with someone who is totally ungrateful. Be open to this advice, use it, and maybe your footage will some day look as good as that demo reel!
Click to expand...


You missed my point totally, He implied that anytime there is a blowout in frame it was a screwup. i was just pointing out that his demo reel has blowout in it so either it was an artistic decision or a screwup. I didn't blow up at negative criticism I called him out on a silly comment he made.

People have called my stuff "amateurish" said the compositions were in essence crappy, but the only "help" i have gotten so far is "compose it right" and "light it right" how does that help? please tell me...
 
Starshine Video said:
You missed my point totally, He implied that anytime there is a blowout in frame it was a screwup. i was just pointing out that his demo reel has blowout in it so either it was an artistic decision or a screwup. I didn't blow up at negative criticism I called him out on a silly comment he made.

People have called my stuff "amateurish" said the compositions were in essence crappy, but the only "help" i have gotten so far is "compose it right" and "light it right" how does that help? please tell me...
Click to expand...

Hey sorry if my response was a bit aggressive, but basically, yeah... The problem is that it's hard giving advice on shooting style because everyone has a different approach. Some people did offer concrete advice, though: eyelights, less extreme under exposure, less blown out windows, etc.

I know you're not going for total convention but I always find that starting with three point lighting and the rule of thirds helps--even if I want a totally different end result. Start with what's "normal" then screw it up from there.

What would I do differently? I'm not sure I can help much since I'm not so good at composing for scope, and I would have probably chosen totally different shots just because everyone does, anyhow.... But here goes (very quickly; I have stuff to do):

Shot 1: The composition is fine, but I'd definitely bring up the backlight a bit. It's way underexposed and I'm talking makes Godfather 2 look bright.

Shot 2: None of your lines are on axis; this looks kind of rough. Level the camera or, if you're going to cant, cant it like you mean it. Also, I'd pan left a tiny bit to improve the composition and light the talent a bit more. The light and window are the brightest thing in frame, which makes them visually distracting.

Shot 3: The composition is fine; I'd add a backlight and brighten the key a bit but it's okay as is.

Shot 4: The composition is nice and the canted angle looks good but the lighting is flat, muddy, and underexposed. I don't know what I'd do to fix it, but it would involve more lights...

And etc. Basically, though, other people nailed it. It's all very flat and underexposed. It's not terrible and it's definitely presentable enough, but all the criticism I've read has been pretty valid...
 
hey bro, the only reason I even said anything was because you seemed to want some brutally honest feedback... and then you get upset and start taking pot-shots at my reel? lol

I wasnt trying to anger you bud.

look, you seem to have a rad set of lights at yer disposal.... use em'

and just an FYI, the clipped HLs on the documentary footy was grabbed on the fly 4am in the ghetto, sketchy mofos all around, no crew, no "kit", yadda yadda. (you do mean the convenient store shot right :-)

either way, sorry to offend... cheers and good luck in your future shoots
 
Amulet Man said:
And etc. Basically, though, other people nailed it. It's all very flat and underexposed. It's not terrible and it's definitely presentable enough, but all the criticism I've read has been pretty valid...
Click to expand...

Yeah I agree 100% basically the problem was I was going for something that is not my forte and failed. I wanted a Vittorio Storraro style of lighting and just didn't have the balls to really light one thing and let the others fall off to darkness. what resulted is very Flat.
 
hoofandmouf said:
how do blown out windows/highlights represent nothing-ness?
Click to expand...

something:

green_field.jpg


nothing:

white.gif


It sounded cool at the time...
 
oh and to clarify that lite kit was the cumlitive kit of the members of the IDFG... not just mine. oh, plus some stuff that CineQuipt let us use.
 
So then, what's this?

Picture5.png


If white is what your were going for, I'd would have put up some 216 or a bed sheet or a shower curtain.

I just think there is a dis-commect between what you wanted to do and what (at least I saw) you put out.

-j
 
I personally "believe" lighting treatments when there is a motivation for all the sources, i.e, light coming from a window, or a lamp etc...I hope this is constructive...In the grab with the man sitting in his chair for instance, if there was a practical lamp sitting beside him on a little table, I would believe his lighting, as it is, I wonder where that slightly funny coloured light, that is qualitively different from both the windows and practical in the background is coming from. Also I think mixing tungsten and daylight is not a bad thing, but try having a smaller difference next time. if the blue was half ctb instead of full, I might buy it....
 
Last edited:
It's inconsistent to suggest any time of time of day by choosing to overexpose the windows and underexpose what's in the room. That's not an artistic choice - that's bad.

As a series of six images - they don't tell a story. A man smokes a pipe and talks to people - I'm afraid that's not a story. That's bad too.

The practical lamp that appears in two of your frame grabs is overexposed - is that supposed to imply "nothingness"? If so, that's inconsistent because there are no zombies inside the lamp (I'm assuming). If not - you didn't have control over the scene. That too, is not good.

Why are all of the shots of the old man always always shot from below his eyeline? It implies he's powerful and could successfully defeat the zombies - and if that's the case then WHY AM I WATCHING YOUR FILM? Sloppy - and that's no good.

Per your request:
"I would really like honest and full bore feedback, I won't get upset if you tell me it sucks "

It sucks, sorry.
 
shot comp is well done... i have to agree with most of the feedback... not enough light... try to gel your windows to match the lighting temperature
 
As has been noted, the composition is nice.

Just from the frame grabs, it's hard to critique the lighting (at least for me).

I bet once you see it in motion the lighting makes some good sense.
 
dont know if you already answered this but how did you get the wideshot (16:9)? on ur dvx...squeeze mode? anamorphic?

thx
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top