Framing & Lighting.

Check out "Manhunter"
Basic lighting, but damn fine comps. It was the first film where I started to notice the comp over anything else.

I have to say that they are both king. I would almost say that with one, there better be the other, or some DP is missing the boat.

They can save one another.
 
But what you just said is...

Matthew B. Moore said:
Check out "Manhunter"
Basic lighting, but damn fine comps. It was the first film where I started to notice the comp over anything else.
Click to expand...

So, right there you said the comp made up for the somewhat basic lighting... so I say again, I believe the comp is more important, and can stand out more as being pro.
 
I think that its really a "weakest link" issue. I don't know that I can elevate a perfectly framed image that is horribly lite over one that has perfect lighting but terrible framing.

There are no "rules" that define the importance of one area over another. Its all a matter of degree.
 
Right, there are no rules... but at the same time... to my eye... a poorly framed yet well lit shot looks bad... where as an underlit, or passably lit shot that's framed GREAT doesn't strike me as bad looking.
 
hi everyone im new here,does anyone knoe a site i can go to,or a book to learn more about composition and framing,when i look at my videos its eighter a little low or a little high.
 
My feeling is this :-

-Cost of learning how to get decent composition ( Time and Patience )
-Cost of Good Lighting ( $ $ $ $ $ $ + Time and Patience)

Ingredients -
1 pinch of the Sun = Best light Eva and 0$
1 handful of Good Composition
1 twitch of Camera Operators wrist on the iris dial

Method
Get Lost on an Island with 100 crew

hmmmm add fx till salty - you may not all like the taste left in your mouth.
 
I just rented "2046" (http://imdb.com/title/tt0212712/)

I spent 80% of that movie saying to my girilfried, "DAMN this guy can frame a shot!"

Check it out, it's visually a stunner. BEAUTIFULLY lit, shot and composed film.... it just doesn't get any better. (And pretty pretty asian actresses, too!) :)

Also, look up the book "The Visual Story"; fantastic resource on filling a frame. The section on color, particularly cutting between frames of opposing colors to increase perceived color saturation (due to persistence of vision)... an amazing tip, which I'd never heard before.
 
I think that the two are interconnected. With that said, I think a poorly lit shot is as distracting as bad audio. It disrupts the telling of the story. And anything that does that (whether it is lighting or framing) will lessen the quality of your film.
 
An interesting point is that lighting only affects the aesthetics of a movie, while composition can literally disrupt the story-telling. For example, whether you light good, or bad, a great actor is going to be a great actor. But try badly composing the scenes of a great actor, and you would think your great actor was picked out of an asylum. Add editing porblems (even a slight mis-timing of the reaction shots is all that is needed), and you know where I am going.

Infact, I bet that 80% of indie films look fake (in terms of acting) because of composition and editing, rather than all the other factors combined.
 
Lightning only affects the aesthetics of movie? How wrong can man be?

Lighting can be as strong tool in storytelling as good framing. Yes, it might not be as apparent as good framing but it can have much stronger effects in you subconsious if done right. Lightning can be used to tell a story itself. It can change moods, change the way we see some character or location, etc. etc. Most people just can't notice "bad" lightning which doesn't do anything else but illuminates but they might notice that the pictures are not as strong and they don't awake feelings as they would in "professional" movies.
 
Mtech,

Amen to that. I was on a student film shoot recently where the camera dept. obviously didn't care a whole lot about the story. They were more interested in being students and experimenting with cool lighting tricks, trying new things for their personal benefit. As a result, much of the lighting did not only not enhance the mood of each scene, it often played directly against it. Very sad.

As a DP, you need to stay fully committed to the story first and foremost.

Josh
 
Michael Carter said:
I just rented "2046" (http://imdb.com/title/tt0212712/)

I spent 80% of that movie saying to my girilfried, "DAMN this guy can frame a shot!"

Check it out, it's visually a stunner. BEAUTIFULLY lit, shot and composed film.... it just doesn't get any better. (And pretty pretty asian actresses, too!) :)
Click to expand...

First off, I would like to concur on the 2046 plug. Almost every frame in that movie is stunning to look at and a work of art (I would kill to be even 10% as visionary as Kar Wai Wong.)

Now back to the topic. If you have a shot with the best lighting in the world but the camera is upside down, at a dutch tilt, zoomed all the way in, and framed on an actor's nose hairs- terrible; or if you have an amazingly framed shot without any light at all leaving the actor in complete darkness- terrible.

What I'm getting at is that in either extreme you will have an equally terrible shot (Unless of course you actually wanted to setup those shots the way I described, then it's all very subjective and then it comes down to personal preference).

But in saying that... If I had a gun to my head and had to choose between mediocre framing with amazing lighting, or mediocre lighting with amazing framing. I would choose the mediocre framing with the amazing lighting. Why, because I like movies like Blade Runner, Minority Report, A.I., where they use light like a character of it's own, dancing over the actors and the set, to me those movies without that lighting would not be nearly as interesting to watch and I could careless if they framed each shot a little crooked... but this is my personal tastes and I pretend to be no expert at either lighting or framing, actually I'm not very good and hope to improve on my craft to get equally well lit and framed shots. Cheers - Jeremy
 
jeremytuttle said:
But in saying that... If I had a gun to my head and had to choose between mediocre framing with amazing lighting, or mediocre lighting with amazing framing. I would choose the mediocre framing with the amazing lighting. Why, because I like movies like Blade Runner, Minority Report, A.I., where they use light like a character of it's own, dancing over the actors and the set, to me those movies without that lighting would not be nearly as interesting to watch and I could careless if they framed each shot a little crooked... but this is my personal tastes and I pretend to be no expert at either lighting or framing, actually I'm not very good and hope to improve on my craft to get equally well lit and framed shots. Cheers - Jeremy
Click to expand...

THat's really interesting. I'd choose the mediocre lighting and amazing framing any day... as if you have mediocre framing, it screams HOME MOVIE to me much more than mediocre lighting... I don't know, maybe it's just me. I'm no expert either, but this is my feeling.
 
Im more of a CG guy whos only now getting into camera work etc. But id say framing is more of a heads up situation than lighting. Mediocre lighting but good framing would anyday be my choice. But im no expert so its not the final word. Just my feeling.
 
well it really depends on what the shot looks like. you can make generalizations like "framing is more important". Limiting your self like that off the bat is rediculous. if you have a choce between good lighting and framing a shot in a particualr location, that just means you (or the DP) has to put in a little bit extra work and make them both work.
 
This is a tough debate I think, and ultimately shows stylistic differences between film makers. Great arguments either way, I can't really decide which side of the fence i am on. There are so many variables when you are actually in the field making it happen. I like the argument that lighting has a strong effect on story telling as it relates to mood and emotion. However I think that composition is also key to telling your story as well, if what is happening visually is framed poorly, its hard to be as involved. Lighting when done properly should enhance the emotion of the scene, without being overt, subtle is key. I think the same applies to composition. I think maybe better terms than good and bad are effective and ineffective. If the lighting or the composition do not enhance and respect the story then they are ineffective, I think we can all agree to that. So which is more important? I think this debate is one of many that film makers have to go through each time they shoot. Its all about priorities. What if in order to achieve great lighting and great composition its going to cost you getting a great performance? What is the priority then? Or what if you have to sacrifice a great location? Or what about not getting to do that fancy jib shot. When the sky is not the limit, as it is for most of us, you have to prioritize and I think how we prioritize becomes apparent in the final product.
 
My vote goes to better framing. I can see both sides of it, but I think where the camera is ultimately helps the story more. With the style that I film in at least. When I think of the opening of Saving Private Ryan, the lighting isn't anything special, but the camera style pulls people right in with the characters.
 
Brandon Rice said:
Right, there are no rules... but at the same time... to my eye... a poorly framed yet well lit shot looks bad... where as an underlit, or passably lit shot that's framed GREAT doesn't strike me as bad looking.
Click to expand...
I think the problem here is, how bad of lighting are we talking about?

Part of good framing is actually lighting! Lighting is what shows your frame in the first place.

For example, the frames below would not look like good frames without the appropriate lighting in various places throughout the frame:

http://imdb.com/gallery/ss/0212712/5.jpg.html?path=gallery&path_key=0212712&seq=12
http://imdb.com/gallery/ss/0212712/11.jpg.html?path=gallery&path_key=0212712&seq=3
http://imdb.com/gallery/ss/0212712/2.jpg.html?path=gallery&path_key=0212712&seq=13

Lighting frames your picture too ...
 
I think that if you don't have decent lighting, why are you wasting your time trying to frame up a good shot unless you are just practicing. Although I think good framing and acting, along with the best audio will keep an audience interested, if you don't have decent lighting that will be what every critic will be talking about. :thumbsup:
 
For a filmmaker and especially a DP, there can be no compromise on both. No one should even say things like I prefer this over that. Lighting, composition, all these are integral to the whole cinema experience just like misc en scene.

Case in point, Malaysia has been a melting pot for indie works in recent years, I watched quite a few and like most indie works albeit only for their ideas; they have promise and potential but for the most part, the excecution is rough at best; usually really bad lighting or framing, wrong age or face for parts, sloppy editing, and most common, really bad sound editing. But from time to time you find some that have it all, story, acting, execution, lighting, framing, etc, etc, and this elavates the work to a whole new level.

My issue with most indie filmmakers here is that they have this "Don't worry, it is indie" approach to filmmaking. Not enough lights? Don't worry, it is indie. Bad framing? Don't worry, it is indie. Sloppy editing, don't worry it is indie. Bad sound, don't worry, it is indie. Wrong age and looks for the part? Don't worry, it is indie. It is like indie is the word to justify a lacked of discipline in the filmmaking process. This also leads to another issue with the indie scene here; indie is the new word for just plain bad story disguised as artistic or indie style.

Ok, I know I am a little of topic here touching on other aspect of filmmaking but it is really the same at the end of the day, when one starts to compromised on something as basic as lighting, what else is he or she going to start compromising on?

One must push hard for the best possible work and the first step is no compromise in your work. Even on a shoestring budget, you will be amazed at what you can do with one redhead, a bounce board, and a table lamp.

Lighting is not about how many lights you need but how you manipulate the lights to your needs.

To answer the TS question, I will never compromised on either. As a freelance DP, my stand is that both go hand in hand. I rather not work on the project if I have to sacrifice lighting equipments.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top