Lighting up a bridge in the middle of nowhere at night?

F

Filmkid2003

Well-known member
Hey everyone. I'm going to be shooting a scene at night under a concrete bridge in the middle of nowhere with no available power source. The ceiling of the bridge (the underneath part) is approximately 12 feet above the ground. This is where I will be shooting the scene. I plan on duct taping string lights holding 25 light bulbs and each light bulb is 25 watts. The string of lights is 54 feet in length with a light socket spaced apart every 2 feet. I will be hanging the string lights in rows that will form a square over top of where the actors will be standing. So, my total light output will be (25 bulbs x 25 watts each) 625 watts. Will this be enough light to light up the scene for the GH1 camera to capture with very minimal to no noise? Or will I have to double the amount of bulbs to 50 for a total of 1250 watts? These string lights with bulbs aren't cheap so, I can't really afford to buy a set of two.

I plan on powering the lights with a 3000 watt Honda generator that I will be renting from Home Depot for the night. And as far as the generator noise goes, I wrote it into the script so I don't have to worry about it being in the background.

By the way, the bridge area where we will be shooting is approximately 25 feet long x 20 feet wide with graffiti on the walls, which I would like to be able to light up a bit so it shows up in the scene.


Here is a link to the string lights I will be buying:

http://www.sivallighting.com/commer...oor-string-lights-54ft-24-medium-sockets.aspx
 
Probably not going to happen. You're calculating a total of 625w, but really only the individual lights are going to count, not the sum of their output. Plus you're trying to project the lights 20 ft away and so it's just goin to dwindle down to nothing.
 
If you are using the string lights for set dressing, fine. To light your scene you are going to need something bigger. With the generator mentioned you have the power to run a couple of 1k's and your string lights.
 
For cost, weight and rigging ease, you might consider sourcing some china balls fitted with 250W 3200K medium base globes. Each fixture, ready to rig with globe would cost about $30. These are so light that you can literally tape them up with good quality gaffer's tape or find a spot to clip them with grip clamps.

Filmtools is a good place to reliably source the basic elements you'll need. Paper lanterns can be had (larger than 12") for less than $10. Lindcraft makes a nice 24" polysilk one for about $12. The globes are

Ikea has a 300W rated dimmer ("DIMR") and used to carry a like-rated, switched wire / medium base for their china ball lanterns. The highest wattage base I see there now is 75W. You should have one rated for 300W.

Care must be taken with china balls, because they can catch fire if the globe comes in contact with the fabric or paper. A larger diameter ball is somewhat safer.

If you were able to rent, small HMI units like Jokers (200W / 400W), which you could put into soft boxes or bounce off of suspended foam / bead board would fill the bill.
 
Thanks, guys. Erik, the china balls would normally be a good idea but where this bridge is located, it is always windy and the bridge becomes a wind tunnel. I do however have two 1,000 watt quartz lights I can use for fill. Kholi suggested I use CFL bulbs for the string lights instead of incandescent bulbs since a 25 watt CFL can output 100 watts worth of light. The only thing is, I don't think they would look as nice for the scene as the nice round incandescent bulbs.
 
Here is a rig that Roger Deakins used for the interior of the synagogue sequence in "A Serious Man". On his website (Roger Deakins.com) he said, "This was a light I had made which consists of 5 concentric hexagonal aluminum strips holding 200 odd 75 watt household bulbs. The largest hexagon is 15' across and the smallest 3' 6" across. It was controlled by a dimmer system and a skirt of ultrabounce acts as a cut as well as an interior reflector"

hexRig.jpg



I don't think that 25 25 watt bulbs would cut it. Even if you could get an appropriate quantity of light from that set up, I have to ask, why do you think that a soft, warm top light would be appropriate for lighting under a bridge at night? I am not a motivated light purist, by any means, but I just don't see that look. Taking one of those work lights and throwing it in as a hard angular light on the graffiti, and providing back or side lighting on the talent with some bounce light (from the other 1K) used for portraiture could be another approach. I think that those string lights are a good idea, and have bookmarked your link for future reference, but I am not so sure that in this case they are the best answer. For the cost of a couple of those string lights you could pick up a good handful of other cheap lights that may work better.
 
Last edited:
Sounds like fun. All of the bulbs, generators, string lights etc.
But what do you want the scene to look like? Do you want to make it look like a natural setting?
Is there a single utility light present under the bridge (usually for safety)?
Is there light coming from a nearby neighborhood?
It might be a good idea to create a light plan based on your script before start buying and duct taping things.
Gary
 
I would never profess to know more than Mr. Deakins, but that rig looks as expensive and inefficient as anything I could imagine.

Pancake lights or Bargers with some kind of low-profile soft box would be great for the under bridge scenario.
 
I'd simply tape 4x4 pieces of mylar (or any bounce of your liking) to the ceiling, and bounce narrow beamed par cans into them. Skirt as desired for spill control. That is cheap.

Mylar is inexpensive.
Par cans are cheap and give the most light output for the watt, with the exception of more expensive non-tungsten units.

This is something I learned from the cinematography of Dante Spinotti, asc, aic, among others.


This is only good if you want 'toppy' lighting... if you were planning on using the string bulbs to actually be in the shot, then they are practicals, and are fine acting as so, imo.
 
Last edited:
Erik Olson said:
I would never profess to know more than Mr. Deakins, but that rig looks as expensive and inefficient as anything I could imagine.

Pancake lights or Bargers with some kind of low-profile soft box would be great for the under bridge scenario.
Click to expand...

I saw the sequence in "A Serious Man", and I really liked the look, but yeah, that ain't cheap. From reading posts on his website forum, I guess he uses a lot of manufactured rigs, and I am sure it is not for cost savings. I posted it to contrast that with the suggested 25 string lights.

I'm also with Ryan on this. I think the way to go for anyone putting together a low budget light kit is most defiantly pick up some Par 64 cans. They are very cheap. I just picked up 4 of them from a stage lighting joint off of eBay for $90.00, with shipping. Getting bulbs for them will be another $100.00 bucks or so, and another $48.00 bucks for baby stand adaptors, from Cool Lights. I have stands, but you should be able pick up 4 light weight stands for around $150.00. So for well under $400 bucks you can get 4k worth of very useful light. You could put together two of them for well under $200.00.
 
David G. Smith said:
I saw the sequence in "A Serious Man", and I really liked the look, but yeah, that ain't cheap. From reading posts on his website forum, I guess he uses a lot of manufactured rigs, and I am sure it is not for cost savings. I posted it to contrast that with the suggested 25 string lights.

I'm also with Ryan on this. I think the way to go for anyone putting together a low budget light kit is most defiantly pick up some Par 64 cans. They are very cheap. I just picked up 4 of them from a stage lighting joint off of eBay for $90.00, with shipping. Getting bulbs for them will be another $100.00 bucks or so, and another $48.00 bucks for baby stand adaptors, from Cool Lights. I have stands, but you should be able pick up 4 light weight stands for around $150.00. So for well under $400 bucks you can get 4k worth of very useful light. You could put together two of them for well under $200.00.
Click to expand...

You probably know this, but for those of you who don't, make sure you get the sealed beam lamps if you're going the par 56 or 64 route - they come in narrow, mdium and wide floods. Many companies will try and sell you a halogen bulb with a reflector kit. IMHO, don't buy halogen. If you bump them, the halogen bulb will almost certainly fail. Sealed Beam Lamps last much longer.

And I like that... "most definatly" haha
 
Kit Hannah said:
You probably know this, but for those of you who don't, make sure you get the sealed beam lamps if you're going the par 56 or 64 route - they come in narrow, mdium and wide floods. Many companies will try and sell you a halogen bulb with a reflector kit. IMHO, don't buy halogen. If you bump them, the halogen bulb will almost certainly fail. Sealed Beam Lamps last much longer.

And I like that... "most definatly" haha
Click to expand...

Oh yeah, the sealed beams are the only way to go. I am going to trick out the ones I have with the full spot sealed beams first, then get the more modest angle sealed beams as a complement. The lights are so cheap, I will also probably pick up some cheap ones and cut down the cans to make specialty lights. I don't think that they should be the only lights you get, but for the cost, I don't see how you can go wrong with picking up a handful of them to have around. I think they are one of those kit items that will end up being the things, "I didn't know I needed" and then "I can't live without".
 
Kit Hannah said:
You probably know this, but for those of you who don't, make sure you get the sealed beam lamps if you're going the par 56 or 64 route - they come in narrow, mdium and wide floods. Many companies will try and sell you a halogen bulb with a reflector kit. IMHO, don't buy halogen. If you bump them, the halogen bulb will almost certainly fail. Sealed Beam Lamps last much longer.

And I like that... "most definatly" haha
Click to expand...

True but the exception is Source4 pars. They use a completely different type lamp and come with 4 lenses for varying the beam. These are more expensive but well worth the money.
 
phudsontx said:
True but the exception is Source4 pars. They use a completely different type lamp and come with 4 lenses for varying the beam. These are more expensive but well worth the money.
Click to expand...

Elation makes a copy that is 1/3 the cost called the opti-Par. They always worked great for us, had about 200 of them. The bulb in their is not as fragile as the halogen reflector kits for the 56's / 64's.
 
Okay, to answer some questions about why I chose string lights. First, there are no lights whatsoever on this bridge. Not even a utility light. Its a small concrete bridge that spans over a dry wash. The character in the movie living under the bridge is a homeless guy. So, it would be believable that he might find some string lights with bulbs in a dumpster behind a nearby cafe. That's why I'm using string lights even if its just for practical lighting. There is no power whatsoever near this bridge so I obviously have to use a generator. That poses a problem for sound, UNLESS I write a generator into the script, then it at least makes some sense why you can hear a generator in the BG. I can't use soft boxes because it is constantly windy there and the bridge just magnifies that wind and wind like that is going to blow the softbox fabric and create light shimmer. I don't have any money to go out and buy $400 worth of cans and bulbs if I buy the string lights. So, based on the advice from everyone on here, taken as a whole, I will make do with the 2000 watt quartz lights and the 1000 watts worth of shop lights I have for fill and bounce lighting. Thank you everyone for your help.

Just one more question, what White balance setting should I use for this scene with the lighting I am using? I don't want to have to do manual white balance before every shot because it becomes too time consuming and time and money are the two things I'm short on.
 
Is this film called "The Magic Generator"?

How in the world do you write a generator into a story about a homless guy that lives under a bridge in the middle of nowhere? Did he steal it?

Why not do your best to baffle the generator, down wind, far away with a couple hundred feet of extension cords? If it's as windy as you say it is, getting it far enough away and somewhat baffling it, you may not be able to hear it at all, or if you can slightly hear it, since it's constant, you should be able to get it down to an acceptable level in post.
 
Filmkid2003 said:
Just one more question, what White balance setting should I use for this scene with the lighting I am using? I don't want to have to do manual white balance before every shot because it becomes too time consuming and time and money are the two things I'm short on.
Click to expand...

Uhhhh, you should only have to do it once. :undecided
 
Is this film called "The Magic Generator"?
Click to expand...

Kit, the movie is actually called "The Sarcastic Generator". Hahaha! You're a real wisenheimer, aren't ya? The bridge the homeless guy lives under is a train bridge and the generator happened to fall off one of the freight cars a half mile back. That's how the homeless guy comes in possession of it. Thanks for the sound advice. No pun intended.
 
phudsontx said:
True but the exception is Source4 pars. They use a completely different type lamp and come with 4 lenses for varying the beam. These are more expensive but well worth the money.
Click to expand...

Yes!

The source 4 pars are really fantastic. I always feel like such a dope carting around all these bulbs for medium wide and spot. It's great just to have a little kit full of lenses that I can pop in and out. For some reason I was so excited when I first saw one of those maxibrutes with HPL's, just seemed like a much saner way to do things.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top