Making one tiny hotel room look like four.

[Ryan Patrick O'Hara]

Just wanted to show you guys a short film I shot awhile back, but just got re-scored. The new music is much better.

From a cinematography standpoint, I am proud of this short because not only was it my first DP gig in Los Angeles (Only been here less then a year!) but we successfully made the same hotel room look like four completely different rooms through lighting, camera, and rearranging furniture!

For the hotel room scenes, we lit almost completely from the ceiling, unless a c-stand could be hidden in a corner or a fill light was handheld. We used pole-cats without safety cables, so we only ventured to cardilini clamp two 650's at MAXIMUM to each polecat. The room was tiny... what you see in most 'wide' shots is the entire room. In some instances a side light would be kino's duct taped to the wall *right* off camera framing. The spill would be flagged off the background with a cut up 7-UP cardboard box, also taped to the wall. We simply had zero room for c-stands on the floor.

Anyway, I just really enjoyed the new music so I thought I'd share this today. Enjoy.

 

[Kess]

Congrats! Looks great! Lighting, camera movement, etc. Enjoyed the film.

 

[Graham King]

I enjoyed it as well. Only thing that bothered me was the motion blur on the main guy running through the halls

 

[Finnegan]

Well done Ryan, great work. A couple questions/issues though, if you don't mind. First, what'd you shoot on? Second, all the different rooms/subjects were beautifully lit in a way that supported the story except for the guy running in the hallways (in my opinion). Were you forced to use an on-camera light simply because the hallways and stairwells were too dark?

 

[Ryan Patrick O'Hara]

No. Our lighting approach to the guy's character was a deliberate surreal choice which unfortunately many interpret as mistake. I'm not sure where we went wrong on the delicate attempt to throw out motivated lighting, but we kinda did. Many don't comment on it, but the on board light was the biggest complaint I've heard.

As the story dictated, the guy is lost trying to seek out something or someone, of which the audience is led to believe is the woman. Because of this, we went for an inspired and less extreme version of the Fionna apple Criminal video and the Lacuna Inc memory erasing scenes from Eternal Sunshine on the Spotless Mind. By having a strong frontal soft light on the character, the background would quickly fall to darkness, making him seem as if he is drifting through an uncertain and unforeseeable lost world. Kind of like a 'fog of war' in RTS games. Notice how the female waiting by the phone is very dimly lit while the background walls and curtains recieve a bit more light. Her lighting scheme was the opposite because she is waiting and unsure.

I would very much like to know your opinion and other DVXusers on why our departure into surreal or unmotivated lighting has had a 50/50 effect on people. Half accept it and the other half say 'what the heck?! That light is on the camera and it's too bright!"

We wanted it to be brighter and very frontal, letting only the man's immediate surroundings be in the light. He is lost and panicked. Did we not go 'far enough' with the effect to make it look intentional? Perhaps I'll snap on a little post vignetting on the corners and try to make it seem a bit more spotty?

Thanks!

:beer::beer::beer:

Screen caps from Vimeo... sucks i know, but I don't feel like taking time to downrez larger stills.

 

[Finnegan]

You had the right intention with the look in support of the character and his story arc, but I believe the issue lies in the execution. I think the difference between your film and Eternal Sunshine is that in the latter, the soft front light doesn't drop off the subject when he moves. Or, if it did, I didn't notice it. I haven't seen the movie since it came out. There are times, especially when your character enters the lobby, where he moves from side to side of the frame, and since the frontal light is centered, you can see him move in and out of the light.

In this screen, the character has moved to the right side of the frame, and a soft shadow appears vertically on his face. But in the next second or two...

He's more or less centered and that soft shadow is gone. I think that is what really distracted me, because it alerted me to the fact that it was an on-cam light which didn't feel motivated, even though it was. So like I said, what you tried to do was great for the story and the character, but I think the issue is how it was executed.

 

[Ryan Patrick O'Hara]

Yes. As we were not going for literally what Eternal Sunshine did, it was the basic idea. Hence perhaps the feeling could be heightened with a little post vignette? It is what it is, and I've never really been bothered by it. It's something I will keep in mind next time I 'break' the rules intentionally (being as modern audiences really need motivated light sources, unless it's a music video).

 

[Kess]

I actually liked the shots, but I can see more impact on the audience if the character went from total darkness to light then back to darkness, etc. as he roams the hall. I think too much light may have bothered some viewers...maybe too flat. That's what happens when filmmakers view your shots...LOL! We know where the light sources are located. Too often while watching films I'll switch from audience member to filmaker and detemine the shots, lighting scheme, etc. as I'm watching. I think the wall sconces in your background could have a huge impact if every other one was dark. We once did a hallway shot with single bulb overhead lights in fixtures spaced approx. 7 feet apart...the person roaming the halls would come in and out of the light and it provided quite an impact. Very disorienting. You shoot some great stuff! Keep rolling!

 

[emretufekci]

Great work Ryan, you cannot tell that is the same room. Very tastefully done.

-(Click) Call accounting tell them to send a fruit basket to the DoP's house and book him for the next gig.....Oh by the way cut checks the editor and steadicam op, then erase their names from the rolodex....:evil:

 

[Huy Vu]

This looks much better.

I would very much like to know your opinion and other DVXusers on why our departure into surreal or unmotivated lighting has had a 50/50 effect on people. Half accept it and the other half say 'what the heck?! That light is on the camera and it's too bright!"

My issue was that it's a complete shift in the quality of the footage. Everything else has a very polished feel to it so that when you suddenly have this sequence where he's lit completely flat on an on-board camera light it sticks out like a sore thumb. Another factor is that all of these shots take place in locations that would have been hard to light properly without major equipments in any case (i.e the big lobby) and so the assumption is complete that you didn't have the resources to do that.

Color grading though definitely plays a huge part in it. Dramatically lit footage, even ungraded, has a very different look and feel versus something that's just a flatly lit source like a news report. If you had done some grading like the grab above I think it would have fit much more into the overall style and still retains the motif that you're going for.

 

[djkarn105]

We wanted it to be brighter and very frontal, letting only the man's immediate surroundings be in the light. He is lost and panicked. Did we not go 'far enough' with the effect to make it look intentional? Perhaps I'll snap on a little post vignetting on the corners and try to make it seem a bit more spotty?

I think that's exactly the problem. I think with the soft light it's just not drastic enough to look intentional. I think a corner vignette and maybe some punchier contrast to harshen it a bit should do the trick.

 

[jonE5]

i really enjoyed this and the lighting.

As a beginner i strive to achieve this quality of video.

 

[Michael B. McGee]

yeah, go spotty. too much spill/flood. nice work otherwise.