obtaining Depth of Field

From the Indie Toolbox site:

"Don't I need to know a lot of technical jargon to get shallow depth of field?"

"Not with the SoftScreen! You don't need to worry about f-stop, zoom setting, or anything else: just put up the screen where you want the background to go soft, and the SoftScreen does the rest"

Yea...why actually learn how to USE the camera?
 
Originally Posted by TC
Ya know what helps your film more than shallow depth of field? A good script. Everyone get out of your garages, trying to make mini35 adapters and go brainstorm a story idea.

Just my thought
Click to expand...
Yeah, I'd agree too, except this is 'Cinematography' forum. For someone interestly mostly in that, I doubt they would want to become writers...

To answer the question above - possible but VERY unlikely. I don't even know what CCD size those cheap cameras use, but it will for sure be at most 1/3" (possibly 1/4"). With shutter speed pretty much locked at 1/60 sec until the minimum aperture is achieved (probably f/22, maybe f/32), you are looking at the 1 ft - inf. depth of field.
 
I think it might make for an interesting look using one of those screens in combination with the Century 0.7X wide angle attachment. There is a certain aesthetic that you lose when zooming in from far away. I lack the technical language to describe it, however my eyes tell no lies and it just doesn't "pop" the way a larger format can and does with a subject a foot or two away from a wide lens. To get an idea of what I'm talking about, check out Bob Yeoman's work on Rushmore. Many of the wide head shots in that movie have a vibe to them that (to my eyes) looks like a pretty wide angle lens and perhaps some barrel distortion. Of course on DV using a wide lens (3.5mm, for example) makes it impossible to blur background for effect. I'd be interested to see on of those screens in action with a wide lens and camera close to subject and view that footage compared to Rushmore. I'd be really interested. They're on back order for like six weeks.

Brian
 
Well, that does something but it isn't the same as focus field. A hazer or it's less expensive, very smelly third-cousin-once-removed, the fog machine, adds "atmosphere" by diffusing light.

The last feature I was involved with (as sound mixer) used a fog machine extensively and it really smelled bad especiallly when the gaffer had to fan it out to look authentic and not patchy!

We used it indoors and outdoors even at night with HMI's faking moonlight in Big Thicket National Forest at 3AM for the "Bubba's camp" scenes. It's definitely a cool look.

brian wells
 
good notes. we didn't have that exerience with the smell.
we used a small party fogger and only on indoor scenes (we had almost no exteriors)

as always your milage may vary, but it's a pretty cheap investment to test out.
 
parasite said:
we used a small party fogger. . .
Click to expand...

Yeah, ours came from (literally) the dollar store. Family Dollar had them half off and I think production paid $15 for the machine, plus a gallon of water-based fog juice.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top