Theory of Lighting...

Phil

Phil

Veteran
How about having to fill for daylight, exterior...without it looking like it was a 3 point lighting set up?

Does noone really notice? If you're outside, everything is flooded with light, making the shot flat?...I was told to silk to bring down the sun and then use a CTB. That makes it look more "3D". But that wouldn't look real...
Is that what I'm not getting about lighting?? That the "film look" isn't supposed to look real, it's supposed to look like...film?...like a movie?...damn

You can almost hear my brain turning on...Barry, David, you pros...Is the above stated correct?

Edit: Sorry if I come off manic, but I just spent most of the night reading "Lighting for Video" "Lighting for DV" "Beginner's Lighting" "Lighting for Dummies"....oh and the Y (yahoo.com) and G (google.com) buttons are broken on my keyboard now... ;)

Thanks for the info...
Phil
 
Re: Theory of Lighting...

Nothing about a movie is "real" or "authentic"... you light something so it looks the way you want it to, not how it "should" in real life...
 
Re: Theory of Lighting...

ahh gotcha...Barry, one day...one day I'll pay you back for all the help!
 
Re: Theory of Lighting...

Phil-
One of the primary 'theories' of lighting is to give your subject "shape" by controlling the light and the shadows. Whether its a talking head or a group, or even a building, the angle of the light to the subject is primary. That's why you generally don't shoot with the sun behind your camera because everything in front of the camera is going to be terribly flat. Sun to the side, 3/4 back or even occasionaly back lit with proper fill is much more interesting visually. Using tungsten or HMI's gives even more control because you have much more to say on placement than you do using daylight. Good luck in your shooting.
 
Re: Theory of Lighting...

Take your favorite movie, Phil, whatever that it. Really look at the lighting. Chances are, none of it really looks like "real life." Look what's in shadow, more than anything.

When you're lighting, you're creating a mood. Shadow is your friend, whether it be soft or hard.

Think of drawing something with a pencil. What you're really doing is adding shadow to a perfectly even light (the white of the paper). Shadow is what adds depth, adds interest. Where you put the shadows is at LEAST as important as where you put the light.

Take this shot of mine that you liked:

242180100.jpg


Don't look at anything but the shadows and dark spots. I think they tell you more about the picture, the mood, than any other single element. Also, look at the way the shadows add depth.

This was done with a hard flood from the right, creating the key and the illusion of late afternoon sun, and a fill -- another hard flood bouncing off the opposite wall.
 
Re: Theory of Lighting...

[quote author=David Jimerson link=board=lighting;num=1095744359;start=0#4 date=09/21/04 at 17:43:02]This was done with a hard flood from the right, creating the key and the illusion of late afternoon sun, and a fill -- another hard flood bouncing off the opposite wall.[/quote]

David, do you mean the fill was bounced off the wall opposite the talent (behind the camera), or bounced off the wall opposite the key?

I wish more posts could be illustrated this way. We are after all, visual people.
 
Re: Theory of Lighting...

The fill was bounced off the wall to the left of the camera, to the right of the actors.
 
Re: Theory of Lighting...

Ehm...

I thought that was obvious - just look how nicely filled is the shadow part of the guy's legs and his robe...

But I agree - more examples like this, with descriptions, is a great way to share with those who want to learn. Beats any 'How to...' book because it's interactive and we can discuss pros and cons.

I love this forum!
 
Re: Theory of Lighting...

[quote author=Jerry XCheck link=board=lighting;num=1095744359;start=0#7 date=09/22/04 at 07:23:20]Ehm...

I thought that was obvious - just look how nicely filled is the shadow part of the guy's legs and his robe... [/quote]

No, it's not so obvious. With fill on the talent's right, you wouldn't expect the shadows to be very strong at all, since the fill would wash them out.
 
Re: Theory of Lighting...

That's why we bounced it off the wall, instead of just using a hard light fill. I didn’t want to kill the shadows entirely, just brighten some of the shaded areas.
 
Re: Theory of Lighting...

Thanks for the help David, the hard part is being outside...since the light source is everywhere.

I'm watching Star Wars and they're in the valley where C3P0 gets ripped apart. There they're lit from all around...if there's too much light, I've noticed DP's will push the background away. So even if the image is flat, it still isn't because of the DOF. Unfortunately, the shot I had trouble with is right against a door, so there's no depth.

Since we're getting more indepth (thanks)...What's the actual use of the foam core. It's to be the key light right? Because it's not the fill, because the light that's already there would be less than the bounce plus the light already there. Right?
 
Re: Theory of Lighting...

You generally use the foamcore reflector for fill on the side that's getting a harsh shadow from sunlight.

You can use a more reflective surface (something silver) to give you a more directional key at the same time as blocking the direct sunlight from hitting the subject (think shade).  It's all about keeping light from where you don't want it and directing it to where you do.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top