Various ways

[Guest]

I know that there are various ways to change the lighting in camera by fiddlign around with knobs and control, BUT, I'd like to know if there's a certain priority you should give to them. for instance, should I try neutral density filters before changing the iris? other way around? So far, this is what I've been able to determine in the order of prescendence to get the best light, from things to do first to things to do last...

manipulate lights from Lighting equipment -> apply neutral density filters -> fiddle with iris control -> change gain -> change shutter speed

(this is all assuming that i've white-balanced the scene already) Does this sound just about right?

 

[J.R. Hudson]

Re: Various ways

No, no, no...

You should really never have to screw with the GAIN.

ND's are only applied when prompted. Trust the camera to tell you this. Don't just flick them on for whatever...

IRIS is the most important and will ultimatley control your exposure; ND will come into play in some circumtances but again, let the camera prompt you.

Shutter Speed? That'll just make you have to go back and change the IRIS, ND, etc....

Start off with the Shutter Speed you want; OFF is best but if you are going for a certain look, by all means do it. People are really into the staccato effect of the 1/250th shutter speed.

Then, look for the ND prompt. Usually when the COLOR TEMP is really high, such as outside in the natural sunlight. IF no ND is needed then use your IRIS to adjust the exposure properly.

Honeslty? Don't even screw with the GAIN.

 

[Stas_Tagios]

Re: Various ways

Well, it really all depends on what effect you're trying to achieve, and in what situations you'll be shooting.

For run-and-gun documentary shooting, you're most often at the mercy of your location lighting and have to shoot at whatever aperture gives you a good image, whereas in sit-down interview situations, you can control the lighting.

For narrative filmmaking, where you have the luxury of lighting your shots, you might want to first decide on an f-stop, then light for that stop. This is frequently the procedure on feature films, where a deliberate aesthetic choice is made whether to shoot with wider apertures for more shallow depth of field, or smaller apertures for increased depth of field, and the lighting is then adjusted for the specific aperture. Of course, this can be difficult to do without a good lighting package and crew. Also keep in mind that many lenses perform their best around an aperture of 5.6 or so and are less sharp wide open or nearly closed down.

As for ND'S... If, for example, you want to decrease your depth of field for a more cinematic look, in addition to shooting at a longer focal length, and maximizing your talent-to-background distance, you might also want to use an ND in order to necessitate using a wider aperture, thus decreasing your depth of field. This approach is frequently used when shooting outside.

Say for example you're shooting outdoors, with a 1/8 ND at a stop of f11. You could click in the 1/64 ND, thus allowing you to open up your iris further to get the proper exposure and further limit your depth-of-field.

You can also force a wider aperture by increasing your shutter speed, but as John points out, the faster the shutter, the less motion blur and the more stuttery any movement in your frame will look (a la much of the opening battles in "Saving Private Ryan" and "Gladiator"), which is fine if that's the aesthetic for which you're going.

You can also decrease your shutter speed lower than 1/48th to boost your exposure, which is especially helpful if you're filming a static, low-light exterior. The lower your shutter speed goes, the more blurred and dream-like any motion in frame will look, which again, can be used to good effect.

Gain is usually a last option, utilized only if you can't add more light to your subject or open your iris any further, or if you're going for a grainy, surveillance video look.

 

[Mike_Donis]

Re: Various ways

Normally, I'd rather push a video signal (brighten it) in post, rather than use gain. To me at least, there's just something about it that seems too "video" about using gain. When you push the levels in post, it tends to look more like a movie.

To be fair though, I don't even know if there IS a difference. It might just be a type of placebo "in my head" sort of deal. But it does work in my opinion.

(of course, for the record, just do your best to have enough light in the first place )

 

[Everdene]

Re: Various ways

Yeah, Mike, I'm with you, I'd rather push it in post. And there is a difference. While you might not get much latitude of exposure by pushing in post without gaining up, using gain adds grain and noise and doesn't look very good to my eyes.

If you have to gain up, I've heard that knocking the detail levels down quite a bit can help to get rid of some of the noisy grain associated with the gain. But with most cameras I usually only use gain once, hate the experience, and never touch the button again. I haven't tried it with my DVX yet, though.