What does footage on high end cameras look like with no lighting?

Azmyth

Azmyth

Veteran
If you took away the great lighting that alot of productions shot on higher end cameras have... what would the footage look like?

maybe even a big budget hollywood film
 
> Home videos.

Perhaps.

It's not so much the camera nor the lights but rather the DP. Are you asking what the footage would look like without grip/electric, or without a talented DP who can recognize and use natural lighting conditions?
 
it looks flat, grainy, and generally unimpresive. Watch news. same cameras as most short films. Varicams, F900's and HPX2700/3700. Same cameras we use for shorts, and features but with no lighting, art direction, color grading.....

The more impressive comparison, is when you point a consumer camera artistically at a professionally lit and art directed set. The consumer camera suddenly looks pretty darn good.
 
Everyone who has spent time behind the camera as either an operator, or a DP, knows the importance of lighting. It's an understatement to say lighting and composition is important. More like, it's everything.
 
Point being -- if you point the best camera in the world at a scene that looks like crap, the resulting footage will be crap.

If you point a mediocre camera at a scene that looks beautiful, the resulting footage will be beautiful. Maybe not as technically perfect as from the best camera, but it'll still look good.

Let's rephrase the question -- what will the footage look like if you point a Red One at Phyllis Diller without her makeup? And what will the footage look like if you point a Canon HV20 at Kate Beckinsale when she's fully glamorized up?

Lighting is important, but it's not the only thing*. Art direction is, in my humble opinion, more important. In the overall formula of factors that contribute to the overall look of the footage, the camera is probably the least important element in the chain; as long as you've got a semi-decent camera you can get brilliant-looking results if everything else is up to snuff.

*even with the best lighting in the world, Ernest Borgnine will never look as good as a poorly-lit Charlize Theron. What you point the camera at is at least as important as how you light that scene.
 
Thanks for all the great replies. I was just always curious what it would look like without all the hollywood pizazz behind it. Lighting, art direction, makeup... seem to make ALL the difference. I had an actor ask me what camera I was shooting my film on, and I thought to myself.. does it really matter? The camera is just a "paint brush".. given the right painter, he can make a beautiful painting with the cheapest brush.

And Merry Christmas! Can't wait to get my Green screen and light kit in the morning! (My wife wanted to surprise me.. but she had to confer with me to make sure she got the right one lol)
 
Good examples can be found with any movie shot Dogme 95 style.

If you only look at Lars Von Trier there's a big difference between Breaking the Waves (shot on film) and Dancer in the Dark (Handycam), both using available light. To me there's a big difference in the image quality, but the awareness of it goes away quickly as I get sucked into the story. Yup. Content is definitely still king.
 
Huy Vu said:
We have an example right here: Megan Fox shot on the RED with no lighting whatsoever.
Click to expand...

I wouldn't say there's no lighting whatsoever. The setting was definitely cast with shooting with available light in mind and it was undoubtedly graded.

Check out The Girlfriend Experience, Soderberg's new film. I'd say the indoor night time stuff looks like a doc but day exteriors look like most other films. Then again, day exteriors are sort of always lit.
 
The Megan Fox clip is fantastic and "lit" very well. It does use available light only but in best possible way. The clip itself might be "boring" (yes, i'm a straight male...) but the content is not tht great.
 
djkarn105 said:
I wouldn't say there's no lighting whatsoever. The setting was definitely cast with shooting with available light in mind and it was undoubtedly graded.
Click to expand...

The point is that it didn't look like it was shot on a RED. It looks like any prosumer 3 chips camera. Colorimetry, contrast, shot selection etc, none of that conveys the feeling that this was shot on a high end digital cinema camera at all. Looks completely video, as the definition goes.
 
There are actually several important things being missed in this thread. The movie "The New World", with Colin Ferrell, was shot without any lighting. Merely practicals and available lighting. Also you guys must remember he even said "a high budget film camera". Film cameras are able to see something like up to 7 stops on both ends of the f-stop. I am not sure of the exact but it is something like that. Not even RED's can do that. So if you are using a film camera without lighting you still have the better chance of getting a great picture out of it. Combine that with a DP who knows what he is doing and you have a great chance for success. None of that is ideal but it is going to look better then a "home movie." Merry Christmas.
 
Brooksy said:
There are actually several important things being missed in this thread. The movie "The New World", with Colin Ferrell, was shot without any lighting. Merely practicals and available lighting. Also you guys must remember he even said "a high budget film camera". Film cameras are able to see something like up to 7 stops on both ends of the f-stop. I am not sure of the exact but it is something like that. Not even RED's can do that. So if you are using a film camera without lighting you still have the better chance of getting a great picture out of it. Combine that with a DP who knows what he is doing and you have a great chance for success. None of that is ideal but it is going to look better then a "home movie." Merry Christmas.
Click to expand...

Lets take film cameras out of the equation for a second and focus on the low budget end most of us are a part of..

I've seen some stuff done with the HVX200 and other similar range cameras that can produce images very close to what I would see in a theater. I was curious if the footage from an HVX or EX1 or XH A1 looks like home video when its not lit, and when there is no art direction.

I was just curious as to what footage on a big budget camera would look like without all the things that make cinema... cinema.

I've seen stuff on the DVX100 thats cinematic as well because of lighting/art/makeup.. but I've also seen stuff that looks worse than what I could do with a High 8 camera.

I always wondered if the higher end cameras had a magic "looks like a movie" setting that automatically gives it a "movie look" without doing anything other than pointing and shooting.

Also, if they are using reflectors to manipulate natural light.. they are still "lighting" the movie. I'm talking about picking up the camera, out of the box.. and shooting something with it.. what does it look like?
 
Barry_Green said:
Point being -- if you point the best camera in the world at a scene that looks like crap, the resulting footage will be crap.

If you point a mediocre camera at a scene that looks beautiful, the resulting footage will be beautiful. Maybe not as technically perfect as from the best camera, but it'll still look good.

Let's rephrase the question -- what will the footage look like if you point a Red One at Phyllis Diller without her makeup? And what will the footage look like if you point a Canon HV20 at Kate Beckinsale when she's fully glamorized up?

Lighting is important, but it's not the only thing*. Art direction is, in my humble opinion, more important. In the overall formula of factors that contribute to the overall look of the footage, the camera is probably the least important element in the chain; as long as you've got a semi-decent camera you can get brilliant-looking results if everything else is up to snuff.

*even with the best lighting in the world, Ernest Borgnine will never look as good as a poorly-lit Charlize Theron. What you point the camera at is at least as important as how you light that scene.
Click to expand...

If you pointed an hv20 at kate beckindale it may explode......
 
Most documentaries are shot on high quality equipment w/o special lighting, and they look great. You might want to look at almost any of the early Spaghetti Western's of Leone's with Clint Eastwood, Good Bad and Ugly, Hang Em High, etc.. Take a look at the 1970's McCabe and Mrs. Miller, all movies shot with minimal exterior lighting, from the look of things.

Also, I would guess whether you are showing the comparison's on a small laptop screen, or projecting them in a theater might be the real comparison test. A great camera, shot by a great DP with production values (which may be the real answer to the questoin) will 'hold up' more under theatrical conditions. But even then, the goal of the look can offset. See Blair Witch Project.

Enjoy your families, mine is just now getting up! Bye!
 
All of this said and even my earlier posting quoted, I would like to back up and tell a little story.

Several years ago I was hired to shoot a spot for a clothing manufacturer. The location selected was the North Rim of the Grand Canyon. Very remote and very beautiful. We had several top models for the shoot, a great crew and all the equipment you could imagine including Panavision 35mm cameras. Almost no expense was spared.

We spent the better part of the day setting up for one hero take. A beautiful dolly with a crane up to reveal the canyon with a model in the foreground. As we were nearing completion of the setup a desert monsoon storm blows in and destroys the better part of a days work.

We all retreat to the safety of RV's to lick our wounds and regroup for another day.

Often these desert rain are violent and quick and this one blew out about an hour after blowing in. Never the less it was still to late to completely reset the shot. Myself and the first AD stepped outside to talk about the next days setup and were greeted with one of the most spectacularly lighted views of the canyon I have ever scene.

Everyone quickly sprang into action and captured one of the shots that most people say is one the best shots on my demo.

Now, this is the exception and not the rule. When people stare at this shot and ask, "how did you do this", I say "sometimes you just show up and turn the camera on - but not very often do you find yourself on the edge of one the 7 natural wonders of the world with beautiful models and the finest light show God can provide."
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top