Matt Harris
Veteran
Marc you are correct, I knew you'd catch my reference.
When is enough, enough? A vent.
- Thread starter Ryan Patrick O'Hara
- Start date
mattsdni
Active member
I like to just shoot under the moonlight. ISO 6400 @ f1.4 works well...I can actually get a proper expose if it's a full moon. I have to go to 1/30th though. On a more serious note, I generally keep it to ISO 400 when lighting inside. Want a challenge? Grab an old DV cam or VHS and light a scene and make it look good. That really makes you work with what you've got!
Patryk_Rebisz
Veteran
wouldn't only a complete novice really care about high ISO? (besides a pro that needs it for a few specific cases) I mean, i light not to get the exposure but to get certain vibe and feeling across.
Also, the biggest battle now is getting rid of spill, or over powering ambient light. i swear, one 60w bulb and your whole scene goes sickly yellow. You have to kill EVERYTHING in the room. Laptop Screens, TV's, Blinking clock radios etc....
j1clark@ucsd.edu
Veteran
With Black and White such color casts disappear... only pansies use color film anyway...
Ryan Patrick O'Hara
Veteran
I've started to stop hiring light skinned camera assistants. Their skin bounces too much light and ruins my ratio.
ilauzirika
Boring Senior Member
I've started to stop hiring light skinned camera assistants. Their skin bounces too much light and ruins my ratio.
well...that's why I always wear black clothes........hahaha
Damn I'm happy with my HMC151.....It doesn't even have ISO readings it just tells you DBs.....and I always have it at 0.....from there on I try to work with the light to get the desired look and f stop.......and If I need DOF I'm forced to move back and zooooooooooooooom..... But it's really fun hahaha having the action happen 50-100 meters from you to get the background out of focus in a close up......
I was thinking on buying an Af100....but I think that I'll keep my hmc151 to experiment and learn compositing, lighting, etc....and rent whenever I need interchangeable lenses and a better recording medium (whatever camera I feel comfortable with...).
I didn't say they're stupid for having a preference, I don't think somebody is stupid because they prefer pepperoni over sausage on their pizza... but I do think they'd be dumb for not trying both before making a judgement about one or the other.
No. Seriously. Stop.
While I completely agree with everyone about lighting properly I have to play devils advocate. Say the person you are talking about is someone who has their bank broken when they spend $1500-$3000 on camera equipment so it's hard to spend more money on arri fresnels, stands, etc. Yea you can give me that whole make it work with clamp lights and work lights all you want but we all know professional lighting gear is light years ahead of these inexpensive tools when you wan't to be serious about your shooting. I exclusively do music video work (no short films, features, commericials) and there are a billion music artists in the world so I'm able to do quite well financially off of what I do and I am able to invest money back into my gear. But I could only imagine just making short films for yourself, theres basically no profit in it unless you're getting funding, etc. So for most amatuers now they are able to get the camera but don't have much more room to buy anymore equipment. Yea the price of camera equipment is down but lighting, lenses, etc. haven't really budged. So basically these people are looking for the only thing they can afford, "the camera", to do everything for them i.e. be there light kit by shooting at such high isos with no noise.
First off, if you blow every dime on a camera with nothing left over for the other support gear that is necessary, then you made a poor decision. Second, you don't have to jump out of the gate with an expensive Arri of Kino Flo kit. There are myriad of options available out there for you that, if you learn how to deal with the lights you do purchase, you can do some very nice work.
William_Robinette
Shallow Member
All of this, +1.
ilauzirika
Boring Senior Member
In this case you buy a 1000$ camera and a nice 2000$ arri light set....and this isn't the only combination, with 3000$ you can do lots of things..... There are many different lighting manufacturers, there are second hand stores..etc...and you don't always need to buy stuff.... Spending all that money in just a camera isn't a wise choice when there are lots of options for cheaper cameras that are more than enough to make films for yourself....
Rick Burnett
Section Moderator
I have this conversation ALL the time. It's not just lighting either, it's sound as well. If you spend $3k on a camera and have no money left over for anything else, you've spent poorly. The camera itself is probably THE WORST investment if you are not a paid professional. The best bang for the buck are things that stay with you over your career. Tripods, heads, lenses, lights, screens, filters, etc. This is why networking is a filmmakers BEST friend. It's really hard to do film productions (other than music videos) as a one-man-band. If you are starting out, work with others. Share your resources. This is what I did, and I started with music videos as well.
I bought my camera before my light kit, and now I want a different light kit Nothing is to say someone who is just being able to buy an expensive camera is even going to make the right decisions on any other equipment as well. It's not just knowledge, it's experience. A shoulder rig that works great for one person works like crap for someone else. Start small and learn is what I say.
And that's the thing, blowing all your money on any ONE part of filmmaking is doing yourself a disservice, because there is more to the art than just capturing and image with no noise. The light is a creative tool just as much as it is used to work within technical limitations of the equipment. Even if your camera had 18 stops of range, it doesn't make your frames look great. People over expose and under expose all the time on purpose. I do. People walking silhouette in front of a setting sun. That's underexposed and looks great, I don't want the people to have detail. Balancing the lighting in a scene is something extra latitude does not fix, period. Color correction works on ranges, but when you've put two things in the same range that shouldn't be, only very painful mask based color correction is going to fix that. No thanks, it's easier to use a light! As they say, it's better to get it in front of the camera then to fix it in post, and that is the truth!
To play devils advocate to your devils advocate, these people are going to shoot with found light, it's going to look bad, and then they are going to be frustrated because people told them "Spend money on a higher sensitive camera and you don't need lights" and they'll find out, that is not true. High sensitivity cameras also just mean less light, so I still think there is a cost and power savings.
I bought my camera before my light kit, and now I want a different light kit
Nothing is to say someone who is just being able to buy an expensive camera is even going to make the right decisions on any other equipment as well. It's not just knowledge, it's experience. A shoulder rig that works great for one person works like crap for someone else. Start small and learn is what I say.And that's the thing, blowing all your money on any ONE part of filmmaking is doing yourself a disservice, because there is more to the art than just capturing and image with no noise. The light is a creative tool just as much as it is used to work within technical limitations of the equipment. Even if your camera had 18 stops of range, it doesn't make your frames look great. People over expose and under expose all the time on purpose. I do. People walking silhouette in front of a setting sun. That's underexposed and looks great, I don't want the people to have detail. Balancing the lighting in a scene is something extra latitude does not fix, period. Color correction works on ranges, but when you've put two things in the same range that shouldn't be, only very painful mask based color correction is going to fix that. No thanks, it's easier to use a light! As they say, it's better to get it in front of the camera then to fix it in post, and that is the truth!
To play devils advocate to your devils advocate, these people are going to shoot with found light, it's going to look bad, and then they are going to be frustrated because people told them "Spend money on a higher sensitive camera and you don't need lights" and they'll find out, that is not true. High sensitivity cameras also just mean less light, so I still think there is a cost and power savings.
j1clark@ucsd.edu
Veteran
You aren't married are you... This is how it goes... you get a $5K bonus, you quickly run to the nearest computer and make an Amazon purchase of a 'cheap' $1K camera... then by the time you turn around to spend the rest of th $4K, you are
informed that the roof needs fixing, the plumbing is stopped up, and if there's kids in the house, they need new school cloths (despite it being summer...), and the car, new tires... so, your $4K disappears with lightening rapidity... and you wait for the next bonus...
Oh, and it would probably be easier for you to 'justify' the $1K you did spend, if you come home late one night, stinking of cheap perfume and cheaper liquor, and admit to having spent the $1K on a hooker in a dive. Because you'll never have the time to use it, because you are recovering from the broken leg you got, fixing the roof, because the money for the roof job, disappeared with a emergency need to go to a health spa.
I understand where you all are coming from but some people think a totally different way. All they see is the 5d mii was used on House or the 7d was used on Black Swan. They run out and buy these cameras not thinking about the extra work, accessories, equipment, they need that goes into making an image look good because they see some videos on youtube made with the same cameras by their peers and say "hey if they can shoot that I can". Also these people go all out on buying the camera because if you think about it the camera a lens and some form of memory is the bare minimum you NEED to capture images.
ilauzirika
Boring Senior Member
Hahaha yeah, I'm not married, but I wasn't talking about spending the money, I was saying that if somebody did spend 3000$ in a camera and leave nothing for the rest of the complementary equipment, be it lights, audio, decoration, tools, paperwork.....that is an unwise move...and he/she would be better spending the money in a different way. But purchase decisions are up to one (or as you mention, family...).... I did spend 3000 in a camera, but I also spent some money in lighting tools, and also spent some money in other stuff, and found some people that I can borrow a great audio set from, and another that has a fully equipped editing suite....There are more ways than purchasing...... But every case is different, I maybe able to get acces to some basic items, but maybe others can't. We live in a world where not everyone has the same choices, that is where creativeness and willingness to solve problems comes from. If you can't get a professional light fixture you maybe good handcrafting a barn door set for a work light, or if you feel that you absolutely have to block that light, you can get by using a piece of foam left over by a construction team in a nearby construction site.....That is why I love the DIY section......other times you maytbe able to shoot with more professional tools...
Paul Hudson
Vacuum Tube Member
Buying a camera without buying the support gear (lights, grip, tripod etc...) is akin to buying gasoline before you can afford the car.
Barry_Green
Moderator
This is all true. That is what people are doing. And they are very wrong to think so. After a few struggles, they'll soon figure out that they made a big mistake.
And this is one reason why I harp on people that it isn't about the gear, and nobody anywhere will give a flying crap what you shot something on. It's about knowing how to make great images. The camera is nearly a commodity at this point. I've gotten caught up in doing "shootouts" and the like in the past, but I think in the end it becomes misleading. The images are good enough from just about any of these cameras, so now it's all about your craft and what you do with it. When someone asks "this camera or that camera" my response is always "what do you intend to shoot?" because it is now the functionality, not the imagery, that makes a difference with these various cameras.
If someone is foolish enough to plunk down $3,000 to $5,000 because some camera shot some episode of some television show, well... their decision-making process is evidently quite flawed and they need to do a lot more research before making such a purchase. And people who mindlessly repeat the mantra "get a 5D, house was shot on it" are not doing those people any favors at all.
Barry_Green
Moderator
Brilliantly put.
Good point Barry. Someone best described the situation of any craft like this: Take something that us camera people dont put that much thought into like cooking, djing, or music recording. We wouldn't care if a chef had some special pot he cooked with, we don't care if the dj is djing with turntables or a ipod, we don't care if it was recorded on a million dollar microphone or one from radio shack as long as it taste good, we have a good time, it sounds good. The same applies to cameras.