cinematography Filming in the woods at night
- Thread starter cacb395
- Start date
There's certainly a difference, but I wouldn't necessarily say a big difference.
And here's where we get to the difference between lighting for exposure and lighting for story - or perhaps the difference between Cinematography and Videography.
Whether I'm shooting on a C500, Alexa, F5, DSLR or film - if the 'HMI moonlight through the trees' look is the look I'm going for, then I'm going to be renting that HMI (one or more) and making it happen. Now, the stock/camera you use does make a difference. If shooting on an F5 with a base ISO of 1250, then I may only need a 1.2k HMI or a 575w. If shooting on 200T stock (though who shoots anything but 500T for night on film?), then I'm going to need something a lore more powerful.
Now, cranking the ISO certainly has a look in and of itself. If that's the look I was going for, then I'd certainly do that. However, it is a very different look the the previous one I've mentioned, and I would only use it if the story called for that, not simply because the camera I was using was physically able to do it.
I do agree with you on your point that different lights give different looks, but there is no real point to using a 2.5K HMI, if you can get away with a 1.2K or even 575 by just upping your ISO a bit and not loosing on quality as these sensors are so god damn sensitive. It all depends on what you're shooting, but I don't see the point in all these overly huge lighting setups if you can go minimalist and get same results by just using todays technology to your advantage. I've actually done exactly this on location and it saved a lot of hassle, in a way that we didn't have to run extra power and saved money on equipment rental.
I wish some DOP's I know that made it big and are working on massive things would write blogs. One favourite quote from Rodney Charters, ASC, CSC, talk at Canon booth at NAB was that his actors on Dallas walked onto a scene and asked when he would start lighting and he just said that they were fully lit and good to go. Just lit with a single low output source, bug ISO cranked on the C300.
Give me a F5, F55 or C300 and I am comfortable shooting it at 6400 ISO and cut down on big HMI's for night shoots because I can get away with less!
I wish some DOP's I know that made it big and are working on massive things would write blogs. One favourite quote from Rodney Charters, ASC, CSC, talk at Canon booth at NAB was that his actors on Dallas walked onto a scene and asked when he would start lighting and he just said that they were fully lit and good to go. Just lit with a single low output source, bug ISO cranked on the C300.
Give me a F5, F55 or C300 and I am comfortable shooting it at 6400 ISO and cut down on big HMI's for night shoots because I can get away with less!
Again, it completely depends on what you're shooting. And it depends on the contrast ratios you're aiming for. A 4k HMI might get you a super contrasty scene, whereas a 575w HMI with the ISO bumped up is going to decrease your contrast significantly. All of this comes down to how you want the thing to look, all the looks are different, and all the cameras perform differently.
I also wouldn't shoot on an F5 or C500 over an Alexa simply because they're slightly more sensitive, unless it was a shot that was just going to be physically too difficult to light.
Of course, minimalist is a style in and of itself - I haven't seen Dallas, but I would almost guarantee that the style of shooting fit the mood of the scene, and the style of the show.
That's awesome - but with Cinematography, there's no 'one size fits all' method, and whilst I might shoot on an F5 at 1250 ISO on one film with no lights, I might then shoot on an Alexa at 800 ISO with two trucks worth of lighting for a similar scene on a different film. One might be gritty and one might be polished. One might be a commercial.. They're all going to have different lighting styles, even if the scenes are similar.
On top of that, I tend to prefer to do my own testing when it comes to acceptable noise, rather than take a manufacturer's word as gospel. I rate the Alexa at 800 ISO, but have no qualms moving it around to adjust the DR to what I'm shooting.
I rate RED Epics and Scarlets somewhere between 320 and 400 ISO, simply because it tends to exhibit so much less noise than at the manufacturer's quoted 'native' ISO of 800.
Similarly, I tend to rate 500T film at 320 because I like the tighter grain. If I wanted something grittier, I might rate at 500, or push it to 800.
The new Sony cameras and the Canon Cx00 series I've yet to test extensively at higher ISOs but I imagine what I'd be comfortable rating them at would be different to what the manufacturer quotes as acceptable or 'native'.
I'll also add that 575w HMIs and 1.2K HMIs are great lights, as are their higher-powered bigger brothers. You'll likely struggle to get something that looks like moonlight out of a 575w or 1.2k, especially on a lower budget. There's a certain size and distance that you need to create if you're really going for that moonlight look.
But of course, that's okay - you can motivate the lower-powered guys however you want - but not every film is going to be averse to the 'moonlight' and not every film is going to have it's night scenes take place in areas where you can motivate your smaller HMIs as street lamps or similar.
Slide over to 34:04 and watch as the evening hours on top of the hills turn into night time in the valleys. Carefully placed headlights from vehicles and the previous mentioned budget lights seem to be an option. Throw a few "torches" in (flashlights) and we can see a little better too. A DSLR like the 5D MarkIII (or II) would help out too...
Hope these links work, it's been a while..
http://www.dailymotion.com/video/xnk1g5_the-hounds-of-baskerville-part1_shortfilms
Hope these links work, it's been a while..
http://www.dailymotion.com/video/xnk1g5_the-hounds-of-baskerville-part1_shortfilms
Both Phil UK and Jax Rox make good points. I am in total agreement with Phil UK when he says:
The technology available today that that enables you to do more with less doesn’t just include camera sensors. For example, the new Arri L7 LED Fresnel is of particular benefit in location production because it has an output comparable to a 575W HMI but only draws 1.98A at 120V (220W.) When it comes to operating lights on portable gas generators, the greater efficiency of the Arri L7 is only half the story. The other half is the fact that the Arri L7 is Power Factor Corrected (PFC.) The power supply used in the Arri L7 has a Power Factor of .91 (compared to the .54 of Litepanel 1x1s), making it a near linear load. As a result, the Arri L7 uses power more efficiently, minimizes return current, and generates virtually no line noise. Where, it is as much the Harmonic Noise that non-PFC HMI, Fluorescent, and other LED power supplies kick back into the power stream, as it is their higher Apparent Power, that limits the total number of them that can be reliably operated on conventional putt-putt generators; the efficiency and near unity Power Factor of the Arri L7 means that you can operate more of them on portable gas generators. For instance, you can operate only four 575W HMIs on a 6500W portable generator, where you can operate 27 of the Arri L7 (each with an output comparable to a 575W HMI) on one of those enhanced 7500W Honda EU6500is portable generators.
But Jax Rox is right when he says:
There is however, new lighting technology that will enable you to get the moonlight look on an indie budget. The new Power Factor Corrected M40 Arrimax lens less HMI Par is another new light from Arri that is going to have a big impact I think on indie production. With 30% more output than a 4K Par, the M40 has an output close to that of a 6k Par making it a great source for daylight fill. And with a “hard” light quality similar to that of a Fresnel, the M40 can replace a 12kw Fresnel as a hard window source for day interiors or moonlight source for night exteriors. A light with this kind of capability that can be operated on one of those enhanced 7500W Honda EU6500is portable generators or standard wall outlets is certain to have a big impact for the better.
Without a doubt, the greater output, with reduced power consumption and particularly line noise, that Arri achieves with these heads offers location productions a great cost benefit: not having to rent a movie blimped tow generator, with all of its’ hidden costs, in order to obtain decent production values with Digital SLRs. Until recently, to power HMI lights over 1.2kw or Quartz lights over 2kw required a large diesel movie generator. Movie generators are not only expensive to rent, but they come with hidden costs that usually break the budget of independently funded DSLR projects (see my previous post for details.) While these new lights are more expensive to buy or rent, the ability to operate them on small portable generators and common wall outlets translates into a tremendous cost savings in large generators, cable, and man power to set it all up.
Paul Dean
The technology available today that that enables you to do more with less doesn’t just include camera sensors. For example, the new Arri L7 LED Fresnel is of particular benefit in location production because it has an output comparable to a 575W HMI but only draws 1.98A at 120V (220W.) When it comes to operating lights on portable gas generators, the greater efficiency of the Arri L7 is only half the story. The other half is the fact that the Arri L7 is Power Factor Corrected (PFC.) The power supply used in the Arri L7 has a Power Factor of .91 (compared to the .54 of Litepanel 1x1s), making it a near linear load. As a result, the Arri L7 uses power more efficiently, minimizes return current, and generates virtually no line noise. Where, it is as much the Harmonic Noise that non-PFC HMI, Fluorescent, and other LED power supplies kick back into the power stream, as it is their higher Apparent Power, that limits the total number of them that can be reliably operated on conventional putt-putt generators; the efficiency and near unity Power Factor of the Arri L7 means that you can operate more of them on portable gas generators. For instance, you can operate only four 575W HMIs on a 6500W portable generator, where you can operate 27 of the Arri L7 (each with an output comparable to a 575W HMI) on one of those enhanced 7500W Honda EU6500is portable generators.
But Jax Rox is right when he says:
There is however, new lighting technology that will enable you to get the moonlight look on an indie budget. The new Power Factor Corrected M40 Arrimax lens less HMI Par is another new light from Arri that is going to have a big impact I think on indie production. With 30% more output than a 4K Par, the M40 has an output close to that of a 6k Par making it a great source for daylight fill. And with a “hard” light quality similar to that of a Fresnel, the M40 can replace a 12kw Fresnel as a hard window source for day interiors or moonlight source for night exteriors. A light with this kind of capability that can be operated on one of those enhanced 7500W Honda EU6500is portable generators or standard wall outlets is certain to have a big impact for the better.
Without a doubt, the greater output, with reduced power consumption and particularly line noise, that Arri achieves with these heads offers location productions a great cost benefit: not having to rent a movie blimped tow generator, with all of its’ hidden costs, in order to obtain decent production values with Digital SLRs. Until recently, to power HMI lights over 1.2kw or Quartz lights over 2kw required a large diesel movie generator. Movie generators are not only expensive to rent, but they come with hidden costs that usually break the budget of independently funded DSLR projects (see my previous post for details.) While these new lights are more expensive to buy or rent, the ability to operate them on small portable generators and common wall outlets translates into a tremendous cost savings in large generators, cable, and man power to set it all up.
Paul Dean