They are shooting stills using strobes. I don't see how this applies to film making. Worse none of the light they added with the strobes is motivated by anything seen in the frame, no lanterns , no nothing.
It still can be useful for the purpose of light placement. It would have been helpful if they had a prop lantern or fire of some sort to motivate, but in this case we can assume that most of the light motivation is moonlight and maybe a lantern off frame.
I was surprised to see a lesson on strobes here, but if you don't know how to apply that to video maybe you're in the wrong business. He gave some very good tips, plus it's a good video for product promotion. Most of us do product promotion videos, so this is a lesson for that too. We use these same techniques when shooting film, but we use constant light instead of strobes.
Daniel Stilling, if it was moonlight, why not the "traditional" blueish or silvery moonlight. The captain or officer was brightly lit frontal or 3/4, where is that light supposed to be coming from. The smoke was more of a backdrop than anything, black powder smoke from a cannon or musket is anything but white. The smoke his hid the light in the window of the building behind the ship as its anchored in dock. Unbelievable to have passed for fog. Hadley an area where there would be an exchange of cannon fire. Just poorly staged.
Joe Becker, is a person learning supposed to equate the size of the strobes with a particular type and size of continuous lighting instrument? Was that even mentioned? Tungsten? Hmi's??? Photographer on that shoot didn't even have the common sense to cover or other wise extinguish the fluorescent tubes at the ships rail. A fantasy photo shoot.
JD Hartman, I think you are far too critical. He quite clearly said that he would remove the fluorescents later. You can decide which color you want your moonlight. Hollywood is always doing things like using the wrong color smoke. And if you want it to look like fog, then you let it disperse. He was using it as smoke in this instance and it worked just fine for his purposes. What lights you use is up to you. If you have a grip truck full of lights, go to town with whatever you want. If you don’t, use what you’ve got. This wasn’t an in depth lighting study, just a person sharing what he did on one project. And for that, all you do is bash him and everyone who commented
I agree with Joe, JD your complaints do seem a little harsh. You clearly have a lot of knowledge about lighting and staging, however, the majority of us are not technicians in this sense and can see that Theresa has done a good job here. One thing she has done is helped others see another way to explore doing this for themselves. She can be praised for that. Plus the excellent staging.
I like the comment about using a China ball, but that's just another way to light the same set. Theresa gave clear reasons why she did what she did. That doesn't mean it's the only way, but just the way she did this that night, and why she made those choices.
I can look at this and see what I would do differently, and quite frankly, not much. As was mentioned, obviously we'd need constant light, not strobes. I love the new Westcott flex mats. Plus, we'd use diffusion and flags to control the light. But I'm not getting into detail until we're on the set. I don't know exactly what I'd do until I'm in the situation.
BTW, check out all the fake smoke in these Hollywood battles
Back light was wrong on finished photo. I'd move the back light and strobes to as far away as possible. As it is, it looks like there is an explosion going off behind the actor.
There are many ways to light a night scene, and I agree, that light is too bright to look natural. I would have had it up high and to the left to mimic moonlight. I like a little mystery, so I wouldn't show all the detail, just some detail. It's a night shot, it's supposed to be dark. I don't mind a little shadow on the face either. We all have our own personal style and taste. I would have made the scene a little more blue too.
That or place some fake lanterns higher up around the mast (isn't that what's in the background?) and then change the light to yellow, move it up, and mimic the cast of lantern light on the background.
1 person likes this
They are shooting stills using strobes. I don't see how this applies to film making. Worse none of the light they added with the strobes is motivated by anything seen in the frame, no lanterns , no nothing.
It still can be useful for the purpose of light placement. It would have been helpful if they had a prop lantern or fire of some sort to motivate, but in this case we can assume that most of the light motivation is moonlight and maybe a lantern off frame.
I was surprised to see a lesson on strobes here, but if you don't know how to apply that to video maybe you're in the wrong business. He gave some very good tips, plus it's a good video for product promotion. Most of us do product promotion videos, so this is a lesson for that too. We use these same techniques when shooting film, but we use constant light instead of strobes.
This is really interesting. I had kind of given up on my photography, but this brings it all back. Thanks for sharing. Kx
Daniel Stilling, if it was moonlight, why not the "traditional" blueish or silvery moonlight. The captain or officer was brightly lit frontal or 3/4, where is that light supposed to be coming from. The smoke was more of a backdrop than anything, black powder smoke from a cannon or musket is anything but white. The smoke his hid the light in the window of the building behind the ship as its anchored in dock. Unbelievable to have passed for fog. Hadley an area where there would be an exchange of cannon fire. Just poorly staged.
Joe Becker, is a person learning supposed to equate the size of the strobes with a particular type and size of continuous lighting instrument? Was that even mentioned? Tungsten? Hmi's??? Photographer on that shoot didn't even have the common sense to cover or other wise extinguish the fluorescent tubes at the ships rail. A fantasy photo shoot.
1 person likes this
Interesting tutorial - but limited relevance to filmmaking. Why not just hang a China Moon and be done with it?
Why is the captain looking away from where where all the action is? ...and it's night and he has a small telescope in his hand.
1 person likes this
JD Hartman, I think you are far too critical. He quite clearly said that he would remove the fluorescents later. You can decide which color you want your moonlight. Hollywood is always doing things like using the wrong color smoke. And if you want it to look like fog, then you let it disperse. He was using it as smoke in this instance and it worked just fine for his purposes. What lights you use is up to you. If you have a grip truck full of lights, go to town with whatever you want. If you don’t, use what you’ve got. This wasn’t an in depth lighting study, just a person sharing what he did on one project. And for that, all you do is bash him and everyone who commented
1 person likes this
Instead of complaining, please share your lighting techniques with a great video on a pirate ship or something
1 person likes this
I agree with Joe, JD your complaints do seem a little harsh. You clearly have a lot of knowledge about lighting and staging, however, the majority of us are not technicians in this sense and can see that Theresa has done a good job here. One thing she has done is helped others see another way to explore doing this for themselves. She can be praised for that. Plus the excellent staging.
I like the comment about using a China ball, but that's just another way to light the same set. Theresa gave clear reasons why she did what she did. That doesn't mean it's the only way, but just the way she did this that night, and why she made those choices.
I can look at this and see what I would do differently, and quite frankly, not much. As was mentioned, obviously we'd need constant light, not strobes. I love the new Westcott flex mats. Plus, we'd use diffusion and flags to control the light. But I'm not getting into detail until we're on the set. I don't know exactly what I'd do until I'm in the situation.
BTW, check out all the fake smoke in these Hollywood battles
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p7kJi9IaS-0
2 people like this
Back light was wrong on finished photo. I'd move the back light and strobes to as far away as possible. As it is, it looks like there is an explosion going off behind the actor.
There are many ways to light a night scene, and I agree, that light is too bright to look natural. I would have had it up high and to the left to mimic moonlight. I like a little mystery, so I wouldn't show all the detail, just some detail. It's a night shot, it's supposed to be dark. I don't mind a little shadow on the face either. We all have our own personal style and taste. I would have made the scene a little more blue too.
The DP and Director make those decisions.
That or place some fake lanterns higher up around the mast (isn't that what's in the background?) and then change the light to yellow, move it up, and mimic the cast of lantern light on the background.
That gives us a light source for the viewer. Good idea