How did they shoot this?

[Robin Probyn]

Would Rembrandt be famous if he painted with the window right behind him.. not rocket science.. just looks nicer..

[Bob Cole]

I believe you’re totally missing the intent of the DP here, Robin. It’s a “clean look” which emphasizes the product and what it can do for the viewer – it is not about making nice portraits of the individuals.

[Robin Probyn]

Hi Bob

Yes well could be.. but the OP talks about great lighting,no shadows and great skin tones.. there is no footage of any product..
Even so.. I would still voice my opinion,and ofcourse its only mine.. that I thought the lighting was not great and that shadows are part of lighting,and the skin tone didnt look good.. not a dig at the DP.. Iam sure he/she can do great work.. and I would think he/she was forced into lighting in this style.. either by the stills look that have already been shot.. or some other creative director who wanted that look.. its happened to me too.. 🙁

[Bob Cole]

I think you made a great observation, but drew the wrong conclusion. Just look at the new tv spots for “Siri.” They cut off the tops of peoples’ heads in almost every shot. iow – it’s all about the PRODUCT. Apple doesn’t want to make the people in its advetising fabulous as individuals — that would take away from its customers’ tendency to imagine themselves inside the advertising, using the PRODUCT.

[Robin Probyn]

Dont think its that deep TBH.. just the cycle of whats the latest “in ” look.. having the key light on the wrong side of an interview.. is different.. but it plain simply does look good.. or just lighting totally flat.. sure will work as an effect shot with a particular back ground in a drama etc.. but for these things.. why light it badly ?? no ones going to be put off a product just to have a decent key/fill ratio.. .. thats nuts..

[Bill Evelyn]

John,

You said the backings were lit to a flat 80 ire. Why 80?

I did a low-budget shoot last year which was a white seamless in front of a guy yakin,’ and I let the background clip. Made me squirm a bit when the director wanted the iris goosed, but when it was all done it looked nice. All the lighting was uniform on the background, and key/fill adjusted for talent. I cut it so I know there was no “fixin’ in post.”

With 80 ire for background, is the subject then at 70?

Thanks!

Bill

[John Sharaf]

80ire is plenty white, 100 will often cause interference with the sound in transmission, and yes face at 60-70 is normal. This is more or less the convention for white cyc photography for broadcast. I’ve done it many times and it looks great.

JS

‘

[Travis Merriman]

Excuse my ignorance, but what is ire referring to?

thanks,

Travis.

[John Sharaf]

The Institute of Radio Engineers (IRE) was a professional organization which existed from 1912 until January 1, 1963, when it merged with the American Institute of Electrical Engineers (AIEE) to form the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE)

They created a standard to scale the video level from 0ire (super=black) to 100ire and above which is white. White clip is usually at 108ire.

In digital the ire scale has been replaced by percentages (%) where 0 again is black and 100 is white.

When there is a large part of the picture which is full white (100ire) is would often interfere with the audio in analog transmission, causing a buzz, that’s why a white cyc background as is being discussed in this thread had its exposure set at 80ire.

Hope that clears it up for you.

JS

[Travis Merriman]

Crystal clear. Thank you for the explanation.

-Travis