[John Kissane]

“think one of the teams of this thread is not doing things in a way because they are always supposed to be done that way,”

And yet remember that picasso firt learned to create art in the style of previous periods before inventing his own. In much the same way the students of an art school in Suzdal russia are taught. I lived in one of their dormitories for about 3 months and got to know the process pretty well–they got a readily available model and I got a class full of people to speak russian with. They are taught to create works in the a great variety of styles. By the time they graduate they have an intimate understanding of how great art has been created in the past allowing them to invent truly new and techinally masterful works rather than arrangements of junk they rescued from the scrapheap.

virgilxavier

[John Kissane]

WoW
that file is dead on what I’m looking to achieve. As I said–I’m not always a fan of this look but that shot of the barn with the suv next to it was beautiful. Are there any other tips you can give me. How do you keep the background from being washed out or is the back light not to to much brighter than the key? what effect does the slightly telephoto lens have on the image and what do you mean by slightly telephoto?

I’m serving in the Army right now, deployed to Ghazni, Afghanistan. (doe a news article search for ghazni and you should come up with some interesting stuff–If it involves us forces I was probably involved in some way) Until I come home I’m just trying to get a little experiance behind the camera in the time available. Any sort of sophisticated interior set up is out of the question–though there is plenty of very high voltage halogen lighting around. We have no shortage of sunlight and the mountain/desert location is fairly cinematic particurally a few hours before sunset. I can get hold of an unlimited amount of reflector material–large styrofoam boards used for packaging and of course lens’s can be ordered as long as they dont cost thousands of dollars. Time is also available as long as it isnt a very large amount at once. Any further info would be much apprieciated. Aside from experiance I’d also like to take home some fairly nice footage of my time here even if the really interesting bits–rockets impacting, ambush’s, bombing runs doesnt have the “hollywood look” because we have to shoot on the run.

Virgilxavier

[John Kissane]

thankyou very much for your post. I think your the first person to give me something to go on.

Just to clear something up–I never asked how to get that look with only a prosumer camera (though your mention of an hd cam is intriguing) only “how do you get the look and what is the minimum nesseary equipment. I also wrote that I found the look of older films reletively easy to imitate using only my prosumer hdcam and sunglight.

How would you describe the look I’ve been asking about technically? Do you agree that there seems to be a certain look in films that the audience has been conditioned to imitate.

Many thanks

[John Kissane]

I am sorry that I chose to title my post “proffesional look” seeing as it has caused so much confusion and hurt feelings. I mearly chose it because as I said modern audiences have tended to associate it with a proffesional, big budget production and the majority of hollywood films seem to choose this look.

to clear things up (I hope)here are some links to stills from actual films. All were made on budgets in the millions $$$ by large teams of consumate proffesionals in the 90’s–so it was likely the directors choice what the film should look like.

https://www.sequined-sensation.me.uk/Middlemarch/XMM018.jpg was taken from the 1997 production of middle march (a costume drama based on a novel by george elliot)
notice the more sedated colors–the impression of white light–this is the look that I have little trouble creating on my own modest camera. obviously there is a tremendous gap between what I can do in a few minutes with limited resources and experiance especially when make up costumes, more complex lightin in other scences, framein ect. are taken into consideration–none the less the look and picture quality (on a tv screen anyways) are comparable.

compare this however to…
https://bztv.typepad.com/moviessquared/images/pride.jpg
-a still from sense & sensibility made in 1995 notice the more vibrant colors the subtle glow ect. This is the look that I do not know how to go about creating

it is even more pronounced in this still from she’s all that
https://www.joeythefilmgeek.com/reviews2/allthat.jpg or in tom hanks Terminal https://images.usatoday.com/travel/_photos/2004/06/18/terminal-hanks-inside.jpg
even in the reletively simple lighting strategies of the modern comedy you can see a distinct diference in the look when compared to films maybe 15 years older or some contemporary big budget films and many low budget productions.

I realize I may have bruised some egos by listing a few low budget films that nonetheless achieved this look but it was meant to illustrate my point that I wasnt nessesarily looking for the acme of skill–just a trick that seems to be present in even poorly done proffesional productions. Ishatar has this look despite the comments made about it in this forum–as does the local evening news to some extent.

Personally I dont prefer this look-whatever you call it–but as I said this is what audiences expect to see.

Any specific suggestions? (yes I know the answer invoves lighting, camera’s, lens’s color correction, and experiance but to be helpfull I need just a little bit more info than that)

[John Kissane]

another movie Full Frontal by sondbergh that meets the “look” criteria
“turns out he’s shooting with a “bare-bones” XL-1s with a Century wide-angle attachment from Birns & Sawyer. The editing for the movie is being done on Final Cut Pro 3.0.”

elswere sondbergh when interviewed stressed the importance of the use of white balance zebra and histogram controls as well as the careful control of video gain and color gain as essential to achieving a quality product using available natural light.

virgilxavier
“there are stranger things on heaven and earth than dreamt of in our philosophies” Hamlet

[John Kissane]

HMI
are you refering to
Hydrargyrum medium-arc iodide-HMI bulbs rely heavily on the mercury vapour for light output, and the other metal halides mixed with the mercury to give it the spectral peaks in output wavelengths that bring it to approximately 5600K, or the color temperature of noon sunlight. Bulbs seem to be available in the 600-1200w range for between $100 and $250 with proffesional studio equipment including mounts, electronics ect. running into the tens of thousands of dollars

However–as you say shooting in sunlight uses no lights leaving the film and the lens’s? Clearly this look is possible using digital and not just the $60-120k camera’s. quoting
“CNN’s Showbiz Today observed Tuesday. Director Spike Lee told the cable magazine show that he shot his latest film, Bamboozled, with a $1, 200 Sony VX-1000 digital camcorder, which allowed him to make faster set-ups than would have been the case if he had used studio equipment. “We did not have a lot of money to shoot this film, so we really needed to move, ” he said”

So does this leave some truly high speed lens’s and a modicum of skill in thier use? What does these lenses do to light?

virgilxavier
“some men see things as they are and ask “why”. I see things that never were and say “why not” Robert F Kennedy

[John Kissane]

So you think that its a matter of getting a proffesional grade lens and maybe a little better lighting? Fair enough. Are you sure? Presumably there are similar gadgets for digital? I have no problem reading a maxirant as long as it is informative.

What exactly is this look–the color and texture of the image specifically, not as another poster has suggested the sum total effect of all aspects of production. Can it be described in technical terms? Whats this about the exposure? Can you give men any referernces specifically on creating this look?

many thanks
virgilxavier