Ryan Elder
Forum Replies Created
-
Oh okay, I thought it was a steadicam, which is why I chose this example. I think I would need that cause if you look at the ground, the actors are running on, there are no tracks visible, so I think I would need a steadicam or a glidecam to get that.
One of the reasons I thought I would get the glidecam in advance, is cause I hear they need a lot of practice and every DP I know, does not have experience with it, so therefore, I could get a lot more experience before bringing the DP on. If the DP wants to get the experience and wishes to operate the glidecam, then that is perfectly fine for me, but since no DP I know has one, I figure I would have to get this equipment myself in advance, and have it ready to go. Plus I could get the necessary practice out of it in advance, if an experienced operator is required.
-
Yes ideally that is the best way to do it, but in past experiences, I have had DPs cancel on me, and I had to have last minute replacements take over, and in those situations, I do not have time to order in new equipment that the new DP may not have, cause the equipment takes a few weeks to get here.
The last film shoot I did, there were four DPs since, the first became unavailable, after one shoot, then the second became unavailable after taking over, and etc. So I want to make the decision of the possibility, if one is going to come and then go, and has to be replaced, that the equipment is already in line and ready to go for the replacement.
-
Okay thanks. It’s just that shooting at night is much more expensive cause you need much brighter lights, and that’s the problem for me.
Plus I can shoot whatever I want at night and no one cares, as long as I don’t light the streets. But lighting the streets requires costly permits as well.
-
Okay thanks, how would be the best way to shoot it then for AE to do the best job?
-
There is another thing… You did masking in order to make it look like this. If I do day for night, do I have to do masking? Cause whenever I try it in AE, the program fails to track the mask while the camera moves, so I have to therefore, do it all manually, and this will be a lot of of frames and a lot of work, which makes me think maybe I should just get a Sony A7s, which is really good for night shooting, without noise.
So do I have do use masks for each frame, as the camera moves?
-
Okay thanks Kalleheikki, I really dig how you made the picture look! However, by not doing a sky replacement, when you bring it down that dark, the actor’s face cannot be seen, and if I do close ups shots at night, the faces will be really dark. So wouldn’t I need to do a sky replacement for close up shots to not be too dark?
-
Okay thanks. I don’t want to use blue though cause the shoots we are going to do, are in the city and there are plenty of streetlights around, so I think it would make more sense to make the audience believe that the street lights are on, which means orange would be better. So is it possible to go for an orange look rather than blue?
As for adding noise, the point of day for night, is to footage without noise since night footage can have a lot more noise. So I feel if I add noise, I would be negating the point of day for night, wouldn’t I?
-
Yep here, is the original ungraded footage, straight out of the camera:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ARFSh613ujQ&feature=youtu.be
This is just a test shot, but I do want the orange streetlight night look, and do not want the blue night look.
So I want to do day for night, cause it helps with lighting, compared to night, plus the cast and crew would normally rather work during the day, than at night.
So what can I do to get the day for night look, without it looking green screened like that? I have tried several different sky replacements, but it still looks fake, compared to tutorials on how to do it.
Some contents or functionalities here are not available due to your cookie preferences!This happens because the functionality/content marked as “Google Youtube” uses cookies that you choosed to keep disabled. In order to view this content or use this functionality, please enable cookies: click here to open your cookie preferences.
-
No, no modulation at all. But outside of Premiere, it plays just fine.
Premiere does however say that it’s ‘conforming’, all the video clips, but it’s taking forever compared to usual. So could this be a conforming problem?
-
Okay thank you very much for the help. I rendered out a high quality version of what I have so far to be safe, but could tinker with it some more down the road, when the project is all finished and I have fresh eyes on the whole thing.
I thought that almost all TV shows choose the 180 degree shutter speed specifically, to keep that same look all the time. Even when I went to film school and worked with other people on shoots, they filmmakers choose to shoot 180 for the entire movie to keep a consistent look. If the camera needs to adjust to the light, they will usually adjust the gain, rather than the shutter speed cause the gain can be adjusted while still looking more consistent compared to shutter speed, no?
I tried lining up the wheel with the peg more but the wheel sort of jolts in a way I don’t like when I do that. But I can keep playing around with it.