Jump to content

tupp

Members
  • Posts

    1,137
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by tupp

  1. Well, perhaps the 150g stipulation is a bit arbitrary (and rather low, considering that fast superwides require bigger, heaver glass, and need bigger heavier housings to hold that glass). Remove the 150g stipulation, and solutions appear.
  2. Let's not go anywhere that might be inappropriate for this forum! Incidentally, allowing the use of a wide angle adapter is a trick question!
  3. Simplistic tough talk and hyperbole fill this apparent announcement page. No doubt the marketing person who wrote this is a thoroughly experienced shooter.
  4. Did you mean "tele-adapter" instead of "speedbooster?" Using speedbooster on his EF-S lenses will make their APS-C image circles smaller.
  5. tupp

    Old treasures...

    I am ignorant of C-stand weight ratings, but I doubt that there is much difference in weight capacity between a plain C-stand and a C-stand with the typical "Rocky Mountain" leg. On the other hand, one should never get even close to loading stands to their rated capacity. Putting too much of a load on a C-stand might not end well (nor will it start well if the grip arm gets bent). If one is not sure the stand can take the load, use a bigger, stronger stand.
  6. tupp

    Old treasures...

    Yes, set electricians (but rarely the gaffer) arm-out lights from C-stands. There are three common methods for arming-out with a C-stand: Mount the item on the grip arm and extend the arm "righty-tighty;" "Cantilever" the grip arm with a ratchet strap or a trucker's hitch; Boom the grip arm, using a sand bag as a counter weight. It depends on the size of the stand and the load to be armed-out. A junior/combo stand will be capable of a larger footprint than a C-stand, and they are much stronger than a C-stand. A typical baby stand might not be as good as a C-stand for this purpose. There are countless ways to arm-out a light, and there are many booms and cantilevers designed especially to do so. It's a large and involved subject. There are just as many ways to suspend diffusion in front of a light. Here is a basic primer on setting C-stands. In my opinion, booming is the best and most versatile way to arm out a fixture with standard gear, but the cantilever method is most often seen on big sets. The problem with the cantilever method is that the strap or trucker's hitch has to be reset every time you want to move/adjust the height/angle/extension of the arm. Since there is always downward stress on that arm, it is a hassle to reset a cantilever. Again, there are plenty of specially made boom rigs that fit on combo stands or C-stands. A popular such rig is the menace arm. Relatively recently, versatile cantilevers rigs have appeared, such as the Matthews Max and Max Mini. By the way, if you are not familiar with the set lighting hierarchy, you should know that there is usually only one gaffer on set. The only exceptions to having more than one gaffer occurs when there is a B-unit or C-unit, or when there is a separate rigging crew. Likewise, there is only one key grip if there is only a single unit and no rigging grip crew. Here are the typical ranks regarding lighting personnel in most big, departmentalized shows with separate electric and grip rankings: GAFFER (Electric Department); - BEST BOY ELECTRIC; - THIRD ELECTRICIANS (usually 3 or more); - KEYGRIP (Grip Department); - BEST BOY GRIP; - GRIPS (usually 3 or more). Essentially, the electricians do anything that directly involves lighting fixtures and power on set. The grips are in charge of "outboard" light controls that do not touch the lights, such as flags, scrims, silks, frames, etc., and they also provide some set rigging for fixtures and set pieces. Grips are also in charge of camera support when it involves a dolly (hence, the dolly grip). Most grips nowadays will dispute that they take orders from the Gaffer in regards to lighting, but it certainly was that way for a long time. Until a few decades ago, there was no such position as a "Best Boy Grip." The "Best Boy" was only a management position in the electric department. Grips eventually realized that they also could benefit from a middle manager.
  7. tupp

    Old treasures...

    Nikolay Bauman is certainly a well done and engaging movie. In the shot you mentioned at 28:49, it's a very nice, beautiful touch to have the light beams through haze/smoke/steam/fog to accentuate a large space. However, it's not as if that lighting gag hadn't been done a zillion times before (nor since) 1967. In regards to the off-shot/off-scene dialog pickups, they are certainly effective and add interest. Of course, those audio editing techniques were in use well before 1967. As for Soviet movies from 1967, there was a small project that year that had some interesting cinematography/editing. Here is one scene from that film that I think does a decent job of utilizing "the language of the camera," although there is nothing particularly special about the lighting. There is a nice little crane shot at the 03:23 mark.
  8. The reason diffusion is used on Fresnels is probably a combination of "convenience," bad planning and the fact that most people don't know any better. Of course, on many sets its a race against time. Once a light is set up, one generally wants it to live there until it is wrapped. So, a common practice is to use overpowered Fresnels (which have beam controllability), and then scrim/dim them down to the desired level or, if necessary, use the extra output to bang through diffusion/softbox. Often there is a piece of 250 diffusion gel rolled up in the Fresnel's scrim box. This technique often avoids the time sink needed to replace the Fresnel with another fixture, and also having to bring the Fresnel back to the staging area and wrap/head-wrap it. On the other hand, some folks start out with the intention of using diffusion on Fresnels, even though they may have open-faced lights and softboxes already on stands in the staging area. I am not certain that this thread now has a singular topic, nor am I sure on how an LED panel in a softbox cannot "compete" with any other source with any other source in the same sized softbox. On the other hand, compared to a smaller light source, the panel light should give a smoother pattern on the front diffuser of a softbox. At any rate, one could use that panel light in question directly on a middle-aged woman without any complaints from the subject. I was responding to your statement regarding your "1x1" panels not being large enough for a "soft key." Your "1-by" is plenty soft for a lot of subjects. In regards to your original questions, I addressed them here. Well, now you are bringing up cost, and that is an entirely different consideration. I have no idea what the prices are for the zillions of LED fixtures out there. In regards to getting the most output from a "COB" LED source banged through diffusion, it is more efficient to use a reflector on the head and move it close to the diffuser, rather than using a Fresnel (or Fresnel attachment).
  9. Of course. The larger the source, the larger the specular highlight. That's why it is best to light flat art and walls with a smaller source -- there's less chance of glare problems because the highlight is smaller. A big variable in regards to "harshness" and/or contrast of specular highlights is the distance of the light source from the subject. The closer the source is to the subject, the greater the subject's diffuse value relative to the highlight value -- so as you move the source closer, the contrast ("harshness") decreases between the highligts and the subject's diffuse brightness. Thank you for the kind word!
  10. Some open-faced focusable sources can produce a double cast shadow in the outer parts of the beam, when focused to "spot." So, cutting into the beam with barndoors or a flag can sometimes not give a clean edge as with a Fresnel. I tend to use open faced fixtures, as that double cast shadow usually is not apparent, and because they are more compact and lightweight than Fresnels. The Lowel Omni light. A great, lightweight, compact, powerful and exceedingly versatile fixture. It's focusing range is greater than many Fresnels. Always use a protective screen on the front of the fixture. Use FTK bulbs with a filament support, and avoid off-brand bulbs. The focusing mechanism is very fast and can break the bulb's filament if one is not careful.
  11. Not sure what is meant by "doesn't really do a good job in 'full flood,'" A Fresnel attachment on an LED fixture might be disappointing to one having experience with tungsten and HMI Fresnels. Regardless, the range of beam angles from a focusable fixture/attachment depends on a few variables. With Fresnel fixtures, the source is always closest to the lens in the full flood setting. So, if the Fresnel attachment doesn't allow the LED to get close to lens, then the beam angle will not reach its widest potential. Of course, there are safety reasons why the light source should not get too close to the lens. On the other hand, if one can just remove the lens/attachment, then it's best to just use the fixture without the lens, one wants to go really wide and use all of the output from the source. By the way, it is dangerous to run a tungsten or HMI Fresnel without its lens. I don't advocate using Fresnels to illuminate diffusion -- it doesn't make a lot of sense to do so. However, I see it on set often. Fresnels and other focusable fixtures are more than "fun to play around with." If one knows how to use them, they are a valuable tool that "play" often on set.
  12. You call a diffuser a "scrim" -- do you have a background in still photography? Generally, a Fresnel will be significantly less efficient than an open-face fixture. A lot of the light is lost when it strikes the inside of the housing of the Fresnel fixture/attachment. An open-faced focusable source would be better and more efficient in this situation.
  13. Fresnels don't focus all of the output in one place -- such fixtures can only focus the light that hits the lens. The light that hits the inside of the housing is wasted. In this sense, many open-faced fixtures are more efficient than Fresnel fixtures as almost all of the light from an open-faced fixture comes out the front of the unit. No. The Fresnel will be dimmer than using the exposed LED with a reflector. By the way, softboxes are generally a lot more efficient and controllable than naked diffusers. Naked diffusers also generate a lot of spill light. Folks, Fresnel lights on set generally have a continuous "focus" range of beam angles from "spot" to "flood." The range of those beam angles varies with each fixture. I can't recall all the times I've seen someone illuminate a diffuser with a Fresnel light, but almost always they focused the light to "full flood" to completely illuminate the diffuser. Fresnels are used all the time on film sets. I use Fresnels and open-faced focusable fixtures directly on people and sets. Keep in mind that the "spotlight" effect from a naked Fresnel will usually give a soft edge to the spot. If one wants a harder edge on a spot, use a snoot and focus the light to "full flood" (or use a good ellipsoidal/followspot or projection fixture that has minimal fringing). A lot depends on what you are trying to do. I could use that panel fixture naked in a lot of shoots. Softness in lighting is a matter of degree between a point source and completely surrounding your subject with a smooth light source. There is not definitive "soft light" and "hard light." By the way, you can use a panel light in a soft box. A lot depends on the optics in front of the LED, but, again, open-faced fixtures are almost always more efficient than fixtures using Fresnel/plano-convex lenses.
  14. The stills look great!
  15. Keep in mind that although signal-to-noise ratio and dynamic range are similar properties, SNR will always be smaller than DR. Both he upper limits and noise thresholds differ in the way that they are obtained, especially in regards to capturing photons with image sensors. This article breaks down the differences. A downscale with binning usually reduces noise, which increases the effective DR/'SNR Perhaps the in-camera downscale is not binning properly, or perhaps it might be too difficult to do in the camera because of the sensor's complex filter array.
  16. I have a fair bit of experience creating patterns and slashes on backgrounds, and unless the desired pattern is complex, you might be better off just cutting what you need out of foamcor and just casting a shadow. Slashes are easy to make with zero spill using bardoors and/or blackwrap. With foamcor patterns the spill is not that big of a problem, if you are careful with your doors/snoot and if you leave a big border around the pattern. If you really need to go with a projection fixture, consider a used Source 4 ellipsoidal. They have a nice punch and go for as low as US$175 on Ebay (sometimes with the pattern holder included). In addition, they take standard theatrical patterns -- there are zillions of them. If you anticipate working mostly in close quarters, get the 36-degree lens (or the 50-degree lens).
  17. Your video is easily better than 95% of the work that is out there -- great eye and a nicely coordinated edit. The narrator did a great job, as well. Did someone give her line readings? I noticed that the interior shot had slight noise, but I was pixel peeping. I would guess that you had to stop down due to the high scene contrast. It certainly was not enough noise to warrant using an unwieldy cinema camera, although it might have been interesting to try a minor adjustment to the E-M10's "Highlights & Shadows" setting. Your video is a superb and inspiring piece that brings life to a mundane subject.
  18. The red line didn't help, but a black Sharpie could quickly fix that.
  19. Film grain is "organized" to actually form/create the image, while noise is random (except for FPN) and obscures the image. Noise doesn't "destroy" resolution -- it just obscures pixels. On the other hand, with too much noise the image forming pixels are not visible, so there's no discernible image and, thus, no resolution. Grain actually forms the image on film. Noise obscures the image. Yep. That notion is subjective, but not uncommon. Actual electronic noise is random, whether digital or analog. It could be argued that FPN and extraneous signal interference are not "noise." This is another subjective but common notion. Again, with the medium of film, grain is organized to actually form the image -- noise is random and noise obscures the image. To me, it doesn't make much sense to remove random noise and then add an overlay of random grain -- grain that does absolutely nothing to form the image.
  20. Yes. Fringing can sometimes be an issue with some ellipsoidal fixtures. Instruments that use lenses made for slide/film projectors usually exhibit minimal fringing. Use an open-face tungsten or HMI source with a snoot. Add a tube of blackwrap if the snoot is too short. That should eliminate most of your spill, and the open-face filament/arc will give you sharp shadows if the fixture is set to full flood. Both open-face and Fresnel fixtures always give their sharpest shadows on full flood.
  21. I know what it is like to suffer attacks and abuse for merely telling the truth and stating fact. All I can say is:
  22. Okay. If you can keep your set-up and shoot time down to an hour total and if you are only using two or three fixtures, then it is probably better to use batteries. Bring spares. LED fixtures might need to be fairly close to the subject when shooting in the daytime.
  23. You have plenty of work light? Are you shooting nighttime exteriors 1000km form the nearest town? What is "IV/PTC?"
×
×
  • Create New...