PDA

View Full Version : Dragon color: Art Adams looks at tungsten vs. daylight



Brett Harrison
10-29-2014, 02:32 AM
Quite a thorough treatment. I'd be interested to see what everyone has to say.

http://www.dvinfo.net/article/ultra-hd/dragon-color-does-tungsten-or-daylight-make-a-difference.html

David Battistella
10-29-2014, 02:50 AM
Pretty much what I noticed in my tests as well.

If you put this up gainst and MX sensor you'd see more variations on how improved the dragon colour science is with the Dragon sensor.

For anyone claiming to do colour critical work and for those whom skin tones are imperative, then Dragon is really the way forward.

Nice write up, but by the end we see that even matching charts perfectly domes not necessarily mean you will be guaranteeing an excellent skin tone. I still have a 1/8 blue for my tabletop stuff when I am using tungsten sources, but it's less needed now.

Battistella

Phil Holland
10-29-2014, 02:59 AM
Dragon is clearly a huge improvement and, at least with the “highlight and skin tone” OLPF package tested here, renders color in a generally accurate manner, if not with finely detailed subtlety.

More or less identical to my findings several months ago. I truly feel Dragon performs extremely well under a variety of lighting conditions. Even the tricky stuff that we don't normally utilize.

For me the color variation between daylight and tungsten was nominal at best.

With Mysterium-X I used the CTB when shooting tungsten. With Dragon I don't use a bloody thing.

There's a few reasons I can see as to why we are getting better performance from Dragon. MX is an approximate 5500K sensor, while in my experience Dragon falls in the 4500K arena. Additionally the newer color science and much fuller dynamic range seems to lend a hand here.

For instance this shot:

http://www.artbyphil.com/temp/reduser/phfx_redEpicDragon_IOLPF_LLO_flashlightFlare05.jpg
(http://www.artbyphil.com/temp/reduser/phfx_redEpicDragon_IOLPF_LLO_flashlightFlare05.jpg )

This is a lighting condition some cameras have a hard time resolving texture in. Particularly DSLRs as sometimes we would just see a flattened out yellow. There's clearly a lot of texture on my skin here. And this is even with the Low Light Optimized OLPF in this case.

Hans von Sonntag
10-29-2014, 03:32 AM
A good article. What it says is that Dragon has a quite good colour accuracy in terms of separation. However, it does not say anything about the perceived colour accuracy which is often a personal thing.

I know that engineers must strive for something objective, something scientific. But we, the filmmakers, users, audience see things differently. We love pictures that look good, we don't care for accuracy for its own sake. In this article a table top shot of a pizza is mentioned. For this particular shot, of course, it is vital that the cameras has a good colour accuracy in the red, orange and yellow realm. But this does not necessarily mean that flesh tones will look nice and pleasing. In my opinion the Dragon sensor allows for very nice and subtle skin tones. But as usual the lighting, the quality of the light is the key to good colour and picture.

----

In my film-days I shot many shots with tungsten balanced stock in a daylight environment. White balanced in the lab or telecine the pictures got a muted skin-tone, nice subtle and surely in no way accurate. Now I'm using a collection of LUTs in my projects. But what I'm going to do next is to experiment with interesting fiter that stress the sensor in one or another way, hopefully resulting in a interesting basis for further grading.

But you can only do things on purpose wrong if you know how to do things right. In this context I'm happy that my Dragon sensor delivers "right" colours.

Hans

David Battistella
10-29-2014, 03:42 AM
But you can only do things on purpose wrong if you know how to do things right. In this context I'm happy that my Dragon sensor delivers "right" colours.

Hans

This needs to be read and re-read. The baseline needs to be set accurately. Then Monet picks up the brush.

Battistella

Matthew J
10-29-2014, 04:52 AM
This has also been my experience since getting my dragon Dragon in January. I've also noticed that mixed light, including florescence's with a green spike, is handled much better by this sensor. I don't know how they did it, but it tends to see light more how my eye actually sees light...and far deeper into darkness with the LL OLPF!

Adam Beck
10-29-2014, 11:44 PM
Shooting Tungsten is no longer a problem for me. I've always had issues with low light and tungsten. CTB was an option and I even thought about getting ride of all my fresnels and open faces to pick up HMI's and such as daylight sources unless I had to mix the light. Now I feel like I can just light how I want to and not have to worry about the tungsten sources.

ali walker
10-30-2014, 01:17 PM
What do you guys think of the Dragon at night shots? I have some night shots to do for a commercial and I was going to switch to a more sensitive camera. I realise Red bang on about the low light capabilities being improved, but what is your real world honest thoughts?

Hans von Sonntag
10-30-2014, 01:36 PM
Dragon with the OLPF V2 is similar to 500 ASA filmstock. There are many, many films that show night scenes and were shot with 500 ASA stocks.

Hans

Uli Plank
11-03-2014, 06:50 AM
If you get the LL OLPF you can expect about 1.5 stops more in the shadow.

Ketch Rossi
11-03-2014, 07:46 AM
Tungsten is indeed not an issue on Dragon...

However, I have stopped using Tungsten lighting all together for years now, and ONLY use Daylight balanced lighting, and no matter how you sliced Digital sensors and especially CMOS sensors do prefer daylight to Tungsten, yet, Dragon shows that it can handle both NO PROBLEM... But I still just prefer 5600k... Day or night... Exterior or interior.... :)

David Mullen ASC
11-03-2014, 08:07 AM
But then how do you deal with adding light to a room lit with tungsten practicals? First replace every bulb in table lamps and chandeliers with daylight compact flos and LED's?

Ketch Rossi
11-03-2014, 08:29 AM
But then how do you deal with adding light to a room lit with tungsten practicals? First replace every bulb in table lamps and chandeliers with daylight compact flos and LED's?

While that would be the way to do it if and when both budget and time allows it, in my case, after 30 years of photography and now Motion, I have experimented enough to have come to the final conclusion that I actually like it better to NOT change nor "Gel" top match any of the existing lights found on any given location, interior or exterior, I simply like the textures differences, the color spectrum created by different lights present, and while I will always have the 5600k Daylight prevail, I won't bother with any other lights around.

While respecting greatly the work done, and Hollywood's way of lighting, and understand perfectly the why, I choose to not follow such practice, no matter how wrong it might seem to others, this is how my eyes see, and how my hearth and mind read the images acquired in the way I do it, and will continue to do so.

When my first Film, will be released next year, I will be very open and truly looking forward to any opinions based on having seen the end results of my work, my lighting techniques and choices made... :)

sam karr
11-03-2014, 09:03 AM
Interesting concept. Like porns.

Daniel Stilling
11-03-2014, 09:04 AM
Color temperature, IMHO, should be part of the artistry of creating a frame, rather than being locked to one temperature only. Sometimes the prettiest shots come out with mixed lights, rated for a different color than they emit, and sometimes not. Specially when it comes to night shooting, with so many temperatures and variation in color spectrum coming from a possible many different sources (Sodium vapor, tungsten, moon).
The Dragon, being so much better at tungsten, really frees you up to compose the shot with the color you like, and using tungsten when needed/wanted is a huge part in that artistic/technical sensitivity. I think that limiting yourself to one color temp. just imposes you limits that you don't need to have. Also in all this, it matters how and where your sources are coming from, but that's a whole additional discussion...

Ketch Rossi
11-03-2014, 09:12 AM
Color temperature, IMHO, should be part of the artistry of creating a frame, rather than being locked to one temperature only. Sometimes the prettiest shots come out with mixed lights, rated for a different color than they emit, and sometimes not. Specially when it comes to night shooting, with so many temperatures and variation in color spectrum coming from a possible many different sources (Sodium vapor, tungsten, moon).
The Dragon, being so much better at tungsten, really frees you up to compose the shot with the color you like, and using tungsten when needed/wanted is a huge part in that artistic/technical sensitivity. I think that limiting yourself to one color temp. just imposes you limits that you don't need to have. Also in all this, it matters how and where your sources are coming from, but that's a whole additional discussion...

Exactly Daniel,

But you see, I don't limit myself to one color temperature, exactly the opposite in fact, as I think exactly as you just expressed yourself, were the beauty of colors in real life give life, with their variety and I never see with my naked eye, a ONE spectrum, I see many, and for this I changed my shooting techniques and lighting been at the very heart of Image capture, is who I control it, or NOT control it, but while using only one Temperature of lights, I do let the others leave and mix and play with it... :)

David Mullen ASC
11-03-2014, 09:16 AM
The thing Ketch is that if you are aiming for a naturalistic look where your added lighting doesn't look added but merely a continuation or extension of what an existing practical lamp is doing, then it should match in color. You can't put a blue lamp next to an orange practical and fool people into thinking that the scene is just lit by the orange practical.

Sure real life can have competing color temperatures but not in every situation -- do you always add tungsten lamps to daylight scenes in order to create a mixed color temperature that doesn't naturally exist in the room? So why add daylight lamps to a tungsten interior if they aren't motivated by any daylight sources?

Ketch Rossi
11-03-2014, 09:32 AM
You of course make complete sense in your analogy David,

And in theory it should be exactly done that way... However, I don't, as it is not just because of the naturalistic sense I like to give the imagery that I do this, because we know it is far form natural what we do in storytelling, but it is also because when creating my stories to tell, creating an illusive 3dimentional world in a 2dimentional medium, that I simply like better and much prefer the light coming from Daylight balanced fixtures then that of Tungstens, and IMO even so Dragon can handle Tungsten greatly, I still see playing nicer on Daylight.

But this goes behind that too, I guess it is not as easy to explain in words as I would wish it was, I have tried this thousands times, and always get a filling inside, ascertain way the images look when lit up with Tungsten vs Daylight...

I would light in Daylight and then go to 3200k in Post, but still light in 5600k, I like it better this way, I don't know really why, I just do, there is something about the Skin tones, about the textures of things, Clothes, Plants, Wood, and even Metal and of course water, which reveals to me better this way.

But to come back to your just question, no, I would not add Tungstens just to mix the lights, I don't like Tungsten, but won't bother to remove it if there,e just carefully position my Daylight sources to overpower it were needed, on the main talent, and in closer to camera shots, or further to camera depending on importance of the framed Talent or Object, but if I was to find myself in a situation were Tungsten would prevail the scene, I would still not allow it to prevail the totality of it, were it would additionally lit by Daylight in representation of the filling and final look at capture I wish to give that particular shot.

Like the use of Polarizers, I have been suing them in Fashion Photography form the start, even so every one was adjacent me, telling me that you don't use Polarizer on skin, unless you are shooting a model on water or reflective surfaces or other situations, which none of them would of course be present on a Studio Set Up set, but I like it that way.

If I was to describe in detail how I see, I would go on for pages, it would not be as simple as saying I like Sugar because it is sweet... :)

Daniel Stilling
11-03-2014, 10:11 AM
Sure real life can have competing color temperatures but not in every situation -- do you always add tungsten lamps to daylight scenes in order to create a mixed color temperature that doesn't naturally exist in the room? So why add daylight lamps to a tungsten interior if they aren't motivated by any daylight sources?

+1000!

I love mixing HMI with tungsten, but not always. Whatever helps painting the picture and tells the story. But using all colors in your pallete is very important, and if a scene has primarily tungsten lights in it (for whatever reason that might be), you should be able to "think tungsten" and get the best out of that situation. Don't limit yourself out of a camera technical issue, specially when that issue doesn't exist anymore. Open your mind, embrace the spectrum, also when it comes to adding lights, not just whatever is in a particular location.

Ketch Rossi
11-03-2014, 10:28 AM
+1000!

I love mixing HMI with tungsten, but not always. Whatever helps painting the picture and tells the story. But using all colors in your pallete is very important, and if a scene has primarily tungsten lights in it (for whatever reason that might be), you should be able to "think tungsten" and get the best out of that situation. Don't limit yourself out of a camera technical issue, specially when that issue doesn't exist anymore. Open your mind, embrace the spectrum, also when it comes to adding lights, not just whatever is in a particular location.

Daniel,

I am not limiting myself out of a camera technical issue, because therein't one, not with Dragon...

I do it how I do it, because it is how I like it, therein't a formula of how much of this sort that to use, there is just a filling I get when I am on that particular location, set place, when I look at it with the naked eye, then thru the camera, I compose, I set desired Iris, and light accordingly, adding Daylight were needed, as it is my only source of light I have, and use, additionally to nay other light I might find on location.

To my eyes, Daylight must prevail, but not in amount of lighting, there can be 100k of output coming form Tungsten source, yet I would most certainly light my most important subject closer to camera or that which is in focus even if further from camera with Daylight balanced 5600k sources.

It is not how needs to be done, it is how I like it, and how I like to express my artistic vision with Imagery, just that simple, no diagrams, no mathematical calculations, no Light meter... Just my eyes and the Iris which once set decides what amount of light is needed in order for me to properly expose my scene, but any and all added lights will be always daylight.

Daniel Stilling
11-03-2014, 10:48 AM
but any and all added lights will be always daylight.

How is this not limiting?

I'll ask you a question:
you find yourself in a situation where you are in this beautiful hall, all lit by tungsten practicals, and you are filming this beautiful model, flowy white drees, long curly blond hair and the director says: she looks stunning as is, I would just like some hair light on her, to increase her angel like appearance. Would you slap some daylight balanced light on her and shoot it at 5600 in camera?

David Mullen ASC
11-03-2014, 10:49 AM
What if you are doing a period movie, a night interior that should only be lit by firelight and candles? A daylight lamp would not blend with those sorts of colors at all.

Ketch Rossi
11-03-2014, 11:12 AM
How is this not limiting?

I'll ask you a question:
you find yourself in a situation where you are in this beautiful hall, all lit by tungsten practicals, and you are filming this beautiful model, flowy white drees, long curly blond hair and the director says: she looks stunning as is, I would just like some hair light on her, to increase her angel like appearance. Would you slap some daylight balanced light on her and shoot it at 5600 in camera?

Not limited by the technical aspect of the camera was my answer.

As far as if I congress myself limited, because I choose to only use Daylight balanced light sources, no I don't see it as limiting either, I see it as an Artistic choice of representing the light in your story for the good of the final image acquired.

Insnare to your question, asides the fact that it would never happen as I don't work for others, I do work for others which is very different, meaning that I will not DP a project I am not Directing.

Any ways, I would need to be there and see it in person and in camera with chosen Iris aperture, lenses on camera, and overall fill of the area and the subject, her position in respect to the Hall and the way the light is falling over her and her dress, what She is doing and how She is doing it, and what the light is doing to her whistle She is doing it, then I would go about adding light there were needed, as it is almost impossible and or extremely rare to walk in to a scenario were after you have chosen the Aperture, you find my miracle that the existing lighting matches perfectly what you wanted...

I would use daylight on her just the same and bring her to life in the way it would seem right to me.

And yes my cameras are always set at 5600k, always at capture, day or night inside or outside, any changes happen in Post, should I see them needed as regard to the temperature.




What if you are doing a period movie, a night interior that should only be lit by firelight and candles? A daylight lamp would not blend with those sorts of colors at all.

It would not bland as easily, but it would still bland by using dirty rugs as softening instead of pure white cloth as usually fond on Soft Boxes, and use of Filters will also aid such a situation aside form Post coloring.

But at the end I am not looking to really bland anything, I am only looking at creating an image that is pleasing to me, that once lit pleases my eyes, if I was to do a period piece, I would make creative choices by first experimenting with lights, filters, cloths etc. in order to achieve the most pleasing and also credible look, again, only to my vision, as at the end, I won't really wish to do a Credible piece per say as to exactly make reference to a specific color palette, or look created by time or some one else, I am only interested in creating what I see... And most immortally how I see it.

But nonetheless I understand and see the points broad up by you and Daniel but also by many others in the years, and I have surely been enjoying countless films thru the years, but not for this I see myself bound by such rules or practices dictated by the experience of others, I like to experiment, and so I have done and continue to do, and hope that what I will create will also please others.

Ulf Krentz
11-03-2014, 11:14 AM
And donīt forget, besides all cons tungsten is a beautiful full spectrum light source. I understand you donīt dial in another color temp in camera (like I donīt, always shoot at 5000K) but I filter accordingly… Iīm with Daniel and David, donīt limit yourself use the full palette.

Cheers,

Ulf

sam karr
11-03-2014, 11:18 AM
I think that what Ketch is trying to explain is that he doesn't try to be realistic. He just wants a personal imagery, a style that he likes. Like in his short https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h8ohVVY0TmY. Lights are not linked to any practical. They are just lighting the foreground almost horizontally. It's totally unrealistic but i guess this look pleases him. That's important. But I think it's also important to please the audience. And they can be easily lost and driven out of the story if there is not a logical reason behind a very specific look. It's okay for still images. For movies it's a different story. In Kubrick's party, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s_b-zpSnoHs ,there is this super powerfull light suddenly on Tom cruise. The beauty of it is that we were into a mysterious yellowish look before that sequence. Even if it looks weird suddenly to have this huge light in the room, it's totally realistic, we can feel where it's from, it's plausible. Non plausible lights will bring people out of your movie in a second.

David Mullen ASC
11-03-2014, 11:20 AM
I understand if realism or naturalism isn't a guiding principle, there's nothing wrong with theatricality. You might take a look at "Emma", the Jane Austen movie with Gwyneth Paltrow, shot by Ian Wilson -- he used daylight balanced film stock for night interiors lit by candlelight and a mix of tungsten (for orange) and daylight (for white). It's an interesting look, not strictly realistic in the way of "Barry Lyndon", with the candles going very orange-red but the faces close to neutral.

But there's a difference between that and simply refusing to use tungsten balanced lamps. I don't understand why one should limit oneself like that, if it's valid in your mind to mix in daylight then it would have to be valid to mix in tungsten.

Ketch Rossi
11-03-2014, 11:37 AM
Again, I understand completely were you guys are coming from, and respect that which you say, but as limiting as it might seem, to me it isn't so, I don't see it as limiting, as it is not the light source to give me a full palette in the light spectrum, but the color choices made by which surrounds the set, the locations, the cloth used to dress the cast and so on.

To me the representing colors of a given scene are brought to life by Daylight, pure, not by Tungsten, not pure, but dirty and not neutral in it's color.


As for the reference to the example of Venetian Night at Palazzo Stern, does not serve well my visions of lighting, as beside literally having done that as a ONE MAN band, it was more an experiment and a test to myself after the (Red Dress) experience which literally knocked me off the ground and into the hospital, as I could have never imagined in my wolves drams some one in a community I cam to love and respect would attack my work in such personal ways.

So what I did once I could stand up again, was organize that shoot in Venice, and I chose to do it all, as to force myself to do the impossible, and keep my mind busy doing what I love most in my life doing, creating imagery, and I did it again as son s I done that with the other piece in the mountains.

But I only had 3 Area 48 Soft LED lights, absolutely NOT near enough to do the job, but I created a piece, and at that time that really was what it mattered to me, and I made best do with what I had.

I also perfectly understand that I must not only create imagery that please me but also others, however I come first, meaning that what I do I do it in the way I like it not in thawed I think others might like it, or otherwise what kind of an Artist would I call myself?

Do I wish for others to like it? Of course I do, but I don't do it for them I do it for me.

Gavin Greenwalt
11-03-2014, 11:45 AM
But then how do you deal with adding light to a room lit with tungsten practicals? First replace every bulb in table lamps and chandeliers with daylight compact flos and LED's?

Here is my perspective: most daylight sources are far brighter than tungsten sources per watt (LED, Flourescent and HMI all generally are daylight). Therefore it's easy to gel a daylight lamp down to match exposure of tungsten practicals. It's way more difficult to have a tungsten source filtered for daylight that can match the intensity of real daylight. So if you were to only buy one light I would say buying a daylight lamp makes perfect sense. If I was to build out a kit of lights for my own personal collection I would only buy daylight balanced lights too (probably LEDs).

Conversely I would actually kind of prefer cameras all be tungsten balanced since light loss isn't a problem in daylight and tungsten interiors at night is when I am starved for exposure already.

David Mullen ASC
11-03-2014, 11:49 AM
That's a purely practical consideration, what I'm talking about is the artistic validity of using 3200k light in a scene, particularly if all of the available light is in that range. If I've got a real kerosene lamp on a table, I'm not going to be hiding a 5600K LED behind it to augment the flame, that would look odd.

Phil Holland
11-03-2014, 11:50 AM
The world I'm in you end up using everything. Tungsten through Daylight sources and beyond.

It's good to take notes and shoot in a variety of conditions. Every now and again I create a reference image like this:

http://www.artbyphil.com/phfx/dib/art00002_LightingInADigitalAge/bigs/LotsOfLights.jpg

Probably have a few dozen of these at this point, but it's nice to know how I've used light in the past for shoots and experiments.

Basically for about 10 years of my career it was Tungsten only with gels and filtration until HMI became more standard for me on shoots. Due to certain advancements I've grown rather fond of using Daylight balanced lighting and to gel/filter accordingly to carve out the palette I'm looking for. Balancing with Tungsten, adding some thin Straw into the mix, bouncing off color for more of a radiosity effect, shaping the light, shaping the shadows, etc....

However, the spectral response of a Tungsten source does produce some hidden magic especially to skin tones.

Lighting is a "forever" study for shooters in my mind. Much like Color Theory and Composition. I don't think I've learned all there is to learn and I'm still coming up with wacky ideas to make what I want happen. There's a whole palette of color at your disposal and it can be used any way you deem fit.

I'm more from the perspective of David of course as my focus is narrative and there are realistic creative problem solving opportunities when it comes to shooting on projects. Especially when trying to add variety to the palette of a given project or episode. It's not always about giving audiences what they expect, but it's also not always about using a single road either. The challenge becomes more real when there's key color layout or fully painted concept art that must be matched.

Post color also comes into the equation for me. My artistic background/side knows that there isn't "one answer" for skin tones for instance. We have such powerful tools these days that allow us to explore more color concepts than ever. Not to say you should all the time, but it can be used effectively.

http://www.artbyphil.com/phfx/cinematography/theWorldAfter_Stills/bigs/phfx_TWA_stills_0030.jpg

That frame grab from my old short The World After is still one of my favorite lighting setups because I felt confident in using Daylight, Tungsten, and filtration to create an uncommon palette to produce something a bit different. This was a science fiction short and I was certainly pushing the color limits in general, especially on the opening daylight exteriors. But having that knowledge of all those shoots and test shoots is what leads to that deliberate direction in lighting.

Daniel Stilling
11-03-2014, 12:04 PM
So, this frame, from your short in Venice, it's front lit by a daylight source. What I see here is a day scene on a location, that has a big window behind the camera, but somehow the light doesn't make it to the right of frame. Looks to be about 2 in the afternoon on an overcast day. That wasn't your intent, was it?
When someone like David gives you pointers like this, I would re-examine my convictions and make sure my points are still valid. Just saying this is what I do and that's it seems not as open minded as someone would expect from a world traveller like you.

Ketch Rossi
11-03-2014, 12:05 PM
Phil,

Nicely put and great set of imagery on your Reference page, I have also death with Tungsten only, then HMI, and of course a variety of Flashes and Strobes, and sequentially having moved away form Flash and only dealing with continuos lighting for the past 8 years, I have seen a big change.

The other came with the elimination of Tungsten, or I should say more correctly put, the use of Daylight only as my main sources, not by power but by definitive light source to give illumination to my important subject in Focus, despite any other presence of light.

I also agree of the incredible variety of situations in our world, and the NONE existing, one good for all, but I still see it how I see it, and I am now creating imagery this way.

Testing away at every chance, working till I drop, doing it all, learning as much as I can form every experience and every shoot, and every lighting situation, prepping for that day were I will have the capacity to finally make that project that will showcase from hat point on what I mean.

I would NOT dare to bring up any of the Short films done with Zero budget and one or two or even three lights on a set were 20 were needed, as an example of my work, in representation of what I see and why my choice for Daylight.

But my Film next year will... :)

David Mullen ASC
11-03-2014, 12:08 PM
I don't see how one can say that he does not believe in following restrictive rules and then follows a rule of only lighting with daylight, which is a far more restrictive rule than any cinematographer would want be stuck with.

Ketch Rossi
11-03-2014, 12:15 PM
So, this frame, from your short in Venice, it's front lit by a daylight source. What I see here is a day scene on a location, that has a big window behind the camera, but somehow the light doesn't make it to the right of frame. Looks to be about 2 in the afternoon on an overcast day. That wasn't your intent, was it?
When someone like David gives you pointers like this, I would re-examine my convictions and make sure my points are still valid. Just saying this is what I do and that's it seems not as open minded as someone would expect from a world traveller like you.

As I said,

I would not be able to say with a strait face that I could call to make justice of my work any of the Test shots and or short films done with zero budget as test to my self and to what and were I am trying to do, also while been the Producer, the Director, the Director of Photography and Camera operator and Gaffer and so on, this are all experiments and are not graded properly for other luck of time and or money and or both, yet they are done to learn form it as that is what I have been doing, and continue to do in awaiting for my first Film next year.

However, please don't mistake my arrogance in defense of my view, for luck of respect for some one like David, which I know in person, and respect greatly, as an individual and as a professional as a well esteemed fellow Reduser.

There is a big difference.

That look, in particle in that frame, was shot that way as the third LED went out and there was that wall on the right not properly lit.

It was 2am at night were we were only allowed to shoot till 11pm, so no time to reshoot, and while I agree in part with your assessment as how you see that frame, I personally don't see it as bad, but agree that it surely would not make for a nice frame in photo, but in a Motion sequence I would not worry too much about it, yet of course I intended not to be this way, and it wouldn't' have been if th light didn't went out.

Daniel Stilling
11-03-2014, 12:29 PM
I don't see how one can say that he does not believe in following restrictive rules and then follows a rule of only lighting with daylight, which is a far more restrictive rule than any cinematographer would want be stuck with.
If nothing else: listen to this, ponder and reexamine your convictions.
Part of your skill as a Cinematographer, is to chose the right tool for the right shot. IMHO even with 3 lights or 2, daylight is not the right choice. I don't want you to take this the wrong way, but that shot does not look good. Not for stills, not for motion. You know why? besides taste and style, it doesn't tell the right story. It's night. Not an overcast afternoon. If you had 20 lights it would exacerbate that fact.
We have all been there, no budget, limited lights, one man banding, and I have some material shot that way that I'm extremely proud of. It's not about the quantity, it's about how you use it.
I don't wan't you to take this personally, but please listen to others...

Ketch Rossi
11-03-2014, 12:41 PM
I don't see how one can say that he does not believe in following restrictive rules and then follows a rule of only lighting with daylight, which is a far more restrictive rule than any cinematographer would want be stuck with.

David,

I say that I won't be restricted to what the norm is, and I have been so far the Cinematographer on every project I have done, aside form the Director and Producer, so I am not forcing any one else either.

I never set out to be a Director or Cinematographer or anything int he Studio world of Hollywood, I always mean tour myself to learn the Art and teach myself as to one day make my own films and tell my own stories in my own way.

I hope you can understand this much and NEVER take anything I say as a sign of disrespect to you or to the Art itself, one which I love more then my own life, one which only exist because of my dreams for the Arts.



If nothing else: listen to this, ponder and reexamine your convictions.
Part of your skill as a Cinematographer, is to chose the right tool for the right shot. IMHO even with 3 lights or 2, daylight is not the right choice. I don't want you to take this the wrong way, but that shot does not look good. Not for stills, not for motion. You know why? besides taste and style, it doesn't tell the right story. It's night. Not an overcast afternoon. If you had 20 lights it would exacerbate that fact.
We have all been there, no budget, limited lights, one man banding, and I have some material shot that way that I'm extremely proud of. It's not about the quantity, it's about how you use it.
I don't wan't you to take this personally, but please listen to others...

Daniel,

I would never take offense form anything you say, as I know what you mena and were you coming form and paso have great respect for you and your work!!

This have been great experiences that always teach me something new for the next project, and I have been making progress thanks to them...

I'll always give a reason to examine and re-examin, this sis why I ma doing all this shoots.

Robert Ruffo New
11-03-2014, 12:54 PM
So, this frame, from your short in Venice, it's front lit by a daylight source. What I see here is a day scene on a location, that has a big window behind the camera, but somehow the light doesn't make it to the right of frame. Looks to be about 2 in the afternoon on an overcast day. That wasn't your intent, was it?
When someone like David gives you pointers like this, I would re-examine my convictions and make sure my points are still valid. Just saying this is what I do and that's it seems not as open minded as someone would expect from a world traveller like you.

Agreed. Whenever David says something that goes against my current practice, I do a serious re-think of my current practice. I'm not saying I don't do wacky things that David might not choose to, but I don't ever feel what I'm doing is "better", or that I know better - not even for my own unique style.

Daniel Stilling
11-03-2014, 12:57 PM
Here's an example of a job I did for Disney just last week. Lots of stuff to do, hardly any time to light, and the location? I cringed when I saw this trailer/office I had to shoot in. On top of that, ― of the ceiling lights where on all the time for safety. Talk about a mixed light situation. I used 3 lights for this: A kino 4x4 for key with some "schmuts" on, with 2 daylight and 2 tungsten bulbs, a 1200 HMI outside that window, blasting through as if it was a sunset. It has full straw on it, so it's more like a tungsten source, and outside the frame on the right side is a 1K baby tungsten for the hairlight, that's motivated by the ceiling lights, and of course you have daylight coming from the windows
I chose to hit the lens with flares from the 1200 to mask a little the fact that we were shooting in an ugly trailer. And the camera was set to 4400K.
I used the mixed lighting situation to my advantage. Used all the colors, correcting them or not, to make a frame that is not only pretty but tells a story. This in particular, is to entice more international students to come and work for Disney for a year. Who would 'not want to come work in a place that has a beautiful sunset?
Or I could just have hit her with daylight, let the tungsten in the ceiling go even warmer and let the daylight outside look like it's about to rain...

Robert Ruffo New
11-03-2014, 01:55 PM
I don't see how one can say that he does not believe in following restrictive rules and then follows a rule of only lighting with daylight, which is a far more restrictive rule than any cinematographer would want be stuck with.

Very well put.

Mark Wilkinson
11-03-2014, 01:55 PM
Looks great - Nice save, Daniel. :)

Robert Ruffo New
11-03-2014, 02:02 PM
Here's an example of a job I did for Disney just last week. Lots of stuff to do, hardly any time to light, and the location? I cringed when I saw this trailer/office I had to shoot in. On top of that, ― of the ceiling lights where on all the time for safety. Talk about a mixed light situation. I used 3 lights for this: A kino 4x4 for key with some "schmuts" on, with 2 daylight and 2 tungsten bulbs, a 1200 HMI outside that window, blasting through as if it was a sunset. It has full straw on it, so it's more like a tungsten source, and outside the frame on the right side is a 1K baby tungsten for the hairlight, that's motivated by the ceiling lights, and of course you have daylight coming from the windows
I chose to hit the lens with flares from the 1200 to mask a little the fact that we were shooting in an ugly trailer. And the camera was set to 4400K.
I used the mixed lighting situation to my advantage. Used all the colors, correcting them or not, to make a frame that is not only pretty but tells a story. This in particular, is to entice more international students to come and work for Disney for a year. Who would 'not want to come work in a place that has a beautiful sunset?
Or I could just have hit her with daylight, let the tungsten in the ceiling go even warmer and let the daylight outside look like it's about to rain...

Nice work making lemonade out of lemons!

Ketch Rossi
11-03-2014, 02:09 PM
Daniel,
We each find ourselves in situations, but can't really never know how it really was if we weren't there, there was more to it then just having only 3 fixtures in a space that needed triple that, there was the fact that I lit up for those 3 and one to the right failed, hence the huge difference you see, the fact of the color grade done fast and last minute by a friend on a Beta system that crashed four times and did not export final color corrections made and I could go on and on, but I choose not to, fact is that the one light failed, do to the Bricks not been powerful enough, and that is why I now moved completely to BlueShape HD Batteries...

That shot can be Color graded in so many ways!

I respect your choices made in the situations that you have found yourself in, as so I did, and it is absolutely ok to like or not like ones work or choice made, but in an entire Film, short or long, looking at a single or particular frame makes no sense.

Lastly you can't really judge work done as experiments and for free, on situations such as it was this short for me, were I literally done everything, this are learning experiences to test the gear and myself, should be taken as such, yet their purpose was well served as all of the Sponsors were happy and I continue to gain favor of more of them in doing what I do, better will only get by continuing to test and shoot real life project, and this is what I do, I am not afraid of any results, this are NOT paid jobs, this are my experiments to gain Practical experience to take with me on the set of my first Feature Film.


Either way, this is what I always loved about this community that we once did have this type of very respectful and very thoughtful discussions about Cinematography, lighting, storytelling and more...

It did not matter if they were with me or adjacent me, I mena my Artistic believes and likes, it only matter having them as to force one to respond to questions and question oneself about their work and their choice made doing it.

I will always move forward, and learn form experiences good and bad, especially form the bad, I will never stop learning and never stop experimenting, but I will always be of free spirit and never follow any one, only follow my instinct and likes, learning form others yes, listening to others yes, but always do what and how I want.

And this is what I am doing, Experimenting on my own time, with people that are willing to do it with me, and learning something themselves, when time will come to make the big move, even if it might be a low budget movie, for me it will represent that moment in life i have done all that I have done for ti, and I'll do it my way.

Trying to bring to life a story in the way I like to do it, and let people like it or not, judge it there were they see the need to do so, and I'll be al hears, as far as they'll do so with respect, never offending not attacking me as an individual or an Artist, but simply making their opinions known and giving it in a humane and respectful manner.

I'll be there to take credit for the good and the bad, and ready never to defend myself not my choices but ready to answer any questions, to the why...

Again, please understand my convictions, and let me continue to experiment and work this way, following my believes, and do NOT take offense, as I respect greatly each and every one of you, as fellow Reduser and fellow Filmmaker, I read and listen to your comments, and they are greatly appreciated, but this of course can not mean that I should not continue to do what I am doing how I am doing it... :)

Mike P.
11-03-2014, 02:14 PM
Any filtration there Daniel, or straight glass (what lenses)? Smooth flare, though I guess Dragon has something to do with that as well.

Daniel Stilling
11-03-2014, 03:14 PM
It was a GL version of the Sigma 18-35, wide open with a Classic Soft 1 and the appropriate ND, if any. I don't remember.

Nick Morrison
11-03-2014, 06:12 PM
It was a GL version of the Sigma 18-35, wide open with a Classic Soft 1 and the appropriate ND, if any. I don't remember.

WOW. Classic Soft 1. Would have thought it was a bit less (1/2 or 1/4). Very nicely done!

Brett Harrison
11-07-2014, 05:06 PM
Thanks for the enlightening discussion guys.

Here's some interesting discussion over at LiftGammaGain

http://liftgammagain.com/forum/index.php?threads/color-issues-with-incandescent-vs-daylight.3809/

Including a spectral power distribution survey (linked) of modern sources (in French but it doesn't matter)

Marc Wielage
11-07-2014, 07:04 PM
Here's what I said in my LGG comments...

The discussion is particularly interesting when you weigh the pros and cons of actually getting into the Raw metadata and changing the color temperature vs. just trying to change the overall white balance with the Log or Primary color controls.

This is something I've seen neophyte colorists struggle with, and believe me, it was a huge problem back in the day when DPs forgot to use 85 or 85A color temperature filters with film. In the early 1980s, I could tell just by "feel" that something was inherently wrong with the overall color, and I was stymied as to why even when technically I had balanced out the color channels -- what we used to call the "front end" of the Rank or whatever scanner was being used -- the picture still looked grainy and kind of contaminated-looking. Eventually, I realized that shooting daylight with tungsten film or incandescent interiors with daylight film didn't work; in each case, one layer of the film was either overloaded by or starved for light. No matter how hard you pound on the knobs in color correction, you're not going to be able to get there. LUTs can't do it, primaries can't do it, secondaries can't do it, even curves can't do it... not completely anyway. Nothing can overcome badly shot material.

It's particularly interesting with the Red camera, which is optimized for 5600 degree daylight. While you can sorta/kinda get tungsten material there with the regular knobs (aided by some curves and various tweaks), it's not a great look. This is a huge problem for people dealing with ProRes or DNxHD material sourced from camera raw files, where somebody hasn't gone in first and set the color temp and ISO correctly.

Art Adams' vectorscope photos of the original, adjusted, and filtered signals are very revealing:

http://www.dvinfo.net/wp-content/uploads/2014/10/RD-R-B-smear-Tungsten-600x475.png
Tungsten with added blue in color correction to compensate


http://www.dvinfo.net/wp-content/uploads/2014/10/RD-B-R-R-B-smear-daylight-600x475.png
Tungsten with 1/2 CTB ("color temp blue") filtration



http://www.dvinfo.net/wp-content/uploads/2014/10/RD-flesh-tone-comparison-in-blue-600x258.png

This is a vexing problem when dealing with DPs who don't understand the need to get the camera metadata and/or filtration correctly set during actual photography, or -- even worse -- those who rely on mixed lighting to get the shot. Mixed lighting is fine if you're going for a fairly intense, whacked-out look, but god help you if you expect white whites, black blacks, accurate color, and clean skin tones. The red/yellow/magenta smearing will make you crazy in post, particularly if (for whatever reason) you can't get to the Raw files for final color correction.

Adams has very interesting comments to make about color accuracy in Alexa/Amira vs. Red, and I agree completely with his conclusions. Check out the piece of you get a chance.

Zeb B
11-08-2014, 11:12 AM
http://www.reduser.net/forum/showthread.php?115781-Hexolux-Color-Rendering-Dragon-R3D-s