|
|
07-11-2009, 12:34 PM
A local development has me making some advertisements (internet) for them. Tell me what you think! Nikon lenses were 20mm f2.8, 85mm f1.8 and 50mm f1.4. All of the audio was a rode nt3 (not ntg3) directly fed into the camera (no sound crew).
Thanks in advance for looking!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a4tZvIKZ6Sg
07-12-2009, 12:32 AM
Hi,
To be quite honest, the lighting is rather poor. I don't think you gained very much from using a RED One on this project.
Stephen
Originally Posted by Patrick Wynne
07-12-2009, 01:01 AM
There were a couple of cute girls in there....
OK, I should make a constructive comment. Stephen is right about the lighting, not that good, and not consistent, take it to another level.
To be far, you can judge an early effort of a video casting I did. I had no clue back then how to do video or sound, but I used lighting I normally use for stills. http://gallery.me.com/vonthomas#100108
Last edited by Von Thomas; 07-12-2009 at 02:07 AM.
07-12-2009, 01:49 AM
I thank you for your comments. Most of the lighting is natural except for the interview scenes. I welcome any comments positive or negative, I've learned that it's really the only way one can improve.
Most of the shooting that goes on where I am is stuff done on the cheap (mostly news photogs that shoot a quick ad for local people who pay for the airtime and get the production for free). It's sort of hard to pick up on things when thats what you are more or less competing against.
Please people don't be shy, you definitely won't hurt my feelings.
07-12-2009, 01:54 AM
bad lighting.
bad inter-sequence connectivity.
07-12-2009, 01:59 AM
Could you be more specific about the lighting than just bad lighting? I hear you on the editing of the sequence. They kind of wanted it to be like "The Office" and thats part of the reason perhaps... but then again maybe not.
07-12-2009, 04:03 AM
Hi,
The light is just illumination, it needs to shape & separate. Reading some books on Film Lighting would help you greatly.
Stephen
07-12-2009, 06:46 AM
So what was this shot for? Was this a demo so you could show how much better you want to be than (mostly news photogs that shoot a quick ad for local people who pay for the airtime and get the production for free).???
I know even the cable crews that shoot a quick ad for local people who pay for the airtime and get the production for free, usually light the scenes...
And by lighting it could be simple. You don't need a whole truck filled with lights to get the job done. Pay attention to white balance and when editing try to match the shot to shot color....
Audio was a bit weak on some of the shots as well. Audio is one area where people really notice.
Keep shooting and don't fall into the trap that you have to shoot for free because the "other guy does".
07-12-2009, 11:37 AM
Hi Stephen and Mike,
Thank you again for the comments. Mike, I actually used to work as a news photographer and around here production quality is not very good to say the least. I did that for a few years and now I'm at Minnesota State University studying film production. This was done for free sort of to get me some more work under my belt. Unfortunately I don't have access to any real lights outside of the school. Stephen, as for books what would you recommend? At the school I have basically been going through two books and they don't touch on much more than 3 point lighting. The books are "Film Production Technique" by Bruce Mamer and "Directing" by Michael Rabiger. Anything you can recommend I'll definitely look at.
Thanks again guys.
| « Previous Thread | Next Thread » |
| Tags for this Thread |
