Does anyone here have experience creating shafts of light, as seen in things like Citizen Kane, X-Files, Noirs, etc? Are the main components heavy directed lighting, high-contrast composition, diffusion in the air (smoke, humidity, etc.), or something else completely.

I'll be doing it in colour DV, but finishing in black-and-white. Any suggestions would be welcome.

Thanks in advance,
--Craig

Done as a practical effect, dark-ish background, fresnel light (perhaps screened through a gobo), and some form of airborne diffusion such as a fog machine.

elipsoidal would allow a very cohesive look to a shaft as well.

Like Ken says, the key is having an intense backlight against a dark background plus some sort of haze effect. You can rent smoke/haze machines at your local theatrical supplier. Be aware that the health issues from these machines is a really controversial topic these days when it comes to performers, crews and their unions however.

I would also agree with Richard that an ellipsoidal reflector spotlight (such as the ETC Source Four) with a gobo (also called "template") can give really interesting effects in haze. Here are a couple examples:

http://tech.operaphilly.com/sets/flute/pix2001/1/7.jpeg
http://tech.operaphilly.com/sets/flute/pix2001/2/14.jpeg

In theory you could also do it in "post" with a 3D volumetric
render engine (like lightwave has for example) or fake it with
a transparent 3D object with special textures. Ofcourse you can't
beat the real deal, especially if you want objects / people to
interact with it.

Do you have access to any large Mole lights or Arri lights 2k or bigger? A 5k Senior pounded through window blinds works well. As the others stated, you have to have "atmosphere" in the form of haze/fog.
Your ambient light levels will be important.

I have seen aerosol cans of haze. Anyone use them before?

Jeff Patnaude

I've used the canned smoke and found it works very well.

You have to make your own call on the amount
but smoke gives you the best canvas to gets shafts
of light. I have no idea if they can hold up but Radio shack has a smoke machine.... anybody ever use it?????
I have only used rosco

r

My boss picked up a cheap smoke machine at Meijers
(a regional super store chain) for
$49. It works pretty good, but like most cheap machines its
output is not continuous. He went back to get a couple more
and they were sold out.

Incense does a good job too and smells better (if you choose wisely).

Remember, when working with "smoke" or "foggers," you have to be in a confined space, with no air conditioning, or your effect will dissipate before your eyes.

Wayne Orr, SOC

By the same token, you might want to educate yourself regarding the nature of any smoke/haze efffects used in a poorly ventillated confined space. This is a particularly hot topic these days in the entertainment industry with a number of union grievances and lawsuits arising from the use of such effects. You could be opening yourself up to some liability by exposing actors and/or crew to smoke during an extended shoot.

One recent study "Atmospheric Effects in the Entertainment Industry: Constituents, Exposures and Health Effects" may be found at this link (http://www.soeh.ubc.ca/research/reports.htm)

Since we were talking about the lowest of the low end, I didn't
mention the high end. The high end and best imo are
the MDG smoke and haze machines. The smoke they produce is the smallest
particulant there is and can pass right though a hepa filter.

The MDG guys told me they are the only ones approved for
Broadway because the smoke/haze doesn't smell and has
almost no effect on actors/singers throats. In the world of divas
that really matters.

NOT cheap . . . like $3500 for the top of the line, but a 10 year
guarantee and built to last.

We had one in the video studio and this is the only machine that
didn't set off the fire alarm . . . even when the haze got thick!

Could you post a link for the MDG machines ?

I did a search online but didn't find them.

Their website is "under construction" however you can download their brochures and specs here (http://www.mdgfog.com/manuals.html)

I've used their "Atmosphere" machines before and was very impressed. The haze consists of mineral oil in tiny quantities. One possible downside of these machines is that they require an outboard CO2 tank which may need changing depending on how long you run the machine (I think we got through 2 rehearsals and 2 performances on the same tank however).

The nice thing about oil-based haze is that it disperses very evenly and hangs in the air for a long time. Unfortunately our singers union in Philadelphia only accepts water based haze so we can't use these, although they have indicated a willingness to look at the specs and MSDS if we want to make a switch in the future.

If you're interested in fog/haze then the other companies worth looking at are CITC (http://www.citcfx.com/flash/index.htm) and LeMaitre (http://www.lemaitrefx.com) and of course Rosco (http://www.rosco.com/main.html).

Thank you Boyd, much appreciated.

I would like to create this effect for a church like scene where the speaker is at the pulpit. The speaker would be lit (would love to get that angelic shaft of light) and everything else would be in darkness.

Problem: is it possible to create a similar effect with a single open faced light (500w)? Maybe light the subject from overhead and close down the iris?

Thanks

An open faced light will not give you the 'shaft' that a focussed instrument will. You CAN put a 'snoot' on an open faced light. (Technically, it no longer becomes 'open'... but that's semantics)

A snoot is a metal cylinder that concentrates the light into a circular(ish) spot. The longer the snoot, the tighter the beam. It's NOT as effective as an ellipsoidal, say, which uses lenses to focus the cohesive beam, but if it's all you've got, it's all you've got.

You really need an Source Four or other ellipsoidal and a haze machine.

Besides the problem of focusing your open face light, that Richard points out, you are lacking serious firepower with only a 500 watt light. But there is another problem.

Light is not seen as a shaft unless you use smoke, which opens up another problem. (You can also use "Fuller's Earth, except it's a health hazzard) There are various types of "smokers" available, as well as solids that emit tremendous amounts of smoke when they are ignited. Just sit back and wait for the smoke to fill the church with a soft haze. Keep all doors and windows closed and you are good to go, if you have a suitable lighting instrument that will create the shaft and light the subject from a distance. As Richard mentioned, an ellipoidal like a Source 4 JR would be a good possibility, if you can rent one. They are pretty cheap to rent, and a purchase runs around $200.00. It's a great light to have in your kit. But I have a hunch you don't want to do that.

The other viable alternative is to create the shaft of light in post with software. One such software is 55mm (from Digital Film Tools), which has a "light" setting which could do this nicely. To prepare your footage, you should shoot the interior with the background barely visible and your subject lit normally. Later in post you create the shaft effect, which will then overexpose your subject as well as create the shaft. This method means the camera must almost certainly be locked off to create the effect.

Good luck
Wayne Orr, SOC

To prepare your footage, you should shoot the interior with the background barely visible and your subject lit normally. Later in post you create the shaft effect, which will then overexpose your subject as well as create the shaft.


Hi Wayne...long time.

One question...I have the 55mm package, but wouldn't you want to light the person from the top to create the proper face (and general down-) shadows? It might save some time in post to have only to add the shaft and not the shadows...

Or I might simply be misunderstanding you and I'm simply repeating your advice...

Technically you can create shafts without any haze/fog (like laser beams) but we're talking serious light levels. All the recs. about Source 4's are good calls - you can't get that kind of output that tighly controlled for that amount of money any other way. They are EXTREMELY efficient fixtures. Also, if you're looking for more output but still on household current, K5600 makes an attachment to mount their jokerbug line to the Source 4's, giving about 4-times the brightness. That's a LOT of punch - it shouldn't take a whole lot of fog, etc... to make the beam stand out. Also know that fog acts like diffusion, so no matter how tight your beam is, expect some radiance and bounce from the beam itself. Also, if you're planning on using the beam itself to light your character, be aware that the beam willbe MANY stops darker than the pool of light at the end of it. DV/HDV/HD may have a hard time with that kind of contrast. You could aim the beam from above, to land just behind your character, and light the character separately... Or get a gobo that scrims just the very center of the beam, and make that part land on your actor. Since the camera is looking at the side of the beam, the effect will be invisible, but the talent will be better balanced with the luminance of the shaft. Source 4 (and all ellipsoidals) have gobo slots, so doing this should be no problem.

G'luck!

Also, if you're looking for more output but still on household current, K5600 makes an attachment to mount their jokerbug line to the Source 4's

These look very cool... am going to have to find an excuse to use them sometime :-)

http://www.k5600.com/products/bugabeam/index.html

There are some gotcha's I can see when doing this 'live', especially on a small budget with little gear. Controlling the shape of the cone, rigging the light high enough above the talent/scene, controlling spill as well as light ratios if the 'shaft light' is also creating rim lighting on the talent, etc. It can seem so easy, but to do it well...

Wow. This thread has gotten pretty sophisticated and filled with great ideas.

Tim, you rascal, you have unmasked me. Yes, in a perfect world, that light source would want to be rigged above the preacher, but as Eric rightly points out, we'd be getting into some serious lighting and rigging to pull that off. My suggestion is a compromise that Joe might be able to pull off without too much pain and expense. And btw, that idea of Jaron's of using the joker with the source 4 is excellent, and I'm going to have to try that sometime. But for now, I'm assuming that Joe doesn't have all these tools available (or maybe the cash) for rent where he lives. So I suggest the software solution, but that's because I already own the 55mm software. Here's another way to proceed without the software or the expensive lighting hardware.

Shoot the wide shot with dim lighting in the church with the preacher in the pulpit. Light the preacher with the available 500watt light, keeping the light source out of the shot. The addition of candles, if appropriate, would add to the effect. Lock off the camera. Keep the light on the preacher off the background and probably off the front of the pulpit. Putting a source window for the shaft in the shot might help sell the effect.

Find an old aquarium tank, or something similar. Hang a piece of black material (duvetyn, if available) behind the aquarium. Back light the aquarium with the 500w light, fill the aquarium with smoke to desired volume, put a lid on the aquarium, and shoot it with your dv camera.

In post, you will layer the smoke over your locked-off shot of the preacher. You can cut a matte to give the smoke the proper size and shape, and maybe rotate the matte to an appropriate angle. Tweak the video levels to create the proper look, and soften the edges of the matte. The tricky part here will be overlaying the preacher without eliminating him with smoke.

Or, use the software approach I mentioned earlier. You can also use a "fog" filter from the 55mm set to give the church a haze look, besides the light shaft. Easy does it on these effects.

Or, rent a Xenon follow spot and rig parallels outside the church to place it on and blast it through the window into a smoke filled church. Shouldn't cost more than a couple thousand dollars, and your friends will be really impressed. :)

One additional thought: if you have the lighting fixture in the shot, you can eliminate it in post if you shoot a second locked-off pass of the same frame with no light and no preacher. Cover the light fixture in post with elements from the second pass.

Good thread. Let's see if we have some additional ideas.

Many 3D programs have "Volumetric Lighting" that allows for great control over the look of the shaft. Still the same issue with Mattes. You could shoot talent as Blue or Green Screen with some good rim lighting which would help remove spill and blend in the Shaft of Light if it was envisioned as being focused actually on the talent. More involved in post but you would only have to matte still elements, i.e. the podium and other foreground elements.

Assuming After Effects or some such app with at least decent Chroma Keying, shoot scene without talent, shoot talent green screen and render volumetric lighting with alpha, say as QT with 'color +' or PSD with alpha still sequence. Seperate scene foreground and background with matte into two seperate layers. Pre-comp volumetric lighting and background scene, Chroma Key Talent over that 'background comp' and top with matted foreground scene elements. Spice with levels adjustments and serve fresh.

It's a bit complicated and the green screen needs good, even lighting. OTOH your not matting moving talent and you get tremendous control over the 'lighting', whether live or in post, of the different elements.

You can rent a 750 watt elipsoidal with a 10 degree barrel for 15 dollars a day. Anyone ever see the special features to Jay and Silent Bob Strike Back where the talk about the CG sheep that cost 50 G's.

Hey guys thanks for the ideas, these are awesome. I think that software might be the way to go, this will be shot in a garage with a black background.

Wayne I was playing around with the light effect in the demo version of 55mm and found it hard to create the shaft. Could you post some basic instructions on how to create it.

Furthermore, you can create like a reflection window effect, it looks pretty cool on their site. What would be the best way to implement that.

The 750 Source 4 PAR would do the job just fine. You would use the narrow or the medium lense. The source 4 PAR is brighter than the source 4 leko. You can't get the fine cut with the PAR, but it dosen't seam to be nessary for this shot. The Par is very small. Do you have a cardollini? You could use zip cord to power it, but I wouldn't leave it on all night.
I also think the light should come from the back. I think this was written about earlyer in this thread, but I wanted to re-empize it. It would glow the hair and any clothing the actor is whareing. Take that 500w and pull the bulb and put it on the lecturn or podiym to light the front of your actor. You will have to rig that carefully not to burn anything. A little blackwrap should help contorl the spill. Put every thing on Vareacks (dimmers). Hopefully the church has dimmable over heads that you can contorl.
My wife loves the show Touched by an Angle. I think they are at least useing a 5k if not a 10k for the Godlight. Most likely a 10k with some CTO.
Others have had very good smoking ideas, that you can ponder on.

Put every thing on Vareacks (dimmers).

Actually you're thinking of Variacs. That's funny, I haven't heard anyone use that term in years. When I started doing stage lighting in the 1960's we thought these things were great, but you don't see a lot of them anymore. The name is a contraction from variable and AC. A quick Google search shows that they are actually still made - I did not know that! http://variac.com/staco_Variable_Transformer_Map.htm

Most dimmers you will find today use solid state devices which are much cheaper and smaller than the old Variacs. But Variac is just a brand name, that kind of dimmer is known as an autotransformer.

Sorry, I know this is all OT but your mention of Variacs brought back some old memories :-)

I actually just tried to rent light kits with SCR type dimmers. I specified till I was blue in the face that I wanted small household-type scr dimmers, SMALL and cheap, max 600 watts. When I picked up the gear (at closing, of course), they had the light kits in HUGE pelican cases. I asked 3 times before leaving "this case is just the dimmers? Little squeezes, household? 600 watt max?" The guy reassured me... "yeah, the little guys with wooden boxes." And I asked again - "NOT variacs, right? Little household ones?" He seemed annoyed that I kept asking. Well, needless to say I got back to check through the kits, and sure enough I had a pelican case 100lbs full of Variacs! Great for the studio, not so great for setting up one-man band kits for airline carryon.

BUT, Variacs are fantastic and as of yet, no electronic dimmer can do the same thing. They dim extremely smoothly, and generally without any buzzing. When you dim a light and hear a "bzzzzzzz" it's the filament actually vibrating because of the fact that the dimmer itself is chopping the sine wave of power. Variacs literally change the voltage and do so without altering the frequency of power, so they dim smoothly and quietly. Also, because they are giant variable transformers, they can also boost the output voltage. So if you're on 110v wiring (not common) you can boost to 120 to get the proper voltage to your lights. Or, if you don't mind frying a lamp or 2, you can get that little extra brightness for a quick shot.

Ok, back to the topic at hand - if you're using the shaft effect, definitely put it on a variac, especially if its hung WAY up - you won't be able to scrim it, and that type of fixture is meant to be dimmed electrically/electonically anyways.

that type of fixture is meant to be dimmed electrically/electonically anyways.
You mean the HPL in the fixture. What do you mean by "dimmed electrically/electonically"? They don't like variacs or they have been corrected for the vibration, your were refering to, in the filament. Or is this just symantics?

No i can't spell, or use Google

You can dim them with any technology you want, it's just a light bulb. We use hundreds of them in our light plots. I think Jaron's point was that you should use a dimmer down at floor level so you don't have to climb a ladder and put some sort of filter on the light. Realize however that the color temperature will change considerably if you dim the lamp.

Jaron, I think the modern theatrical dimmers are pretty good at reducing "lamp sing". This is a new product that I've been hearing good things about for example: http://www.etcconnect.com/product.overview.asp?ID=20041

Actually the household dimmers aren't that bad now either. I just built a couple of in-line dimmers with parts from a big box hardware store (for under $20 a piece) to control 300w arri fresenels. I have not noticed any lamp noise at all.

i agree - i use router speed controls on all my lights and they work beautifully. But it is a trial and error thing when it comes to lower-end dimmers (like household dimmers or my router speed controls) - some work smoothly and quietly, some don't. The high-end dimmer boards are fantastic, no sing at all in basically any fixture. And yes, HPL lamps are designed to be dimmed, where FRK are not recommended.

I have used lower end boards (both new and old) and they sing like CRAZY on basically any fixture that's not theatrical in nature.

As for variacs - I still have a soft spot for them. When space/weight allows, I love em.

From my experience, creating "sculptural" light with a fog machine is possible but inconvient since the hang time is so short. I rented a hazer for one week, $150 a week, and never went back. Don't even bother with dry ice machines.

Source 4's are great, but I wouldn't say they're the best for shooting on location.
-Alex

People have mentioned a lot of things in this thread, except one important point:

If you want to illuminate a particulate in the air (smoke, water spray, etc), you generally need to backlight it. It doesn't always have to be a true backlight, but the light needs to be more pointing towards the lens than away.

People have mentioned a lot of things in this thread, except one important point:

If you want to illuminate a particulate in the air (smoke, water spray, etc), you generally need to backlight it.

Hey, I said that! ;-)

the key is having an intense backlight against a dark background

I also think the light should come from the back. I think this was written about earlyer in this thread, but I wanted to re-empize it.
I think its hear also.

Nate, you explained why more clearly. But you want to light snow from the front.