Light Meter For Video YES or NO?
 

I shoot video for our church to put onto the web with a pmw-ex1. A person I work with who downloads the video and prepairs it for web brodcast told me he thinks that we need a light meter to tell us how to set some of the Pre Sets on the cammera to get a better picture. I know that meters are commonly used for getting propper exposure figures for film. I for one am not buying off on the idea but thought I would Inquire annyway. What do You think?

I use a light meter for all my critical work. A waveform monitor would be very useful also, but for set up shots, I'm just fine with the light meter, the histogram in the camera, and my eyes.

Hi Thomas....
 

EX1? Web? Light meter?

Which of those don't you expect to see in the same sentence?

As far as I am aware, Sony had the forsight to actually include a light meter in the workings of the camera (no doubt chargeing a suitably high premium for the privelage), tho' as every other semi pro camera seems to have been equally blessed, I can't see it gave them much of a marketing advantage.

The fact that without it wouldn't take very good video may have something to do with it, but I digress.

Better video on the Web?

Of a Church service?

Did this fount of knowledge happen to impart just what, exactly, an external light meter would bring to the party that the internal camera meter could/ would not?

Or why, exactly, it would be required in order to fiddle with pre - sets?

I think you are exceedingly clever not to be buying into it, this sounds about as much use as an ashtray on a motorcycle.

An EX1 for the web, whatever next, Ferraris for shopping trolleys?

My, the things you read..............


CS

LOL!!!

Yea, somehow I glossed over that "for the web" part. I generally break out the light meter when I am going to shoot interviews and I am interesting in lighting ratios. But if I was just going to the web, and not finishing to BluRay or DVD, then I wouldn't sweat it too much. Just watch the histograms and make sure you don't blow anything out.

It might not be a bad idea to check the lighting once with a light meter to see how much contrast there really is in a scene. When I shoot live events indoors, I usually do this. Walk along the stage and check the lighting at the podium, the front of the stage, and at the back where waiting participants usually sit. It gives me some idea of how much contrast there is and whether I am going to be in trouble.

In the case of a church choir, there is likely going to be some significant differences between the soloist's lighting, and that back row, unless they've spent real money on lighting. But a quick walk through ought to help. I guess I still like my meter from my old days as a still photographer. Gives me warm fuzzys knowing exactly how much light I actually have.

Horses for courses I guess.

Reply
 

Chris:
First of all I am an amatuer in this feild and have a lot to learn not only about the craft but also about the cammera. But I will say that I know much more than I did back in June when we first pulled it out of the box. Mostly from trial and error. I know that the pmw-ex1 is overfkill for what we do now but I personally would like to make a short film with it or some annimation. Since I dont personally own the equipment, and dont have the bank to purchas said equipment, I am limmited to its use. My reson for joining this forum is to ask questions and learn from those who have blazed the trail before me. thanks for your input.

Perrone:
I am going to have to reserch a little more closely to the use of the histogram built into the cammera. I have a pretty good preset built for use under Par lights with tungsten bulbs and it dosnt look too bad. But Just this last sunday the 14th I did run into a situation where the person who was preaching decided to work the floor insted of staying on stage where the lighting is. NOT GOOD! We just dont have the buget right now for more lights but are well awaire that we need them. I told the person who dose the edditing and web work that he was going to have to bump it up on the edditing side. Speaking of lighting.
What is your opinion of using soft lights to light the floor area in front of the stage from about 16 feet above, or should we stick with Par's?

Thomas

Soft lights are no longer soft at 16ft. They become dim ambient lights. If you truly want useful soft light from 16ft away, be prepared to spend some SERIOUS money on blanket lights or HMIs with diffusion. I wouldn't even attempt it. Stick with the pars.

You might consider putting a layer of diffusion below the pars to get more even lighting. Not sure what your setup looks like. This is often done in movies. Basically a "false ceiling is made of diffusion fabric, and powerful lights are hung above it and blasted through. This gives a wonderful even and soft lighting. The only problem is that the diffusion REALLY cuts down hte effectiveness of the light, so you tend to use a higher number of more powerful lights. Again, more money.

Perrone:
Thanks for the advice about the lights. I am glad I asked. If you would like to take a peek at this last sundays or yesterdays service and the problenm I ran into go to.....

Untitled Document

The opening is kind of corney though.

Thomas

Hi again..
 

You wouldn't like to narrow down the area of concern with that video would you, partial as I am to Church services (ahem...).


CS

LOL! Chris you KILL me! Wouldn't matter if he narrowed it down in this case, there is no time index on the video! At least not in my browser. In for a penny, in for a pound!

I will say that it's very refreshing to see ample lighting on someone for a change! In fact, it's a little hot on his forehead. He might want to tone done that iris 1/3 stop or so.

Off to get some "churchin'!

-P

While it does sound like the web guy is making suggestions out of his posterior (regarding light meters and presets), his concern does has validity in the speaker is about a stop over-exposed. There is plenty of clipping in that shot; forehead, hands and edge of podium. While the rest of the scene will darken down with proper exposure, I think you will find the improvements in skin tone quite pleasing. I would also tighten that shot if possible and reduce the headroom considerably--if the camera placement is such that you are already at full telephoto, I would just tilt down.

Looking later in the video, I see the gent roaming around on the floor. He's not dark per se but indeed the background is quite hot in comparison. Perhaps the light on the podium can be dimmed down a little? If so this will solve the problem above and help balance things a little with the people on the floor. The problem here does seem to be more one of contrast than of exposure.

One thing I noticed doing video at our church - if we raise the house lights, it spills more onto the stage and helps with the contrast issues. We always have trouble if they are running a dark house because the light on stage is so uneven.

May not help in your case depending on how separated your congregation is from the stage area and how the lights are set up.

Reply
 

First: about the over exposure at the podium shot. I agree that there are some problems with forhead over expose and the podium edge rerflecting a lot of light. the podium I can fix with some sort of non reflective fabric like felt or something. The pastor refuses to use makup so that is out of the question. And I have tried to use filtering gells in front of the lights to soften, and that worked fine for video but not enouph light for the human eye. Besides the other person I spoke of likes it bright and has openly crtisized me for bringing down the apurature to ballance things under our curent lighting conditions. He Wants me To step up my knowlege of the potography end of things so we can take it to the next level watever that is. Heck, we havent mastered the basicks of the first level yet.

Second: About dimming the stage lights to ballance out the speeker on the floor. That is a good Idea.Wish we would have had that worked out before hand but I was to busey keeping the cammera on the guy and on the apurature so I could crank it up.

Third: Our house lights Stink. Too dim. I will suggest That we put in Brighter ones over that area at least for now untill we can buget in some more pars.

Thanks for your input. I am learning a lot.

Thomas

P.S. Perrone: What is this time index you speak of ?

Thomas, you know how on most internet videos, there is a little bar at the bottom that counts out how far along you are in the video in minutes and seconds? Yours doesn't have that. So it's impossible to tell someone how far to skip along if you wanted to point them at something specific.

As an aside, I watched nearly the whole thing, and was quite entertained!

EX1 Overkill for the web? I don't agree.
 

I'm a "learning" amateur like Thomas when it comes to operating a camera. But as someone who's been involved in streaming enterprise and corporate video for close to 10 years, I've hired video crews that shoot DVcam, Beta and now HD. And regardless of compression, the hire the resolution and quality of the original media, the better the quality of the posted media on the web. !@$@% in, !@$@% out as they say. I bought an EX3 and will predominantly be shooting for the web. So Thomas, rest assured that you don't have too much camera for what you're doing. You have a camera that will deliver a superior product online as well as off.

Perrone:
I am glad that you were entertained by the video shot on sunday. On that site the message will chang weekly. Sometimes the sermmons dont go so well with other guest speekers. But our pastor, seen at the beggining of the last video is pretty good.

http://www.cwczillah.org

Back to the subject of light meeters. Is there one made that can bee used under multible light conditiions or are they all made spacificaly for spacific typs of light?

And thanks Michail for your positive input.

Thomas

Light meters don't care about the type of light (as long as we're talking visible light), and many have very similar functions. I'll save you a TON of time and point you in the direction of two that seem to be quite popular in the film/TV industry.

1. Spectra Cine: Spectra Cine, Inc -Spectra Professional IV-A (The Most Accurate Meter Ever Built)

2. Sekonic L-758 Cine: Sekonic L-758Cine DIGITALMASTER

There are certain video-only things that you'll appreciate in these models that make them suitable for what we are doing. I have the Spectra and find it enough for my needs. It's quite a bit cheaper and simpler to use.

Hi all,

Good Charles and Perrone likely forgot more than I ever knew about light, but clipping in video sometimes hard to figure out. What might look exacting (one stop or 1/2 stop) on a forehead might turnout to be different when dialing down the aperture ring.

Which is precisely why light meters are slightly less useful in video than film for 'getting it right'. Perrone's spot on when he mentioned ratios. That's where the meter really shines.

Another advantage, and maybe the biggest, is looking at the whole scene with a spot meter to see if anything is too hot. While one can easily look into a viewfinder, a hand-held spot meter will give some quick ratios to make quick calculations.

I've found that my new camera (Sony EX1) is VERY very close when it comes to this. In fact, it's close enough for me at actually trust the meter implicitly.

Yes, it's the ratios that we're really interested in. Knowing your camera well enough to know how many stops of latitude you have before you actually lose something is crucial. So I know if my Scene has 7 stops of contrast in it, I am going to be safe. If it has 12, I'm doomed! :)

Well, you can easily iris down to keep anything from blowing out. And in many cameras you can knee the signal so that you keep everything broadcast legal, or at least keep it from clipping. But even when you do that, it's keeping the shadows intact that becomes a bit tricky.

Wow, Chris maybe you don't have a lot of bandwidth where you live but I find this post totally off base.

I find the internet (computer screens) to be rather demanding output devices, much more than SD televisions.

People are used to see high resolution images on their computer screens, so the idea that poor quality video cameras and production values are all that is needed for internet content is short sided and 1990 imho.

And the use of a light meter and a camera's metering system are two different things.

As stated in this thread, a light meter is used to judge ratios and can be located all around the scene.

An in-camera meter takes an overall reading of a scene to find a general exposure point.

Two different things.

I find my use of a light meter is more in the still world and put more stress on proper calibrated monitoring & zebras to setup video lighting and find exposure.

Have you turned on your zebra bars? That might help you more than a light meter in your situation.

Philip: Yes I have used the zebra bars. I was using them from the verry beginning but when I did and set a good ballanced picture, I would get mones from our media head about how he didnt think the picture was bright enouph. So I britened it up. Then when I got a preset that looked good under incondecent lights with good acurate collors on the subject being videod, I got more grunts becase the bacground looked a little dark. We are working of of one strip of 8 par floods. Thats It! I am trying to achive a really good picture that has some definition and dosnt look all washed out. I supose that I could just shoot with the factory preset at 3200K. But the picture looks to pastell and washed out to me. I know what we need. WE NEED MORE FRICKING LIGHTS! I can only do so much with what little we have to work with. The cammeras eye is not like a human eye. Do I sound to sensitive? Yah, I could go back to the factorys setting and the back ground (which is nothing to look at annyway. Just mic and musick stands) would brighten up. But The picture looks like CRAP! Not to mention that we are shooting in standard def. to maximise the use of our memeory and the picture quality has been dummied down to visible pixalization for our web site. I could go on, and on, and on. Annyway. We have a lot of stuff to iron out. Sometimes I just want to walk away from it. But this is something that Ive always wanted to do. So I stick with it.

Thanks for listennig

Thomas

One trick another cameraman passed onto me is set you zebra's to 70 and expose for the face allowing just a little zebra to shine through on the face. Exposing for the face of your subject is the ultimate goal when he's the main subject. Careful of the background. Color correction from your editor could also be an answer to getting a better look.

More lights is correct, but in your case the light meter could help you guide the pastor as to where his limitations are for good lighting and bad lighting. Don't be afraid to make them aware of where good lighting and bad lighting is. If they avoided the weak spots it could improve your overall production. A lot of times I'll make clients aware of what areas to avoid either for background or lighting. Normally there open and willing to listen to improve the production overall.

Thomas, I feel your pain!

I used to do video at Atlanta North Church of Seventh-day Aventists (in fact I did the website too), now gave up on both of them, but the person who took over the web didn't change a thing, and the video guy pretty much works with my setup, presets, etc.

At the beginning I started with a lot of enthousiasm, just like you. The problem is, everyone likes video, especially if they get to watch at times live from home, but nobody puts his dollars to make it better. As you can see from our video, lighting is a nightmare (see the very beginning), it's uneven, the walls behind the platform are much brighter than the pulpit, and it takes a special crew even to replace a burned out bulb, the ceiling is so high.

First thing I recommended was proper lighting; pastor called out specialist, specialist quoted $50K, end of that story. So I just tried to make the best out of what I had, after all the message is our main focus with church video, right? From what I see, you are trying to do exactly the same thing I tried, to produce crisp, sharp, high contrast pictures. Sony cameras are your best friend for that (we use Z1s), but with time you will realise that a softer picture is better suited for the web... anyway, I won't get into that, invariably all of us go through your learning curve.

I would advise to use your zebras as mentioned above, and turn on the black stretch, I'm pretty sure the EX has that too. Use the scope in post to check your luma, on Caucasian faces it should not go above 75% except a couple of small "hot" spots. Don't be afraid of darker faces!

Oh, and wait until an African (very, very dark skin) speaker thinks that walking in front of the platform is better... I had one a while back. All I got was shadows...

Reply
 

Ervin: Thanks for your input. It looks like a switch board was trying to be used on that video. What kind was it and is it a good one? And you are right, some light is needed in your sanctuary. But I dont think you need to spend 50k. Could try to shop around. Par 64,s with some high wattage halogen bulbs could work if your churces power grid can handel it without popping circut breakers. That was my big idea until I was told that our wireing and breaker board wont handel 1000 watt bulbs. So we will have to go with smaller pars with less wattages. I think we might be running about 250 watts right now. That will work fine for us. We just need more of them.

Welcome to Christian Worship Center

I bought the Datavideo | SE-800AV 4 Input Audio Video Mixer | SE-800AV - NTSC about two years ago and have been very happy with it; a small studio I work with now uses the DV version (same thing outfitted with firewire inputs/outputs) also without any complaints. If I had to buy again, I would probably go for and HD board like the GV Indigo or something similar to accomodate HD inputs as well.