Low light ideas
 

I film low light wedding receptions, where I can only provide so much light without annoying the guests. I keep shutter speed at 60 and also leave the gain alone while opening the iris appropriatly. I don't touch the gain (set to manual so it doesn't move). My thinking is that it's easy to add gain in post. Usually there is so much going on with sound, etc., that it's easier, but am I losing quality by not using the FX1's gain?

You can only brighten a dark image so much in post before everything gets pushed to grey. Better to add a bit of grain 6 or 9db and get the photons recorded. You can use a noise-reduction program to smooth out the grain in post (expect long render times). Better yet, get a tall light stand, a dimmer and a bit of diffusion. A light that is placed very high (and is softened somewhat) becomes less distracting than on-camera lighting...especially if its already on when the reception begins. Using a dimmer, I often keep the light at 40% and bring it up ever so slowly before the first dance. Haven't had complaints...although I do my best not to use the light at all. Still, you need photons to make an image. You can't 'add' photons in post.

If need be, drop the shutter speed to 1/30th...but expect motion blur.

Dana, I would experiment with the amount of gain you can add without getting excessive grain. I usually don't want to go past 6 db gain, personally. You can also pick up some more light by going to 1/30 sec shutter speed. But at 1/30 sec shutter you need to have slow pans and limited fast motion on screen or you will get some motion blurring. But it works pretty well otherwise.

Great info. It's tough to mess with shutter speed, as the low light part of the night is dancing.

I'm going to try upping camera gain a bit to help. When I up the gain in post I also up the saturation to simulate good lighting.

I have a boom stand that I use for our third camera that has an adapter for mounting my soft-box. It's essential for back yard weddings, though I basically need to camp out next to it for consistent light.

Hi Dana,

I asked the same question about gain in camera vs. gain in post a while back. The responses convinced me that gain in camera is better. The concept that gain in camera is BEFORE the image is compressed to tape makes sense to me. Gain in post is AFTER, so the image is degraded further.

Since then (with a Z1, which should give the same result as an FX1) I've been much less shy about using camera gain. Up to 15 and even 18db sometimes. These cameras are amazingly clean under gain. And the result has been great. I also routinely use a shutter speed of 30 at receptions, and have never had one comment on the look. No one notices.

For dance footage, I lower the shutter speed even more, though this is for effect. I like the blurred look. I will shoot some at 60, then some at lower shutter as an option.

For dance footage, I also use the Sony 10/20, though always at 10 Watts. I diffuse it with a bit of diffusion paper taped in front, which works great.

I never understood the concept of bringing lights on tripods to increase the light level of the room. Why not just ask the hall to turn it up a bit? Though maybe others have tried this and got a bad response, I don't know.

Actually, though, isn't gain artificial to begin with? What difference would it make for the FX1 to create it than my Mac?

Because, the image is compressed (into HDV format) after the gain is added.

Your Mac adds gain to an already compressed image, further degrading the image.

But really, the only way to figure out what you like better is to do a test. Shoot a scene with no gain, and repeat with gain added in camera. Add gain with your Mac to the flat image, and see what looks better to you.

Shooting our operas I often have to deal with really dark scenes where I can't change the lighting. What is your final product? Standard definition? If so then I think 9dB of gain is still quite acceptable. I frequently must use 12dB, even 15dB. True that it adds noise, but that's what you have to accept when shooting in the dark ;-)

Black stretch helps a bit on the Z1, but of course that's not an option for the FX1. Since I've never shot a wedding (I don't even GO to weddings) I don't have to deal with that sort of customer. But perhaps a little up-front education would help, where you explain that you can still shoot video in a dark place, but they should expect some noise in the picture?

Switching the shutter to 1/30 is the quickest way to gain low light performance - Sony consumer handycams have been using the trick to keep "acceptable" low light performance - yes, you have blur potential, just be thoughtfull and keep it in your option list - it's a powerful trick.

I second the "in camera gain" vs. trying to gain up in post - you might look at noise reduction plug ins if gain is too objectionable - seen pretty effective results in post.

As for light, an on camera light goes a long way - the Sony 10/20 (HVL-20xxx, with the "xxx" being the specific model # designating the battery option), with a sto-fen diffuser, is an old standby that has served many HD shooters quite well, myself included. You can't go wrong with having one or more in your kit for when the lights go down.

The Sima 20LX LED light that recently came out is a bargain too, and as soon as I rig up a few homebrew diffusers, that will be my new light - my test results with it have been quite good, and a pair of them cuts through a surprising lot of darkness - so far, two seems like the optimal array, but you can stack the things as desired.

Excuse me guys, where can i get a noise-reduction program to smooth out the grain in post?
thx

And because using gain in camera allows to capture info in the shadow areas, in post you can't put anything into the shadows that the camera didn't see in the first place.
Steve

Neat Video, and Boris are one place to start. Depends on your platform and price range.
All will be render-intensive (as far as I know). So don't use it as a shortcut to brighter images unless you have plenty of render time to spare.

I used two of these at a party this weekend and I forgot to bring my gel packs so I had no diffusion paper to put on them (last minute throw together)... I quickly looked around my partner's place and grabbed some styrafoam(sp) paper that his surround sound speakers came in, then I needed tape. He had a lint roller sitting right there and I thought "that will work" then as I'm grabbing it it dawns on me that it might be all I need. It fit perfect on two of the lights and didn't look bad at all (lint roller paper straight on the light)! Worked pretty well as a diffuser and I didn't get any cooky looks when I fired them up that night... granted it was mostly drunk hoochies but still, it felt just right.

With the Simas you can use gaffers tape to add a gel for tungsten lighting. Usually when its dark color temperature is low too.
The litepanels are nice but expensive. The micro model for on camera has a dimmer and a gel holder. But $300US versus -$30 for the Sima.
Those of us starting to use the 5DII are able to shoot 1080 30p in low light without problem. But the camera is very limited in function compared to regular camcorders. The future seems to be big sensor with better low light performance.

drunk hoochies...lol

I have two of the Litepanels and two of the Sony duo lights. I love the gain control on the Litepanels, but haven't found a good diffuser (besides the one included) that can spread the light enough. My Sonys do that masterfully, and when I use both Sonys together I'm rockin.

Per lumins, I look forward to selling my three FX1s for a card-based system. Capturing is a huge waste of my day, and if I could get better low-light I could actually start showing off my receptions.

Where can i get a sto-fen diffuser?Thx guys and...MERRY XMAS!!!!
i forgot:when am i supposed to use the black stretch?

you can buy direct, or most web outfits - my memory is that it's the OM-EZ that fits the HVL-20xx series - don't quote me on it, google around you should find a confirmation. It's a good solution, cuts the range of the light, but makes it tolerable to the subject/talent, good soft warm light (as opposed to the LED's that typically run to the cooler side...)

I'll second (or third or fourth) the 1/30th shutter speed. I recently shot a wedding with two Z1's where the church was pretty dark. And then 2 minutes before the ceremony started... the lights were dimmed even more!

Since there isn't a whole lot of motion during the ceremony anyways, I went to 1/30th on the shutter and 6db on the gain.

Problem solved! It looks fine! And when considering the alternative... it made sense.

At another wedding reception the light was pretty dim so we threw up a lot with a softbox and it made all the difference in the world. People understand that we need light. Heck, the flash from the still photog's light can be more of a pain than a nicely diffused Lowell!

I disagree Blake. I think gaining up is a far better option than dropping the shutter speed below 1/60.

I used to be scared of gaining up too much and insisted on never going above 9db (and always having to push the lighting in post). After much more real world experience with these cameras, I am now completely comfortable gaining up to 15db for a few reasons.

First...
When the final film is viewed on a DVD, the grain is nearly imperceptible to me. The grain isn't bad at all on Blu-ray or computer based HD files either. In fact, I would be surprised if a client were to notice this grain without me pointing it out to them. Of course we video professionals will notice some slight grain, but we're paid to notice the small stuff.

Second...
I haven't read about color preservation in this thread, but it is a huge issue. In my opinion, the colors are far more accurate in footage shot at a higher gain (i.e. closer to correct exposure) versus footage shot at a lower gain and then brought up in editing.

Third...
We have to factor in the contrast of the shot as well. I preserve contrast much more accurately using in-camera gain than if I underexpose and then adjust the levels while editing. Of course, I can further enhance the contrast (and generally do) via my NLE, that extra adjustment can lead to macroblocking, in which case I would prefer to settle for a slightly underexposed shot instead.

Fourth...
In my own work, 1/30 shutter speed is good for only two things...for effect and for emergency situations where I cannot move closer to the action and gain alone will not do the trick. To be fair, other videographers I know are more comfortable with 1/30 than I am. However, matching 1/60 footage with 1/30 footage looks awful to my eye. 1/30 footage in slow-motion looks awful as well. Also, it seems to me that the color is not as well preserved with raw 1/30 footage versus raw 1/60 footage with gain (when achieving the same exposure), though I have not done any extensive testing on this.

Alec Moreno
http://www.1Day1ShotProductions.com

Alec i agree with you,to shoot @1/30 shutter doesn't always give you the perfect smoothness in the moves....When you suggest to use the blackstretch?


Talking about sto-fen diffuser:isn't it Dangerous for overheating if i mount it on the SONY HVL-20DW2 light ?


thx and Merry Xmas

I always leave the blackstretch on, and typically darken the blacks a bit in post. With the so-so performance of the Z1 in low light, I'm able to keep much more shadow detail for indoor shots, but still achieve the exact same look for outdoor shots (after adjusting levels) with no quality loss.

Alec Moreno
http://www.1Day1ShotProductions.com

No heat issues with the Sto Fen...works just fine. Been using mine for two years. Couldn't work witout it.

Yes, the recommendation is to have black stretch on at all times when using the Z1. There are no disadvantages but lots of advantages.

I'm with Vito - my PAL Z1 looks a lot better shot at the default 1/50th and +18dB of gain up than it ever does at 1/25th and +9dB of gain. Very clean at that gain setting considering what it's doing for you, and MILES better than trying to lift it in post. The jerkiness of the slower shutter is a give-away even for couples standing 'stationary' at the alter, and I've never liked that.

For close-up work I use the excellent Sony 20-DW2 lamp with a Lumiquest 'Mini Soft-box' diffuser on the front. I've used epoxy resin to hold the velcro in place and the lamp heat makes the self-adhesive run. This gives beautiful diffused on-board light, great for cake cutting, first dance and so on.

tom.

Well there's a bit of a disadvantage for Dana (who started this thread)... because he has an FX1 instead of a Z1 :-)

We'r sorry Dana,i'm tryng to find this soft box for my sony light.....
Any link?

I also use a Lumiquest 'Mini Soft-box' diffuser. It's a must.

Me too, Dana. The Mini Soft-box comes with strips of self-adhesive Velcro but I found the heat of the 20-DW2 means the velcro starts to slide after a bit. Cured it by attaching the velcro using epoxy resin and now all is well.

tom.

FORGET THE GUESTS, you charge for your service, so you have to do your best all the time, you have to do what you have to do:)
(never seen a wedding photographer hesitating work with the flash)
3x500 or 700 watt ( depending on situation) lowell tota, or similar, with remote power switches will solve all the troubles,
light doesn't have to be on all the time, but coming in, first dance, parents dances, garter and bouquet have to be properly lit. ( the rest is OK with just an on camera light)
way back I used to shoot weddings with FX/Z1 and i know how it looks withouh light, and trust me there is not much difference between two,
my advise - be professional, use the light,
all is just MHO :)

While I agree with what Buba says, I don't think that 500 or 70 watt lighting is needed, lighting is needed. But this is a personal preference as to how much.
We use the The Wireless Wedding Reception Video Light style light. We custom built our own lights but ordered the remote controls to turn our powers on/off.

For a normal reception, we'll use two 75 w lights and run them pretty much an entire reception. They're placed on opposite sides of the dance floor, take up very little space, are unobtrusive to guests (as they're 10-13 feet up) and add some great depth to the image.

We also use onboard camera lighting for fill light purposes only, or for interviews away from the dance floor.

Photography and video both need light. There's no debating this, after all photography is literally painting with light.

The combination orReceptionlight style lighting and running camera in full manual, gives us just enough light that we don't necessarily need to use our camera lights and run our FX1's at 12db gain. But if we need to use onbaord ligitng, it's only for fill lighting, and we don't have to blast it.

I used to do weddings and fortunately my cameras were pretty good at low light. I do not really care for the paparazzi highlight/lighting style of wedding videography, so I tried to get away without using any camera lights if I could. I still shoot an occasional wedding, but now I am doing it to help a friend who shoots weddings on a regular basis. While I preferred not to use any extra lights, he wants to use camera lights on almost everything. Two differing philosophies. I have had brides that insisted on very low lighting that they felt was more romantic. That makes it tough unless your cameras can handle that. You just have to explain the camera limitations to them so they are not too disappointed later. But adding light in that situation always seemed to be contrary to the bride's wishes. Back in the day, when I was shooting weddings and needed added lighting, I used an NRG Varilight. Really a great piece. Much better than my old Anton-Bauer frezzi. It could be adjusted from really dim to pretty darn bright. It was well built and is still going strong today. The batteries were a pain in the backside, however. If I were to go back to using it, I would like to be able to attach one of the softboxes Dana mentioned to give a wider, softer fill that would more suited to widescreen shooting, and a lot less glaring.

I also try to get involved in the lighting of the room itself. Often the dimness is set by the facility without consulting the bride, so it's more of a question of being the squeeky wheel. This helps the photographer too. I believe those awful pre-flash red grids are for low light situations (is this true). At one wedding the photog was happy for my camera light because he said it helped his focus.

Good point Dana. Yes, many DSLRs beam out a very unattractive red bar graph to aid their auto-focus mechanisms in low light. Of course our video cameras record this nasty red splurge across the bride's face whereas the still frame doesn't.

I much prefer the pre-flash method used by some DSLRs as it just looks like another still photo's been taken. But then again I'm using CCDs and don't have to put up with the CMOS partial frame flash exposures.

tom.