Charles Papert |
July 30th, 2004 09:30 AM |
Hi Nick:
It all depends on what you see outside the windows. In that instance we were looking at the side of a house that was white, but in full shade. A darker colored house might have called for less ND; if it had been in sun, more ND. And it also depends on how hot you want it to appear on camera. Usually I read the exterior with a spotmeter to make the call on what level of ND I want to use; in that particular instance I did the quickie method of aiming the camera at the window and dialing down the iris until I liked the exposure outside, then doing the math compared to the iris setting I had chosen for the interior scene. In this instance, the difference was 3 stops, so the ND.9 covered that.
So obviously, there are too many variables to really land on a rule of thumb. Had that house been angled differently or if it was an hour later, the sun would have crept up the wall and we would have been looking at at least 2 more levels of ND. And of course, the level of exposure you create inside the room will be another end of the equation. A small lighting kit wouldn't have brought us to the same stop offered by the 1200 and 575 watt HMI's we were using on that scene.
I was actually annoyed at myself because I have a roll of Roscoscrim, which is a perforated black material that achieves the same sort of thing as multiple layers of ND, and you still see the image through the holes. I had simply forgotten to bring it that particular day.
Grayson's suggestion for using black net is indeed valid; you can see and photograph through it, although once you start doubling it up it is possibly to create unwanted moire patterns. On other days on that shoot, Nick, we used double nets folded over twice to knock down large portals such as exterior doors (a double net=1 stop=ND.3).
|